BMS 4.34 IR MODELING
-
https://mega.nz/#!et9BiapJ!lwx50LCoSSGMt5hPa5aIyqtZQa0mgnGZWkhQ32cIYNw
One of the best doc I have ever read about mechanics of Falcon.
-
One of the best doc I have ever read about mechanics of Falcon.
cmon this is a simplistic one
-
cmon this is a simplistic one
But it explains all the upgrades and mechanics which is missed from any other previous jet sim in a very compressed but fully understable way.
-
Taking this opportunity to ask: if fog mainly, or only, defined by the “visibility” parameter?
-
Taking this opportunity to ask: if fog mainly, or only, defined by the “visibility” parameter?
yes and no
yes if you use deterministic model , and then the visibility setting (slider of UI) is attached with the weather type you selected
no if you use map model, the visibilities are embedded in the map (slider of UI not used) and each cell can have its own visibility independantly of the cell weather type
-
Copy. I was indeed referring to the visibility parameter attached to every cell in a fmap file, as it has a visible effect. Guess it’s what defines the fog then. Thanks
-
Copy. I was indeed referring to the visibility parameter attached to every cell in a fmap file, as it has a visible effect. Guess it’s what defines the fog then. Thanks
well yeah , fog is determined by what we call visibility indeed
-
To elaborate more, beyond the obvious change in the way acquiring and shooting is modeled, this is awesome for mission planning. Fair used to be defined as acceptable for a laser strike (you can check or set cloud density to make it sure). There is now a level of uncertainty that is, or rather is not, for more challenge, to be checked on the fmap, if you want to plan all possible situations without knowing what to expect exactly. I totally love that.
-
To elaborate more, beyond the obvious change in the way acquiring and shooting is modeled, this is awesome for mission planning. Fair used to be defined as acceptable for a laser strike (you can check or set cloud density to make it sure). There is now a level of uncertainty that is, or rather is not, for more challenge, to be checked on the fmap, if you want to plan all possible situations without knowing what to expect exactly. I totally love that.
mhhhh we might need to add visibility in the briefing page for TO / Target/ Land
-
Noooo :P. I don’t wanna know. Though I can see how cryptic it can become for someone who is not used to weapons, weather and tactics. I like how it’s not easily checked just from the UI, but that’s just me.
-
mhhhh we might need to add visibility in the briefing page for TO / Target/ Land
We may need a separate, more extensive weather tab, actually. E.g. the current briefing only gives you cloud base altitude, but no information on cloud type, oktas, whether or not there are multiple layers, …
-
I’m hijacking this thread… Let’s say these questions will influence if we’ll expose NOE o to IR SAMs or not depending on the weather.
From the realistic point of view, is having such accurate data ok? Today? In the 90’s? In my dreams, there is a line in the cfg. (called enable “fog of peace” maybe
-
“FLARE MODELING - INFORMATION RESTRICTED TO BMS DEVELOPPERS”
I hate you!!!
-
Hi mavjp, thanks for sharing, again such detail in the modelling. One item that I don’t fully understand in your explanation: IR signature between IDLE and MIL is dependent on spooling time whereas the PLUME is nearly immediate. By plume you mean A/B on?
-
Probably, yes.
I’ve tried to go more in-depth about IR SAMs.
- 100 ft, in terrible weather and fog, SAM-14 manage to hit quite reliably.
- 6,000 Ft, less terrible, but totally blind at this altitude, SAM-14 didn’t even shoot. SA-16 shot and hit. I think this family has a different set of captors including UV (since a couple years…), I’m wondering if this is a factor.
Obviously I made a few tests (few only), enough yet to totally discourage me from using weather as a cover for very low level penetration.
-
Probably, yes.
I’ve tried to go more in-depth about IR SAMs.
- 100 ft, in terrible weather and fog, SAM-14 manage to hit quite reliably.
- 6,000 Ft, less terrible, but totally blind at this altitude, SAM-14 didn’t even shoot. SA-16 shot and hit. I think this family has a different set of captors including UV (since a couple years…), I’m wondering if this is a factor.
Obviously I made a few tests (few only), enough yet to totally discourage me from using weather as a cover for very low level penetration.
Or different engagement envelope because the range of the SA-16 is bit higher than SA-14 in RL. 2700 meter / 3700 meter. At 6k feet the slant range + reaction time + seeker range can mean you are edge of the eng. envelope of SA-14 while way inside of the SA-18.
SA-14 and SA-18 are different generations in MANPAD history. (SA-14 was skipped in WPACT except USSR.)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/nq6i1ja0ds9gqi4/Histoy_of_the_Electro-Optical_Guided_Missiles.pdf -
Or different engagement envelope because the range of the SA-16 is bit higher than SA-14 in RL. 2700 meter / 3700 meter. At 6k feet the slant range + reaction time + seeker range can mean you are edge of the eng. envelope of SA-14 while way inside of the SA-18.
SA-14 and SA-18 are different generations in MANPAD history. (SA-14 was skipped in WPACT except USSR.)
http://www.mediafire.com/file/nq6i1ja0ds9gqi4/Histoy_of_the_Electro-Optical_Guided_Missiles.pdfIt would be new with 4.34 then, concerning the 14 family. I used to be shot above 10,000 without any problem in 4.33.
EDIT: unless you actually mean the weather reduced the envelope. I’m only talking about BMS here, in case of any doubt, speaking of UV because it could have been a factor in modeling it differently.
-
Now I can understand why my France rl drivers were smiling some times…
Nice read, any change to also add 2 more pages in the document including IRIS-T and Python tables please?
-
Why MICA IR has so good seeker range?
And does anybody knows if any F-16s in BMS can carry it?
What about IRIS-T? Has it working flight model (in 4.33 it was not working well, it had range much shorter than AIM-9M)? -
Why MICA IR has so good seeker range?
And does anybody knows if any F-16s in BMS can carry it?
What about IRIS-T? Has it working flight model (in 4.33 it was not working well, it had range much shorter than AIM-9M)?Not only the MICA IR but comparing to that the stone age R-40T has also incredibly large range.