Suggestion for database, data supply
-
P.S. Dee-Jay please investigate the data Molni has to offer. I think most of the chaff flares stuff looks good and can go straight in. I did the chaff flares position stuff a very long time ago when the code was first developed and there are plenty of errors I can guarantee that. It was regarded as not all that important at the time as it was an eye candy thing. as far as numbers of each you might have to ask him where his info came from so please work with him not against him.
Actually … It is what I’m trying to do! … But Monli’s behaviour does not really help me … (easy easy … everything is alright now! LOL is a sort of joke … ok … me run.)
Seriously … as you know, I’m not in charge of that stuff, but (for some reasons) some .dat updates are missing and did not have been committed in time for public release. Falcas has updates to re-commit (that must be done first) and as far as I’ve understood, that will be looked at as soon as possible.
I guess that he had heard us.
Personally, I’m for those changes.
Finger crossed … and time is required …
(Maybe we should better speak about that on DEV forum check PM)
So @ everybody … back to topic please… more interesting…
-
Yes,back to Topic,
While you guy’s are messing with the SAM’s and saying the SA-5’s are not shooting at you after awhile in Campaign.You need to check it’s Rareity in F4Browse in the WCD window.It may be that the Unit just plum ran out of that missile 'til next resupply event hit’s.Field is 0-99%(1-100 I believe),if they are available for use.Current SA-5 is available 70% of the time.SA-2 is available 99% of the time.
GO figure……
demer
-
…bullshit … horseshit …
Its over its done ok?Regards
Rayok, thanks for your diplomacy and the constructive manner of conversation that I failed to provide in my post. Although I do regret the fact that my call for forgiveness, tolerance and understanding is considered to be a fecal matter produced by different species of livestock, especially by people that have the power to close threads, or otherwise moderate here. It’s ok, you are forgiven.
On topic: I suggest people do not just copy paste Molni’s fixes to their files/database. As good as they may be, different database/files may create problems for you if you are planning to engage in MP flights and it may be hard to revert these changes.
-
Yes,back to Topic,
While you guy’s are messing with the SAM’s and saying the SA-5’s are not shooting at you after awhile in Campaign.You need to check it’s Rareity in F4Browse in the WCD window.It may be that the Unit just plum ran out of that missile 'til next resupply event hit’s.Field is 0-99%(1-100 I believe),if they are available for use.Current SA-5 is available 70% of the time.SA-2 is available 99% of the time.
GO figure……
demer
I never knew what controls that value. How is counted the available missile for batteries if they go into 2D world and transformed again into 3D in a single mission? Does the battalion supply level have any effect on available SAM qty? Is the max. what weapon slots and qtys are defined in DB?
I have many question concerning to DB + exe connection.
-
I never knew what controls that value. How is counted the available missile for batteries if they go into 2D world and transformed again into 3D in a single mission? Does the battalion supply level have any effect on available SAM qty? Is the max. what weapon slots and qtys are defined in DB?
I have many question concerning to DB + exe connection.
Rareity= Percent (%) of full supply\weapon’s which is give in’ to the unit at Start\Resupply.So if you only have a Weapon Count of say 2 for the Missile on the Vehicle,and you have 5 Vehicle’s in the battalion then you have 10 Missle’s available to the Unit at start.So if we have a Rareity of 50% for this weapon,then you will only get back ~5 at resupply(~120Minute’s Campain’ Time).So the AI shoot’s those,so your out of Missile’s again,then we have to wait for the next cycle for the unit to be active (Shoot at you) again…If we say Rareity is 99% then it seem’s we never run out of Missile’s……think it’s the 0-254 in the .exe,not sure,don’t have the current Code.
Don’t think it matter’s 2D to 3D,as I have yet to drive a Tank in Falcon…LOL!!!
demer
-
More SA-2 test. I changed the aero data, added an additional brakepoint for modeling drag above M2.0 Normal force coeff was not changed.
Here is the video about the tests. I had to make two tests - because engagement range prevents to see the deacceleration without escaping - for the data in the 3rd diagram. (Two different color.)
http://www.mediafire.com/?w4009c512x6282a
Change have effect on peak speed but deacceleration is almost the same. Strange.
-
Hi Molini. Can u post your videos on youtube like before. Makes it easier for people like me who cannot download.
kaRadi
-
Roger.
-
glad to see you posting more of this molni. Keep up the good work.
-
Thumbs up molni!
-
Yea Molni good to see u back. Super xtra fine with your effort and stamina on the subject…
Respect and thumbs up. -
Video is added to previous post.
-
hey molnimann,
are the DB edits of urs included in update1??QT
-
No.
-
http://www.mediafire.com/?r28bq8f76axnb
More SA-3 test with different aspects and altitudes. With bigger aspect and lower altitude the guidance will be more accurate. I increased the range for the test to see the effect of distance.
-
Molni,
I just came across this thread. I think it’s great how you back up your edits with real life evidence. So many people have “opinions” about this or that being modeled right or wrong.You walk the walk. I really, really admire that.
Nice job, bud.
-
I just discovered that I wrongly labelled ACMI were uploaded yesterday. (I should not work if I’m tired…)
I used a slighty tweaked guidance for test, but as you could see even the slight change did not meant a big improvement. In too many cases, regardless of altitude and aspect, the missile is not able to hit a straight flying target.The original case is worse, missiles fly more higher, about the target altitude, therefore in terminal phase they missed that target in similiar situations that I showed. I will upload more test to showing the difference, before I check time-thrust and time-speed characteristics.
-
SA-3 RL vs. BMS4
Test with modified guidence value to get closer path to RL. (constant pitch angle.)
http://www.mediafire.com/?ofou1qheh7c65oc
RL measured data.
BMS4 vs. RL. 24 degree data is the closest one to BMS4 test.
RL thrust vs. BMS4 thrust.
On RL measuered data you can see that on average temperature (~20 C) the burnout time is about 22 seconds.
-
V-601P 5V27 data
Total weight data of 1st and 2nd stage are missing from this sheet, therefore I asked the Hungarian guys.
I.+II. stage before launch: 952kg
II. stage weight with propellant 420kg
–------------------------------------Only the second stage is important because of limitations of enginge.
593 # Weight of Missile (lbs)
332 # Weight of propellant (lbs)Total weight of 2nd stage = 925 lb = 420 kg
You can see the interpolated thrust data. Thrust of second stage isset 6000 lbs, burnout time is at 22 sec. It matches the moment of peak speed of measured data. The thrust data of booster stage was set as way to reach the missile 600 m/s (~1’150 kts).
Flight path cannot be set as way to will be close to RL set. (Constant flight path angle.) I modified the guidance to get a closer one, but this is the best what I could achieve.
You can see with original drag data the velocity is much bigger than in RL case. I increased the axial force coefficient from 0.5 to 0.8. Result is better but not perfect. It is itersting that acceleation is almost the same in RL case but deacceleration is bigger. It seemt to me add more breakponts to axial force to get better result.
With final settings I will show more cases - on video either - agains An-2 and fast moving, real targets.
-
Kinematic paramteres are finalized. Problem is the guidance. So far I was not improve the capabilites as required comparing RL, but I can improve if I copmare only with current model, especially at lower altitude. Closer to RL minimal engagement range comes serious issues.