Jump to content

Ракеты в DCS


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Chizh said:

нормально смоделированного

 

6 minutes ago, Chizh said:

В рамках проекта ЛОКОН


Выберите одно.
 

 

6 minutes ago, Chizh said:

F-22


Да, был
 

7 minutes ago, Chizh said:

F-35.


Небоеготовый, не на вооружении.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

And R-27T has the same problem, I will do more test later for ER and ET

I dont know what to tell you more that this broken missiles for more then 3 years now!!! Vietnam standard for 3 years 😞   

Want tracks? The DCS R-27 only barely catches an entirely nonmaneuvering bandit within the graphs numbers, it infact will often fall behind by a few hundred meters. No room for any 3G maneuvering and

30 минут назад, Teknetinium сказал:

Chiz I know for a fact that ER-27 have became worse 3 years a go, ask anyone.

Do you have any proof?

 

 

30 минут назад, Teknetinium сказал:

I will show on track for you all the difference between how Er-27 eat chaff or what ever compare to aim-120 from 10KM. 

Of course, the resistance of the R-27R/ER missiles to chaffs is noticeably less than that of the AIM-120. This is true.

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Chizh said:

Do you have any proof?

 

 

Of course, the resistance of the R-27R/ER missiles to chaffs is noticeably less than that of the AIM-120. This is true.

I will show you the difference;) 

 Can you explain what is going on here Chiz? This kind of things are not unusual but actually the opposite! 


Edited by Teknetinium
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 часа назад, Teknetinium сказал:

I will show you the difference;) 

 Can you explain what is going on here Chiz? This kind of things are not unusual but actually the opposite! 

 

I can't say anything from the video. We need a track from a single to debug.

 

Can you show that the R-27 has become worse than it was 3 years ago?

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tone_Picky said:


В такой же мере они являются основными для Алжира, Венесуэлы, Вьетнама, Китая и Казахстана (после 2013). В DCS он отсутствует даже в виде бота. Стало быть, не все основные присутствуют?

В 2010м году было 28 МиГ-29СМТ, которые не пошли Алжиру. Были Су-27СМ, Су-25СМ. Насчет МиГ=31БМ не помню, вроде бы уже с 2011 пошла модернизация по обрезанному варианту. Но их в игре нет и даже в виде ботов.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Anduriel said:

В 2010м году было 28 МиГ-29СМТ, которые не пошли Алжиру. Были Су-27СМ, Су-25СМ. Насчет МиГ=31БМ не помню, вроде бы уже с 2011 пошла модернизация по обрезанному варианту. Но их в игре нет и даже в виде ботов.

Из обновлённых 31-х в войсках был только МиГ-31Б, если правильно помню

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Chizh said:

Can you show that the R-27 has become worse than it was 3 years ago?

 
The main issue is that all other missiles got a lot better... ether due to CFD or new autopilot or other updates...

There is a constant theme in the forums....


a person comes complaints about R-27 since it feels different due to older modeling...
then then three types of different replies come...
1. type: R-27 is bad missile from the ProBlue people 

2. type: R-27 is good missile made bad in DCS from the ProRed people

3. type: R-27 needs an update, please wait for it before judging from the more reasonable people 
 

in the end the only way to make everybody happy and at least partly silent is the update.


So in the end is there chance of ED expediting the updates to R-27s and R-77, or at least putting a timeframe on them?

  • Like 6

-------

 

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

 

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 часа назад, Chizh сказал:

Да. А в с США уже были F-22 и F-35.

И что? Тут не имбу просят, а самолет, +- равный по возможностям и не сильно отделенный от нашего варианта хорнета/Ф-16 по годам

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 минут назад, FoxAlfa сказал:

 
The main issue is that all other missiles got a lot better... ether due to CFD or new autopilot or other updates...

There is a constant theme in the forums....


a person comes complaints about R-27 since it feels different due to older modeling...
then then three types of different replies come...
1. type: R-27 is bad missile from the ProBlue people 

2. type: R-27 is good missile made bad in DCS from the ProRed people

3. type: R-27 needs an update, please wait for it before judging from the more reasonable people 
 

in the end the only way to make everybody happy and at least partly silent is the update.


So in the end is there chance of ED expediting the updates to R-27s and R-77, or at least putting a timeframe on them?

Why do you think that CFD researvh will bring any advantages to this missile? It could be the other way around. The R-27 is now very close to its prototype.
I still want to hear some arguments that the R-27 is worse than it was three years ago. Or do you admit that this is an emotional, non-argmented assessment.

 

PS

We will be able to update the R-27 only when we finish work on current projects. The timeline has not yet been determined.

