Why so many SA-10 :)
-
There are so many factors that will effect the actual flight of any missile, rocket or kinetic projectile that to expect the on-board systems to calc and display a 100% accurate WEZ is in the least naĂŻve.
OK how many variables do we have, fire/release platforms Ground Speed/Air Speed, Altitude, Attitude, Axial rotation, Slip and temp. Did I miss anything?
Now for the Missile, Rocket or Projectile. Fuel/Propellant load consistency, temp, air density/temp, wind direction (if any), release angle, deviation in its flight path, Low to high, High too Low and the changes that makes to air density/temp wind direction and velocity. Is the target manoeuvring, can that be foreseen. What if its raining that will consume kinetic energy. And more. Its as much an art as it is science.
My point is that because a weapon can on occasion be fired outside it displayed WEZ doesnât necessarily mean the simulation is at fault in any way, Iâm not saying there might be areas where improvements can be made.
Final word is that its the pilotâs job to know when to release the weapon not the airframes. Know thy weapon.
-
we need more SA-10s
-
we need more SA-10s
Somehow your link lead me to this.
The title made me laugh the content didnât :blowpar:
-
There are so many factors that will effect the actual flight of any missile, rocket or kinetic projectile that to expect the on-board systems to calc and display a 100% accurate WEZ is in the least naĂŻve.
OK how many variables do we have, fire/release platforms Ground Speed/Air Speed, Altitude, Attitude, Axial rotation, Slip and temp. Did I miss anything?
Now for the Missile, Rocket or Projectile. Fuel/Propellant load consistency, temp, air density/temp, wind direction (if any), release angle, deviation in its flight path, Low to high, High too Low and the changes that makes to air density/temp wind direction and velocity. Is the target manoeuvring, can that be foreseen. What if its raining that will consume kinetic energy. And more. Its as much an art as it is science.
My point is that because a weapon can on occasion be fired outside it displayed WEZ doesnât necessarily mean the simulation is at fault in any way, Iâm not saying there might be areas where improvements can be made.
Final word is that its the pilotâs job to know when to release the weapon not the airframes. Know thy weapon.
Yes but knowing âthyâ weapon comes form experience, and you donât normally shoot multi-hundred thousand dollar ordenance (yeah, itâs a sim but anyway) out of DLZ on a âto-see-if-it-will-hitâ basis The DLZ(?) on most of the weapons in Falcon are ball park estimate that is âoptimally exaggeratedâ, it is accurate enough and should be considered for a decent shot:)
-
Ultimately BMS doesnât have to model DLZ to match missile behavior with so many factors. Its lifeâs goal is to match F-16 DLZ behavior which must be simpler math. Leave it to Lockheed Martin to worry about matching DLZ to missile behavior. A simâs job is not to improve on the genuine articleâs performance.
And for long HARM shots I use TOF timer on WPN page for POS mode. When less than 200 seconds I am in range. My shot from before had ~185 predicted TOF, actual about 195.
-
Ultimately BMS doesnât have to model DLZ to match missile behavior with so many factors. Its lifeâs goal is to match F-16 DLZ behavior which must be simpler math. Leave it to Lockheed Martin to worry about matching DLZ to missile behavior. A simâs job is not to improve on the genuine articleâs performance.
And for long HARM shots I use TOF timer on WPN page for POS mode. When less than 200 seconds I am in range. My shot from before had ~185 predicted TOF, actual about 195.
Amen to that.
-
@mookar:
The DLZ(?) on most of the weapons in Falcon are ball park estimate that is âoptimally exaggeratedâ, it is accurate enough and should be considered for a decent shot:)
Thats very true. The original DLZ range code of F4 was clearly not the best. Its has only been changed for the AIM-120 in BMS, with new range data.
Now as this range data is a pain to obtain (you need tests, basically), you can understand not every missile has an accurate DLZ.
So, for now in 4.32, it is like this. In 4.33⌠wait and see.
-
done
-
@mookar:
Yes but knowing âthyâ weapon comes form experience, and you donât normally shoot multi-hundred thousand dollar ordenance (yeah, itâs a sim but anyway) out of DLZ on a âto-see-if-it-will-hitâ basis The DLZ(?) on most of the weapons in Falcon are ball park estimate that is âoptimally exaggeratedâ, it is accurate enough and should be considered for a decent shot:)
But if you read the thread you would realize that that post was in response to an overtone that the sim should display a âperfectâ WEZ. Some seemed surprised that a weapon can some times be fired out side the displayed WEZ indicator and thus the indicator needs fixing.
