Suggestion for database, data supply
-
Tuning the F-15, what is the point to reduce the angle of attack, unless the original model of the flight is not correct? CL, CD, does not correspond to reality. And if you reduce the angle of attack is what happens to the insant turn?
Hard FM tweak is fary beyond my skills. As I have said the turning capablity is literally the sam because of very hig drag and small increase of lift you can sustain a turn. Buy the pro version of Tacview and check turn rate, AoA and other curves.
Are you sure that the mass of the missile is calculated in this way?
Yes. I can show you on a video if you wish.
Gimbal Angle Limit (deg)
Gimbal Angle Rate Limit (deg/sec)
Field of View (deg)These lines in dat files do not have funciton as I can remember. IR sensor tweaks are defined in DB as well as a part of radar seeker propertes, ICD and RCD entries. (They are linked with dat files in \data\sim\radar by a value in and radar.lst either)
Mis
sile loft time
What range we transfere to terminal guidanceFor which missile? Terminal gudiance maybe have effect on radar guided missiles (chaff sensitivy?), but I’m not sure. I do not know the code I just tested deeply FF, but not in BMS4.
Other problem that in Falcon these values are static but RL behavior is not static. Maybe the code depending of launch angle, distance and altitude alter the used equation for the same modeling values, but this is also exe dependent…maxGTerminal
maxGNormalFor which missile? For some, theí seem to me OK - they are not unbelievable - for some, data is not available.
And when you change engine burntout time and engine thrust, where the check for the total momentum?
Khöm, you can’t check total momentum, because there reference about total momentum is not available. It is a smaller miracle that you find the AIM-7F/M and AIM-9L thrust values. The trust of AIM-120 and other latest gen. missile is confidental. The features are known - AIM-120 have similar profile asa AIM-7F/M but the exact value is not puclic.
As you can see for Russian SAMs time-velocity, time-distance and distance-alt profiles are available or can be counted from each other. Beecause the fuel consumption is modeled momentum is not depends only on velocty. BTW it is an interesting question that fuel consumption is linear or following the thrust profile. I’m able test this by setting exrteme thrust profiles and weights to see the effect of changes. IMHO, this part is a “who cares” issue, because even the baisc engeagement range and kinematic parameres are wrong moreover, some of them are not functional.
My goal is to make better the sim. As I have said my tweaks are not fine tuned but as long as they are close to RL behavior within 90-95%, I’m happy comparing with current situation. For many missile RL behavior cannot be copied because of static DB and data modeling. You can see this on SA-5 or SA-2. They can have different thrust as well as pursuit method. You can’t simulate this 100% accurately but something close is possible.
I’m against “to make the finest model in the wide world, but with 1000 hour of work and waiting years even for baisc fix” if the “relasing 90% accurate FUNCTIONAL model with 20 hour of work” is possible. If somebody will make a better F-15 FM or something I will be happy. If somebody will make such a SAM model, that brings closer result to RL I will be happy. But as long as that time won’t come and most of devs do not care about red stuff (or blue DB inaccuracies either) I won’t stop, as 'Ara said.
-
Buy the pro version of Tacview and check turn rate, AoA and other curves.
There is no need for me, all values are easily calculated, but it takes much time
Download Aerodynamics BooksYes. I can show you on a video if you wish.
and what I see out there?
general rule does not require, a precise formula for calculatingThese lines in dat files do not have funciton as I can remember. IR sensor tweaks are defined in DB as well as a part of radar seeker propertes, ICD and RCD entries.
You are mistaken, these values are considered for missiles with thermal, and active or semi-active guidance. It limiters
In the database, section IR Data, Radar Data value - the maximum gimbal angle onlyFor which missile? Terminal gudiance maybe have effect on radar guided missiles (chaff sensitivy?), but I’m not sure. I do not know the code I just tested deeply FF, but not in BMS4.
affects all missiles, even air - ground missiles
Khöm, you can’t check total momentum, because there reference about total momentum is not available.
