The manufacturer/engineers of the SD10 place this missile somehow between an aim120b and C regarding performance. There are navigation problems like wrong or non existent loft logic, which is a key thing at long range. This missile right now outrange an aim120c. At the same time, those missiles that have been revisited by ED to new standard have improved their range considerably, take the new aim7 as a good example. For these scenarios and conditions the overall feeling is that r27er and aim120c should be really deadly from 25/30nm, intead of 12/15 nm as of now. All old missiles from fc3 time, not only the aim120, are too draggy which means that over 20mn shots even at high altitude high speed are a non sense against a half brained opponet. Thus, I don't know why you guys are soooooo sure that the AIM-120C is modeled wrong.Well we only have guesses tbh, but i can give you a few to consider:
We don't know which version of the AIM-120C is modeled in DCS, and since the F-15 is in FC3 competing with the old-school SU27, I don't think the version of the AIM-120 should be higher than AIM-120C-4. Why you guys are so sure that the AIM-120 is modeled wrong currently in DCS. The JF-17 lacks in outright speed against F-16/F-15 so it will have to rely on better tactics to keep up once that day comes. The missiles wont be too much of a concern, more the platform. Once the missiles undergo their overhaul and are more or less equal. I wouldn't be so sure, the SD-10 is widely regarded to fit inbetween the 120B-C and the gap between B and C isn't very large. The JF-17 and you will likely be in for a humbling. But now you have modern fighters that are basically fighting with their hands chopped off in BVR and shouldn't be, because they're perfectly capable. It's the fact that the appearance of the SD-10 has put a spotlight on how bad the AIM-120 is, which wasn't that big of an issue prior to the appearance of a properly modeled competitor. It's not that the JF-17 is actually better (despite the widespread and ignorant gloating). The guys reliant on the AIM-120 though, they're the ones suffering, due to the abysmal performance of their flagship weapon, which is so poor (in BVR) that I'm amazed they were able to cause you so much grief as you claim.Īnd that is why they are angry. Personally I haven't found the JF-17 or the SD-10 to be much more of a threat than the usual fare either. They're doing just fine and not much has changed for them. Most of the people who've been (apparently) kicking your butt in BVR, aren't the ones suffering. Today we have more/better knowledge.īlue guys finally get a taste of what we have been going through every day in an MP server. Maybe some people asked for it to be brought in line with other missiles, which isn't unfair (as in, for it to be tuned according to how other missiles are tuned), but I'd prefer it to be more realistic and re-tune other missiles to have a more realistic drag model.Īlso, please realize that previous tuning was done according to data and technique known a long time ago. It belongs to a different game type.Īn SD-10 brought to a much more proper drag model would still outperform the 120 as it is in game right now. I would argue that 'nerfed' is the wrong word when asking to bring it more in line with reality. I’ll be honest, I still sweat salt when someone jumps in here demanding the missile be nerfed because it is overpowered without explaining much. It is just when you began comparing the performance with how other missiles behaved I wanted to clarify if any of that influenced your reasoning.įurthermore, I know that Deka has responded to this issue but where is ED’s response? Would love to get all this sorted out so we don’t get used to one thing and then it changes quite late. It does seem to outperform the simulated AMRAAM, it can hold that 5 g for longer, but I wouldn't consider it completely unreasonable. In the tracks I recorded the SD-10 hovers around 5 g a few miles before impact. With this you get some rough idea about how the missile will work vs a maneuvering target. One of the good things about is that it provides information for the missile at g loads above 1 vs range and vs time (pages 28 and 29). I don't know a lot about the SD-10 itself, but IASGATG's already mentioned work is available for comparison: If you want to go a step up the missile can be simulated.
With an approximate drag value, you can work out a deceleration based on altitude (air density) and roughly compare with DCS. I keep seeing phrases like "OP", "I feel", "based on the information available", "behaving like I would expect". Where are we getting all the other variables and parameters? e.g. I see how we can get a reasonable approximation of D and C d from a photograph because we can see A.
How are we defining "accurate" and "realistic" in this context?
0 kommentar(er)
