Suggestion for database, data supply
-
SA-5 non-manouevering fighter-size target - scores a kill
http://members.shaw.ca/robert.muscoby/public/SA5.wmvAnd it is absolutely useless maneuver against the SAM
with this maneuver 4g does not play a special role -
Sorry, but I lost my patience. You to blind to see even the basic problems. How many test have you done…?
I only had to do a single test to prove you’re exagerating, and that your claims were obviously false.
I believe you when you say that you feel annoyed when someone points out when you’re wrong. That being said, there’s no cause for being so rude. Better to admit that what you said was false, than engage in personal attacks. I don’t much care if you’ve lost your patience, nor do I much care about what you feel are “basic problems”.
The most evident “basic problem” is your belief that the 19 years of work put into this sim is utterly flawed, because it doesn’t live up to your expectation of how it should behave. Shameful attitude.
-
You still do not understand. You showed the**ONLY CASE** when SA-5 can destroy a target. RL the usage is not restriced this way. _This is a fact._Can you guess how frequent case in RL or sime that a target fly directly to the SAM…? Hm…? Close to 0.
Are you aware that as long as original values are used you do not have to do anything just keep +/- 10 deg or bigger director off from the battery. Because this is the most common case this means you do not have to do anything as long as SAM do not reach +/- 90 deg bearing.
ANYTHING.
Did you understand the meaning of this word…?Whey you reached the minimal engeagement zone of SA-5 - in RL this is 17 km -you can simply turn to the battery and it is defenless. You can kill even with gun or bombs the better but if you have stand off weapons yiu just keep the profile that I mentioned, lock and kill the target.
This equal with useless. SA-5 is not a threat.What about total unreal thrust char. and weight data? Is is still to hard to admit that you are completely worng…? It is still hard to admit that current modeling values are far from real?
Shameful attitude that you showed here. I provided exact data, result of test, charts for comparison. You did two video and said “you are wrong”. What a nice attitude and deeply made out examination…
I do not care how many years put into sim. Some parts of the DB and modeling values kills the campaigns. AI fly weapons or red side, that cannot be used AI. Red side have SAMs that chance to kill is 0 even against a totally undefeneded sitting duck target. Some parts are not touched since release of Falcon 4.0 or just srcewed by anybody in the past. I respect all of devs who can admit and see what should be fixed or upgraded. If you are a dev. you are not in thus grop. I’m 100% sure.
-
http://www.mediafire.com/?hwby78iq7t0qbma
Just for you, an exreme test. I set the program 105, I set much bigger bubble and other paramteres as I suggested. Even the very big distance and 45 degrees bearing the missile hit me because I set the guidance value that most of functional SAMs use. The extreme range came from thrust and weight data.
1. The original model does not provide the long range that is exist in RL.
2. The original guidance does not proivde to hit even “sitting duck” tagets is the aspect is not restriced to 0-5 degrees.If you use my recommendation, the model provides them.
-
Molnib, don’t care about what scoob says. Looks like he is just trolling or simply is stupid… :uham:
I like to get your SA-5 and SA-3 mods soon as they are ready. So PM or give me link then
-
sa5.dat have been uploaded. Other test just showed teoratical application. For the result that you can see on Youtube demo video only the sa5.dat file is enough.
I was able to configure a bit better the SA-5 by using a bit strange aero data. -
I’ll explain, for a third time, and then maybe you will understand.
You claimed that the SA3 could not hit a level flying target. It could. Your statment is wrong.
You claimed that the SA5 could not hit a non-manouevering target. It could. Your statement is wrong.I don’t care what you edit, or why you edit. The point is that as long as you continue to make false statements, and exagerate things you believe are issues, then even things you do that are right are treated as suspect.
I’m not making any claims about what is right, or wrong about any of the SAMs. I’m pointing out where YOU are wrong, and I take issue with your continual complaints about the nearly 20 years of hard work that has gone into this sim by hundreds of people before you. The campaigns are not “killed” because something doesn’t work the way you think it should, they are “killed for you”.
BMS has chosen to work on aspects of the sim it deems important, in the order it chooses to. If, in the past 20 years, someone has made improvements that don’t meet your level of satisfaction, I hardly think it’s fair of you to characterize their work as “screwed”, “useless”, and “flawed”. I don’t much care what you mod, or why you mod, but I do care about some level of respect given to the hundreds of people that have given of their free time for you to have, what you have.
You still do not understand.
-
Just for you, here is my only comment highlighted about SA-3 before skipped to SA-5.
