Jump to content

Aim-120 Range


briosky2
 Share

Recommended Posts

mmm i think isnt normal 5000ft RMax 7 miles, head to head Su25T vs F18C, no man, 2 miles more and can use IR missiles, something is wrong here.

 

Im not expert are you one? Because you are saying that this is correct.

 

 

 

Time ago missiles had reached more far away.

I'm expert enough to know that ALL missiles get their range reduced to something like 10%-30% from its maximum possible range when shot at low altitude, where the drag is hugeeeeeee.

I will give you an example, that is very enlighting. NASAMS, which is a norwegian air defense system that uses the Aim120C missiles, advertise its range as 40Km maximum and against a high fliying non maneouvering target.

So you get the same missile that goes from >100km to just 40km if launched from low altitude against a high flying target, this distance would be reduced if the target is fliying low.

 

A missile at low altitude is almost like a bullet in water(ok im exagerating a bit). That why for long range shots lofting is used, so that even if your missile flies more distance, it will keep its energy at high altitude where there is very little drag.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 40,000ft feet the air pressure will be ~20% of that at sea level.

 

Given that air density is directly related to pressure and temperature, the density of air at these altitudes is correspondingly substantially lower than at 5,000ft.

 

Ergo the missile is working that much harder having to push more air molecules out it's path at lower altitudes. The missile will travel less distance during the burn-time of it's motor, attain a lower maximum TAS and GS and once the motor burns out it will decelerate faster than that launched at high altitude.

 

So, using some very rough mathematics, taking a missile with a published range of 40nm at 40,000ft and launching at 1000ft I can expect somewhere in the ball park of 40nm x 20% = 8nm.

 

Hmmm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At 40,000ft feet the air pressure will be ~20% of that at sea level.

 

Given that air density is directly related to pressure and temperature, the density of air at these altitudes is correspondingly substantially lower than at 5,000ft.

 

Ergo the missile is working that much harder having to push more air molecules out it's path at lower altitudes. The missile will travel less distance during the burn-time of it's motor, attain a lower maximum TAS and GS and once the motor burns out it will decelerate faster than that launched at high altitude.

 

So, using some very rough mathematics, taking a missile with a published range of 40nm at 40,000ft and launching at 1000ft I can expect somewhere in the ball park of 40nm x 20% = 8nm.

 

Hmmm.

 

The big nock on range is mostly due to having to boost up all the way from 0 kts. Additionally it's not quite as big a difference as you may think. For example I just quickly made this:

kOZcYUv.png

TAMSwJK.png

One missile is fired level from 0kts the other from 500kts level at sea level (SD10).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


YouTube Channel


Update:MSI Z390-A PRO, i7-9700K 3.6Ghz liquid Cooled, Corsair Vengeance DDR4 64GB, Asus Dual GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER EVO OC Edition 8GB GDDR6, 970 EVO Plus 1TB SSD NVMe M.2, HOTAS TM Warthog, HP Reverb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Example 1 F-15C FL060 M1.08 fires at 12nm Score a kill on a manuvering F-16

Example 2 AI F-16 FL190 M1.08 fires at 14nm scores a kill on a manuvering F-16

Example 3 F-16 FL120 M.80 fires at 11nm non manuvering SU-27 Missile accelerates to 4nm to M3.04 which then decelerates to M1.8 in less than 2nm goes stupid at 7nm and then floats to the earth at 9mn

Example 4 F-16 FL130 M.99 fires at 6nm inorder to score a kill on Su-24

 

Sorry I dont buy that its normal to be actually 10-15. The R-27 has a "brochure" range of 120km and is effective at that range in DCS, the Aim-120C "brochure" range is 105km and is not effective at that range in DCS.

 

I have been shot down by Aim-9Ms at 6-8NM and Aim-9Xs at 5-9NM. This means the 120 is not an effective weapon by any means. The Aim-7 is better then the Aim-120 which the F-16 can carry but never did.

I am with you. You can fire an AIM54 @ 45nm 20k Altitude and score a hit at over M1.5. at the same distance an AIM120C will reach M3.8 (aircraft @ M1) and not go farther than 6nm from your current aircraft.

 

 

 

THe missile feels like it has MASSIVE DRAG characteristics. Same with the hornet. Actual F18 pilots say that the hornet feels very draggy in DCS. Same goes for the AIM120C.

 

 

 

This needs fixed for balance. The F18 feels useless because of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here a comparison SD10 vs 120C.

https://youtu.be/sLX02w8gWfw

This is hilarious. See specification section. Range information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PL-12#SD-10 and compare with https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM.

If is modeled C5 versión have the same Range.

70–100 kilometres (43–62 mi) SD10 ~ AIM-120C-5: 105 km (56,6955 mn)

 

In DCS im firing 120C at 5000ft to a chopper in RMAX 6 mn, how is this possible??.