  • Like 1

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Chizh said:

Why do you think that CFD researvh will bring any advantages to this missile? It could be the other way around. The R-27 is now very close to its prototype.

 

 

Unfortunately, you keep missing the point, the point is all the missiles need to be modeled to the same standard, if as long as that is not the case people will complain that something is oddIf the R-27 and R-77 got updated and Aim-7(I really hope for LOFT profile updates on the Eagle too) and Aim-120 didn't, I would complain the same. 

 

43 minutes ago, Chizh said:

I still want to hear some arguments that the R-27 is worse than it was three years ago.

With Aim-120 and Aim-7 update it is like comparing Apples and Oranges... not same parameters were used in modeling them, can't be compared. 

 

43 minutes ago, Chizh said:

Or do you admit that this is an emotional, non-argmented assessment.

 
 
 

As far I as recall, I always provide tables and chart within game measurements 

 

Per example:

 
Please talk to your bosses and if possible, increase the priority of leveling the Air-to-air missiles modeling to the same standard, it means a lot to the MP community.


Edited by FoxAlfa
  • Like 2

-------

 

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

 

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Chizh said:

I still want to hear some arguments that the R-27 is worse than it was three years ago. Or do you admit that this is an emotional, non-argmented assessment.

 

There exists data from long ago that tracked all missiles and their probability to hit and probability to kill.   I can check if I can dig this up.  It's data from random fighting collected by the 104 guys on their server.   The percentages back then would hang around 30% for RF missiles, but don't quote me on this ... it was a long time ago.

 

This sort of data does not really exist in the same way today, AFAIK, as in I do not believe that anyone is collecting this data.  But if necessary I believe the study can be done.

 

Regarding R-27 specifically, changing the FM won't change the Pks much at all IMHO, but I have a simple suggestion, and I follow with the reasoning for it:

Reduce the drag on this family of missiles a little.

The reason is that the depicted Rmax is probably not an RAero, but rather the equivalent of what we would call 'Ropt' in the west, meaning the missile has enough speed to deal with a maneuver in the last 3-5 seconds of flight.  This exists for a number of reasons, and from what we know of the sparrow it guarantees that the missile can still pull 5g for a small number of seconds.

The RAero Pk is much smaller for sparrow  - where for the R-27 it is defined at 0.7 for the Rmax ... it doesn't hurt to be just a little generous and reduce the drag just a little.  I honestly believe that the CFD will show the same type of result.


Edited by GGTharos

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to post
Share on other sites

August 2020

R-27 missiles family. Reduced the value of the induced drag, increased lift. Lift to drag ratio now is more accurate and provides better performance against maneuvering targets, compared to AIM-7 performance level.

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 минуты назад, Chizh сказал:

August 2020

R-27 missiles family. Reduced the value of the induced drag, increased lift. Lift to drag ratio now is more accurate and provides better performance against maneuvering targets, compared to AIM-7 performance level.

Ну да, это типа временное решение до продувки, ты, НЯП, это так называл

1 час назад, Chizh сказал:

 

We will be able to update the R-27 only when we finish work on current projects. 

Включая Ми-24, Апач и МиГ-29?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 минут назад, TotenDead сказал:

Ну да, это типа временное решение до продувки, ты, НЯП, это так называл

Да, временное. Но как я уже говорил выше, продувка может сыграть как в плюс так и в минус. Текущие ЛТХ Р-27 весьма близки к оригиналу.

 

7 минут назад, TotenDead сказал:

Включая Ми-24, Апач и МиГ-29?

Да.

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chizh said:

Why do you think that CFD researvh will bring any advantages to this missile? It could be the other way around. The R-27 is now very close to its prototype.
I still want to hear some arguments that the R-27 is worse than it was three years ago. Or do you admit that this is an emotional, non-argmented assessment.

 

PS

We will be able to update the R-27 only when we finish work on current projects. The timeline has not yet been determined.

Because bandits with RWRs that can detect you generally speaking turn to not get shot at.

The question becomes at what range should they start turning?

 

With the CFD AIM-120 + its new guidance laws like lofting you generally saw those ranges for posturing shots go up (because of the missiles better retention of energy in turns which as we all know cost energy and of course better APN meaning no more dramatic turns while still quite some distance from the bandit and this leads to once again better energy retention) while Pk remained the same since people learned the new ranges, a shot that doesn't hit isn't necessarily a bad shot if it let you get into a spot where you can shoot him and he can't shoot you.

 

In August last year you threw REDFOR a bone, which the DCS community as a whole is pretty thankful for I believe, with the tweaked drag to the R-27/77 and yes such a small change did help a bit, this all has lead us to believe there is more around the corner when a full CFD is completed and same for the new autopilot changes.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 минут назад, Chizh сказал:

Да, временное. Но как я уже говорил выше, продувка может сыграть как в плюс так и в минус. Текущие ЛТХ Р-27 весьма близки к оригиналу.

