Heat signature - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-17-2018, 12:17 PM   #21
///Rage
Senior Member
 
///Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,971
Default

Even if tumbleweed is right, why the discrepancy?
__________________

www.51bisons.com

51st TS 96.43.128.170
///Rage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 12:29 PM   #22
Xechran
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ///Rage View Post
Even if tumbleweed is right, why the discrepancy?

Bingo!

Potential issues: Im on open beta. May roll back to stable today depending on what BlueFlag does.

The very first track I posted shows an FA-18 with AIM-9X getting tone at 8.5nm on a Mirage, and immediately losing it. Acquired solid tone at 3.5nm. Its not impossible to get tone depending on conditions and randomness, but its not steady and if I had launched in the moment I had tone it would have lost while in flight without even any countermeasure or maneuver.
Xechran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 12:38 PM   #23
"Tumbleweed"
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 24
Default

There is definitely discrepancy, some are at 7Nm (Mig-21,F-5, 6.5 for the mirage) and some others at more than 15Nm.
So even if the mirage is little bit low some others look to much.
"Tumbleweed" is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 12:48 PM   #24
Xechran
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by "Tumbleweed" View Post
There is definitely discrepancy, some are at 7Nm (Mig-21,F-5, 6.5 for the mirage) and some others at more than 15Nm.
So even if the mirage is little bit low some others look to much.

For that there is the question of, "do they have different, larger heat signatures in afterburner than not?" And the answer is, "yes, they do."

Any issues past there would be balance questions, not bugs as this is. And we wouldn't want to change these things for balance, but for accuracy. If someone wants to run the stoichiometry and solve for X, be my guest. Thats outside the scope of this inquiry though.

Will note that there is a logic to their progression, at the least. Larger engines and twin engines produce a stronger signal than not. Holds true all the way through the SU-27, which has much higher afterburn ratings than the F-15.
Xechran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 02:05 PM   #25
chinpok
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 40
Default

I did some test ~3 patch ago it's not the latest patch for sure probably a very old bug.
Btw this low signature means in dogfight the mirage just pops one flare and the missile is defeated.
chinpok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 02:20 PM   #26
"Tumbleweed"
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 24
Default

I checked on the m-2000 aircraft lua file:
IR emission coef is 0.8 (1 is Su-27 without afterburner. It is reference.)
IR emission coef_ab is 1.62
to compare with:
F-5E is 0.4/2
F-18 is 0.58/2.5
I didn't find those for Su-27 and F-15
I think it hepls to understand the discrepancy.
The question now is how this values are chosen?

My guess: It's more or less arbitrary.
"Tumbleweed" is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 02:34 PM   #27
nessuno0505
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Italy
Posts: 464
Default

M2000 is smaller than Su-27 -> thus maybe 0,8 vs 1 with no AB; F-5 is even smaller; F-18 is built to have a tiny RCS (even if not properly stealth) so maybe also IR signature is low.
M2000 is single engine, F-5 and F-18 are dual engine -> more heat when AB on.
I can see a logic in those numbers...
nessuno0505 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 03:46 PM   #28
///Rage
Senior Member
 
///Rage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 2,971
Default

Surely thrust is a better surrogate indicator than number of engines.

A NASA rocket booster is "single engine" yet I assume it has a higher heat signature.
__________________

www.51bisons.com

51st TS 96.43.128.170
///Rage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 03:48 PM   #29
jojo
Senior Member
 
jojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: France
Posts: 2,763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xechran View Post
Bingo!

Potential issues: Im on open beta. May roll back to stable today depending on what BlueFlag does.

The very first track I posted shows an FA-18 with AIM-9X getting tone at 8.5nm on a Mirage, and immediately losing it. Acquired solid tone at 3.5nm. Its not impossible to get tone depending on conditions and randomness, but its not steady and if I had launched in the moment I had tone it would have lost while in flight without even any countermeasure or maneuver.

Since AIM-9X is WIP, this isn't the best missile to test IR signature, better stick to FC3 AIM-9M for consistency
__________________
Flickr gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi
jojo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-17-2018, 03:54 PM   #30
Xechran
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jojo View Post
Since AIM-9X is WIP, this isn't the best missile to test IR signature, better stick to FC3 AIM-9M for consistency

Correct. Which is why the 9M was used in every setup but the first.

The first setup was just to explore the difference between the 9M and 9X. The M2k stood out as an obvious bug. Thus the subsequent iterations with the 9M. Noting that it did get tone for a fraction of a second is simply full disclosure. A 9M may also find tone, then, since the results of the tests are consistent across the two missiles. But its not stable and is likely to drop off. No other airframe does so.
Xechran is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:01 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.