Hot contacts 15 mn at 25.000ft and 19 mn at 35.000ft.

 

I think the characteristics of the missiles are far from being modeled on DCS. I am not an arms expert, but here the numbers do not deceive anyone. It can not be that the performance of the missiles have losses of 50% of their effective range.

Video is private

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any news when the AMRAAM Range will be fixed? Missile Tracking/Performance is way undermodeled as it is. BVR Setups are kind of useless, currently.
Amraam range is much better now. 30/40nm shots are now possible at high altitudes.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its more that lofting got fixed the speed hasn't really changed that much. And that a lot of people were informed by GS's vid where he used the new lofting and 50k + drag bug that's been in the game for years to get long ranges. I've been using this tactic (high and fast for the 50k + drag reduction) for years its just now its much more lethal due to the new loft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amraam range is much better now. 30/40nm shots are now possible at high altitudes.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

 

As long as AMRAAM isn´t capable of a headon 25nm engagement in mid-20k ft it´s way underpowerded. Especially since the current SD10 does tail-chase intercepts at way too big ranges.

 

As several other former and current military fighter pilots said: the -120 is currently severly underpowered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as AMRAAM isn´t capable of a headon 25nm engagement in mid-20k ft it´s way underpowerded. Especially since the current SD10 does tail-chase intercepts at way too big ranges.

 

As several other former and current military fighter pilots said: the -120 is currently severly underpowered.

Who are these people you are quoting? Does anyone want to put their names down to this? Because if it's public domain then ED can change it, but if it's just non attributable, it might as well be me saying it. As is, at least the CNATRA docs teach a 20nm head on shot, and my personal finding in DCS is that you really need 17nm before it will catch someone executing a reasonable crank at 20k ft asl. The reason I ask for the links is that I've not found the documentary evidence of the range, yet everyone keeps quoting gospel and I'm wondering what I am not reading and where I am not reading it from.

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as AMRAAM isn´t capable of a headon 25nm engagement in mid-20k ft it´s way underpowerded. Especially since the current SD10 does tail-chase intercepts at way too big ranges.

 

As several other former and current military fighter pilots said: the -120 is currently severly underpowered.

It can't do this? I'm usually flying at 30000 ft or more, but 25 miles in the 20's seems reasonable unless the target evades immediately.

 

 

If there is an issue at this range I'd wager it being down to the AIM-120 autopilot. Besides the guidance the 120 is a better missile than the SD-10 in DCS.

[sIGPIC]http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/kk187/Exorcet/F-15singaturebaseACOmodifiedcomp-1.jpg[/sIGPIC]

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also assumed the SD-10 does well in tail chase the same reason it has larger NEZ then AMRAAM, becuase it’s based on the sparrow and has a thicker larger rocket motor despite the drag(worse gliding/low altitude performance) of a thicker body, however being only 10kg heavier means that rocket motor isn’t pushing much more mass. The SD-10 uses the exact same warhead weight as AMRAAM so there is a lot of space for its 70kg of fuel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should we also consider that DCS simulates a C5? Maybe pilots talk about a C-7?

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

 

No i've made sure to mention this fact and their agreement was based on this knowledge at least for the three I have talked too and know quite well the other two i've only seen them say it on various forums such as discord and the forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well Habu is a current a10 pilot and he's told me this on several occasions and I have another friend who's flying rhinos who's also said the exact same thing.

 

Would you be able to interview them somehow (through video or an audio recording)? Like Pikey suggested, this sort of thing might be able to move mountains with ED.

 

Also I heard a few months ago that ED had a new virtual wind tunnel that they would be using to remodel the drag of all missiles. Has this been done yet for the AMRAAM? Since I have seen nothing on the changelogs about a drag change since, I will assume no. Perhaps there is still hope that ED can fix it themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t know where you have been but the AMRAAM has changed a lot,, they had a newsletter showing CAD models running CFD saying they ran 200 simulations with different AOA. It now is as good as SD-10 or better and can even achieve 60 mile shots at high altitudes and speeds. As well as magic ins being gone. That was a huge thing with 2.5.6 was the first AMRAAM drag change

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was a huge thing with 2.5.6 was the first AMRAAM drag change

 

Yes I know that, but what I don’t know is what changes have taken place since then other than the lofting. I have seen nothing new in the changelogs about drag changes and when I emailed ED asking about it they said they still had some work to do. They also said had a new virtual wind tunnel that would be used to remodel all the all the missiles. It does indeed loft now, which is great, but from what nighthawk is saying, a bit more work needs to be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

Hi.

 

Does anybody know where/how to get numbers within DCS of A/A missiles? Mostly Aim-120 (and other F3s if possible)

I'm looking for MAR or Tail WEZ... I didn't find it neither on the forum, nor in DCS docs folders...

 

Thanks for helping me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...