I will write later
-
Download Aerodynamics Books
I’m a mechanial engineer, my faculty was flow mechanics.
and what I see out there?
general rule does not require, a precise formula for calculatingWhat formula? Weight is simpla data. You can add and or subract the two weight lines. What was your question? What did mean for you “this way”?I tested, exe handles separately the two weight data, the propellant and burnout weight. I checked the basic missiles - and later less basic - and I found that burnout weight in Falcon = total launch weight in RL therefore ALL, I repeat ALL dat files are wrong because aero data - if ever checked somebody - built around a wrong weight. What formula is reqired to verify this statement? Simply set bigger propellant weight as the other weight. If exe subract the prop. w. you should get negative weight… You can do another test. Set 1 lbs propellan and 499 lbs empty wegiht for AIM-7. That do it reverse. What you will see confirm that missile weight is added from two data. In first case because of constant weight the acceleration and deaccleretaion will be much different than in second case.
I’m crazy that I have to write this n+1 times. What will be ever check anybody who “challange” my aspect…?
It is not so strange that if I set RL thrust and weight the missile performance close to real shownig that other aero data cause the sligh difference…? (Just check SA-2 data.)
You are mistaken, these values are considered for missiles with thermal, and active or semi-active guidance. It limiters
In the database, section IR Data, Radar Data value - the maximum gimbal angle onlyHave you tested? Because I did Loooooooooooooooooooong time ago ˙(~4,5 years) when I opened first time dat files. I tried to play with these values. They did not worked. Just for you I did it again. I changed the values of AIM-9L/M, nothing happend. ICD entries rule the IR sensor properties concerning gimbal value, ranges, flare sensitvity and if ever worked, the FOV.
I can’t see the point of your post… Do you wish to help or critize me…?
-
thinking about one
wrote about another
Here is the correctTotal impulse (Суммарный импульс) = available power (энерговооруженность ракеты) * mass of missile (массу ракеты) = the average thrust (средняя тяга двигателя) * burnout time (время работы двигателя).
1kg = 2.2046 lb1.JPG
mass of missile - pointed red
available power - pointed blueTotal impulse
aim-120b ~ 30500 lb-s
aim-120c5 ~ 34500 lb-s -
This post is deleted! -
I know, but this tells you 0 info about characteristics…
I will try to find somebody who will translate this stuff maybe there is some useful data. Where did you find?
-
Have you tested? Because I did Loooooooooooooooooooong time ago ˙(~4,5 years) when I opened first time dat files. I tried to play with these values. They did not worked. Just for you I did it again. I changed the values of AIM-9L/M, nothing happend. ICD entries rule the IR sensor properties concerning gimbal value, ranges, flare sensitvity and if ever worked, the FOV.
it seems you are right, so I mixed up with another version
too bad for bms
@molnibalage:I know, but this tells you 0 info about characteristics…
I will try to find somebody who will translate this stuff maybe there is some useful data. Where did you find?
You can check the values of the average thrust in the original there is a lot of errors for all A-A missiles
book “Авиация ПВО России и научно-технический прогресс. Боевые комплексы и системы вчера, сегодня, завтра”
there is a slight inaccuracy in the table
but for the bms will fit -
Currently I can’t upload to youtube, because my net is unstable. I can upload only to MF.
SA-5 comparsion video. I used program 201. The difference is clearly visible. If the engagement range can be increasd with new model against med/high flying targets the ragne is very, very big.
http://www.mediafire.com/?d48dr38b95yf23w
I have no time to test, but maybe the eng. reange is linked with bubble distance value. I have to check.
-
just found the su 27 flight manual (I believe… downloading now)
also I tranformed the above from djvu to pdf…holly Fxxk Bullseye… SU-27SK… converting to pdf… will try and auto translate to Greek lol…
pdf ready.
Trying to make it editable pdf…Mig 29 GAY (No engine data) flight manual in English: http://airspot.ru/book/file/1058/Flight_manual_MIG-29.pdf
-
Awesome work Molni. Its great of you to give BMS data a reality check. With that much proof, information and + fixes you are providing I think all of this data has a potential to be implemented in future updates, since it seems readymade and hopefully would not create additional workload for devs (pardon me if I’m wrong please, not judging anyone).