- Engagement range is very small comparing with RL value. RL value is 25 km.
- Because of small engagement range and default guidance values even a non maneuvering and slow target is impossible in some situation. Three missiles required to shoot down an An-2 (!).
- Aganist the F-16 the result is slightly different, 2nd missile hit the non maneuvering target. 2nd missile worked because the different relative position of launch position and target.
- In a simple dive any fighter is impossible target.
About SA-5.
The current guidance model is useless. Missile is not able to hit even a straight flying target, regardless it speed, and altitude.
Then I showed the comparison video, you can see what situatin does not work. You showed the only one in approaching aspect.
Pls. compare with your statements. [Edited by Retro for lack of civility]
-
Keep it easy guys! … We are all Flacon4.0 lovers here…
Instead of talking like that, try to convince you each other with kind explanations and demonstrations etc … (It’s a hard work I know I know ) … but it is not by arguing you will be able to understand each other.
All we are reading here are very interesting … Scoob also … let’s try to be smarter and let’s deeply analyze what is really said
What is good here, is that figures and diagrams, videos, demonstration and explanations are provided … just need time to look at it and test it seriously etc…
IMO, ALL opinions are good to be consider …:)
Long lif BMS!
-
I gave molnibalage a timeout… there’s no use for this kind of language on these boards.
-
I wish Scoob_SBM the best of luck with his (our) holy DB for the next 20 years. I did hope for a better one. The outcome off this should be some dev working side by side with molni.
I guess no better red data source exists. -
in the falcon database just a huge number of errors and distortions
without respect to sides
but it looks like here is the same sandbox
as well as on forumae ED -
I wish Scoob_SBM the best of luck with his (our) holy DB for the next 20 years. I did hope for a better one. The outcome off this should be some dev working side by side with molni.
I guess no better red data source exists.You might find it interesting to know that internally there has been a profound amount of time consumed looking into Molni and his edits. I think it’s interesting that BMS is comprised of folks from Openfalcon, RPG, original Falcon 4 team, BMS, and Superpak and Freefalcon. All of whom have univerally panned both his attitude and information. The fact that he continually chooses to put down the work of others is why he would never be asked to join the team. The fact that his data, while interesting, is also very suspect along many different lines is another reason he would not be on our team. It’s not “just” that some of his data might be spot on while other data is not… we can’t be bothered with deciphering between which is which when there truly are other more important priorities. Quite honestly, the only reason he’s not permanently banned is because we genuinely hope he’ll change his attitude and stop insulting the work done by the afformentioned groups. If he personally attacks another member of this forum by calling them names or teling them to “Go to Hell”, he will be banned permanently. What really bothers me is that if his disdain is so great for BMS, then why bother posting, or otherwise flying it? That seems like a stress he could really do without.
-
@OSD:
in the falcon database just a huge number of errors and distortions
…According to whom? I would be interested in specific errors and distortions if possible. That way, if there are some legit items I’d be happy to pass them along. We know about gaps in CT #'s, but what else?
And if the errors and distortions are really “HUGE”, then how is it possible so many people are deriving enjoyment from flying BMS?
-
It seems like the important things easily gets lost in translation and single words get focus and become storms in water glasses.
Be bigger than the words and don’t call eachother names, let’s fight the war in the sim;)
Cheers
-
According to whom? I would be interested in specific errors and distortions if possible. That way, if there are some legit items I’d be happy to pass them along. We know about gaps in CT #'s, but what else?
And if the errors and distortions are really “HUGE”, then how is it possible so many people are deriving enjoyment from flying BMS?
in the data that entered into the database
in which thread to write about them? -
This is really sad.
-
Here have fun Lad’s:
http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?us4yd8cypmpaunc
Just point it to your Data\Sim\Misdata folder and have fun……
demer
(Can’t remember who made it…Aggy maybe??? Who ever it was credit to him) -
@OSD:
in the data that entered into the database
in which thread to write about them?Great question… there’s a forum for that called Technical Support.
But I digress… on a positive note, you can expect some great things for the next release. -
BMS is working because we are working together, in the same direction … not easy every day, but the strong point of the team is actually because it’s a team.
And a great one!
Monli have to change his point of view about what is a team work, he must accept than not everybody is thinking the same that him (with or without clues) … we have all those kind of problems here … it is not a reason to be impolite.
I hope he will change (rapidly) his behaviour so that many other guys will take his information seriously.
His behaviour deserves him … and the entire community also since I think that some of his work is interesting.