Как так вышло, что у непродутой аим-120 лтх были далеки от оригинала, а у непродутой Р-27 они близки?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FoxAlfa said:

 

Unfortunately, you keep missing the point, the point is all the missiles need to be modeled to the same standard, if as long as that is not the case people will complain that something is oddIf the R-27 and R-77 got updated and Aim-7(I really hope for LOFT profile updates on the Eagle too) and Aim-120 didn't, I would complain the same. 

 

With Aim-120 and Aim-7 update it is like comparing Apples and Oranges... not same parameters were used in modeling them, can't be compared. 

 

As far I as recall, I always provide tables and chart within game measurements 

 

Per example:

 
Please talk to your bosses and if possible, increase the priority of leveling the Air-to-air missiles modeling to the same standard, it means a lot to the MP community.

 

Totally agree Fox! 
Its sad that ED don’t understand that we fly in MP as matches and tournaments and all missiles that are used in DCS need to be to date around same time. 
 

You are braking the community more the you think by this BIAS approach. With that fallows costumers. 
 

Its funny if you dont remember Chiz when I told you that ED should have control over missile performance. Back then you told me  its up to each developer. 
 

I replied by telling this will become a good borch and got band. Look at us now 🙂 
 

Plz take my concerns with some afterthought.  


Edited by Teknetinium
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Chizh said:

Да, временное. Но как я уже говорил выше, продувка может сыграть как в плюс так и в минус. Текущие ЛТХ Р-27 весьма близки к оригиналу.

 

Only under the questionable hypothesis that the available graphs show the aerodynamic range.

 

MiG-29 manual says:

"Разрешенные дальности пуска ракеты Р-27ЭТ практически такие же, как и у ракеты Р-27ЭР однако в ППС они ограничены дальностью захвата цели ТГС."

 

Note how it says that the permitted launch zones are practically the same. So if a SR-71 was to be engaged, the R-27ET would have basically the same permitted launch range as the R-27ER. The ET would of course reach the target with less energy.

 

Same with the following graph, showing that the permitted launch zones of the graph are valid for R-27ER, R-27ET and R-27EP.

 

 

With current DCS logic (permitted launch zone = absolute kinematic range) the ET would never hit.

 

 

Similar things were said by certain russian pilots here on the forums (at maximum permitted launch range there is still some speed left for some maneuvering, but it is unknown how much).

R-27ER range.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 часов назад, Chizh сказал:

Да.

А вы добавите Р-27ЭП когда будете пересматривать ракету?
Функционал уже есть у ракет воздух\поверхность Су25Т.  Вроде не сложно перенести же.


Edited by Stoikiy
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 минут назад, Stoikiy сказал:

А вы добавите Р-27ЭП когда будете пересматривать ракету?

Нет. Пока не планируем.

 

6 минут назад, Stoikiy сказал:

Функционал уже есть у ракет воздух\поверхность Су25Т.  Вроде не сложно перенести же.

 

Функционал чего? Ракет ПРР?  Если мы его перенесем на ракеты ВВ, то она сможет попадать только в медленно и прямолетящую цель. И то с вероятностью.

 

Не очень понимаю зачем это нужно, если сейчас и так ракеты Р-27Р наводятся на помеху.

 

1 час назад, BlackPixxel сказал:

 

Only under the questionable hypothesis that the available graphs show the aerodynamic range.

 

MiG-29 manual says:

"Разрешенные дальности пуска ракеты Р-27ЭТ практически такие же, как и у ракеты Р-27ЭР однако в ППС они ограничены дальностью захвата цели ТГС."

 

Note how it says that the permitted launch zones are practically the same. So if a SR-71 was to be engaged, the R-27ET would have basically the same permitted launch range as the R-27ER. The ET would of course reach the target with less energy.

 

Same with the following graph, showing that the permitted launch zones of the graph are valid for R-27ER, R-27ET and R-27EP.

 

 

With current DCS logic (permitted launch zone = absolute kinematic range) the ET would never hit.

 

 

Similar things were said by certain russian pilots here on the forums (at maximum permitted launch range there is still some speed left for some maneuvering, but it is unknown how much).

R-27ER range.jpg

Please think about what limits the range when launching missile in pursuit (tail on) target.

Я не смотрю телевизор

ЧИЖ

 

Вакансии в ED

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chizh said:

Please think about what limits the range when launching missile in pursuit (tail on) target.

 

Well, the missile has to have at least the same speed left as the target, plus the additional speed difference required for the proximity fuze.

 

Or are you refering to something else?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...