Iâm saying its only an indicator and it cant be 100% at all times displaying Max engagement range, thatâs why they put pilots at the controls.
And I never said shoot "out of DLZ on a âto-see-if-it-will-hitâ basis " I was originally questioning the wisdom of earlier posts Quoting figures like â>70nmâ.
âKnow thy Weaponâ does not ONLY come from actually shooting them.
-
But if you read the thread you would realize that that post was in response to an overtone that the sim should display a âperfectâ WEZ
I agree with you, the WEZ is a reference tool, very useful yes, you still may opt to launch outside of it though with various degrees of succsess
-
BMS is amazing. I like the RedFlag Korea, except you have to face the dauntable SA-10 with only an AGM-45 whose range is just a little further than the 20MM. I generally fly under 100 ft AGL for the last 15NM or so. I love Toms Terrain and its peaks and valleys to use to terrain mask along the way. I like to cut a path across the FLOT to give our side wide path to operate within. I have learned to look at the flight paths of all of the flights to keep their approach to their targets at low altitude. I have seen whole entire flights of F15s and B-52s shot down on a single mission by one SA-10 battalion. These are very deadly to say the least. Many times my heart was pounding as I pulled over the last rise in the terrain to have the S-300 IADS right in front of me at about 6 or 7 miles. I usually fire and cut throttle and slice back and down and beam for a couple of seconds and reapply some throttle as I break back toward safety.
Just think, in the real world, these soviet built systems are being handed out like candy to forces who would love to use against us and our allies.
To your success.
Raven
-
BMS is amazing. âŚâŚSA-10âŚ
Just think, in the real world, these soviet built systems are being handed out like candy to forces who would love to use against us and our allies.
Raven
And America doesnât play the same game ?
-
Agave_blue is right u get shot even bellow 100ft if conditions permit. And this might be and real if another radar is tracking u.
About distance u can go longer then 70 miles if u loft the weapon adequately the question is the altitude and how it would affect the weapons trajectory.
Iâm sure the correct answer will come and will be: wait 3-4 weeks -
BMS is amazing. I like the RedFlag Korea, except you have to face the dauntable SA-10 with only an AGM-45 whose range is just a little further than the 20MM. I generally fly under 100 ft AGL for the last 15NM or so. I love Toms Terrain and its peaks and valleys to use to terrain mask along the way. I like to cut a path across the FLOT to give our side wide path to operate within. I have learned to look at the flight paths of all of the flights to keep their approach to their targets at low altitude. I have seen whole entire flights of F15s and B-52s shot down on a single mission by one SA-10 battalion. These are very deadly to say the least. Many times my heart was pounding as I pulled over the last rise in the terrain to have the S-300 IADS right in front of me at about 6 or 7 miles. I usually fire and cut throttle and slice back and down and beam for a couple of seconds and reapply some throttle as I break back toward safety.
Just think, in the real world, these soviet built systems are being handed out like candy to forces who would love to use against us and our allies.
To your success.
Raven
about your last point - dont forget that SAMâs are primarily a defensive system. If they are indeed to use them, its because we (the West) are attacking them with our mass produced f-16s and f-35s⌠i know the countries acquiring them arent always the most savoury, but recent history should show you that we arent exactly squeaky clean either and are prone to cynical military adventurism⌠my point is, you cant invade with SAMs, you can only defend and deterâŚ
-
And America doesnât play the same game ?
It actually took a long time for them to start, and even at this point Iâm not sure how much they put into SAMs, or exporting them widely.
Though broadly speaking, Iâd say thatâs more down to differences in American and Russian approaches to an all out conventional war. The Russians have always been relying on SAMs more than gaining and keeping the air superiority, whereas the Americans have been counting on air superiority, a bit like a shield vs a sword respectively. And we know what Napoleon said about sitting and waiting in a fortressâŚ
-
And America doesnât play the same game ?
Hawk and Patriots are considered some of the very best SAM systems on the planet. With the Patriot system that has gone through 3 major upgrades from the first gulf war, this system now has greater range and is rumored to be able to shoot down other SAM (possible AA missiles) as well as other air threats.