Devs: Thanks for creating the best Falcon flavor ever, you guys are awesome beyond any possible scale and measure ever known to humanity :)))
-
@OSD:
thinking about one
wrote about another
Here is the correctTotal impulse (Суммарный импульс) = available power (энерговооруженность ракеты) * mass of missile (массу ракеты) = the average thrust (средняя тяга двигателя) * burnout time (время работы двигателя).
1kg = 2.2046 lb1.JPG
mass of missile - pointed red
available power - pointed blueTotal impulse
aim-120b ~ 30500 lb-s
aim-120c5 ~ 34500 lb-sOk, when U will reach the AA missiles I will use these data. ButI have to use some regression. For ex. missile wieght is not consant. I will use the AIM-9L/M’s burnout/launched weight ratio to get an average weight. I won’t change the burn time of R-60 or just slighty. In this case if the weight is set by the l/bo. ratio thrust can be computed.
-
here u are in pdf… sorry no translation.
http://www.mediafire.com/?v8hz5yhaascqv1s
Engine data must be after page 50.
trying to translate those pages only. -
They are some kind of aero data but IMHO not engine data. What is interesting on Falcon’s level on page 20. It seems to me allowed max. G diagram.
-
they are turn rate tables??? Performance?
page 49 title says: turn - banking
page 50
Figure 3 · Overload steady-bends, the plane with two 2hR-73 xp-27, with 50% residual fuel from the normal fill under standard conditions of temperature, operating mode, the engine Maxima (for the other masspage 51
Figure 4, steady-state overload bends, the plane with two 2hR-73 xp-27, with b0% residualFuel from the normal charging, the standard conditions of temperature regime
POLHYi FORSAZh engines (for other mass PCF = T1u ust.vir, R0000)
-
For FM and thrust tweaking you need comprehensive data. You can have any curves if they have not connection and shows only very specific situations. I can ask a guy for translate. It is a pure luck, but on HTKA.hu appeared a Russian guy, who perfectly speaks Hungarian.
-
well we can do it our self also I believe. A guy that knows what u want can tell it’s the chart in page xx and than we can translate them even with google… Sure a person witch speaks Russian is better I believe.
-
I was just funny the current situation, when I uploaded the modified FM https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?7259-Changes-in-the-flight-model nobody was looking, and charts on which changes were made, too, no one was looking.
And the links that I gave, too, were not looking https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?7259-Changes-in-the-flight-model&p=88539&viewfull=1#post88539 .
But all the criticized the.
To make the the FM Su-27, you need someone who good understanding in aerodynamics. -
@OSD:
I was just funny the current situation, when I uploaded the modified FM https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?7259-Changes-in-the-flight-model nobody was looking, and charts on which changes were made, too, no one was looking.
And the links that I gave, too, were not looking https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?7259-Changes-in-the-flight-model&p=88539&viewfull=1#post88539 .
But all the criticized the.
To make the the FM Su-27, you need someone who good understanding in aerodynamics.Because I can’t speak Russian I can’t validate FM changes, I can’t interprete the diagrams.
Did you set thrust exactly as in the two charts? What did you set for idle throttle?
I can fly if you wish but I can’t judge.It would be great if you post your models result and original model. I mean, measured performance in the same situations to see the difference. This is what I did with SAMs. Compare with RL diagram your results. Because I cannon understand Russian I do not know which diagram should be reproduced by BMS4.
-
If the aircraft and the engine produced in Russia is not surprising that all the primary sources in the Russian
All of the diagrams on the engine can be found here Al-31F http://1.airwar.z8.ru/bibl/al-31.zip
main, page 37, 40, 42To make the trajectory FM Su-27 requires the following charts and tables
Other charts for correction
Читал и рыдал просто, специалисты инженеры блин.
Больше разжевывать не буду. -
I know where they found. I understand the trust curves. Other curvers are the problem. I did not asked to link what I know.
I aksed to show the performance of current model and your model comparing to a RL reference. This can be te way (?) to convince devs. This is why I opened this thread. I compared my models in same or almost the same situations as was made in RL test.