AIM-120 thrust characteristics?
-
aim120.dat has dual thrust.
BURN TIME BREAKPOINTS
#–---------------------------------------------------
BRNTIME
7
+0.000000 +0.100000 +0.125000 +4.000000 +4.225000 +8.100000 +8.125000#-----------------------------------------------------
ENGINE THRUST (LBS)
#-----------------------------------------------------
+0.000000 +0.000000 +4760.000000 +4760.000000 +1190.000000 +1190.000000 +0.000000
aim120c.dat No dual thrust for AIM-120C?
#-----------------------------------------------------
BURN TIME BREAKPOINTS
#-----------------------------------------------------
BRNTIME
5
+0.000000 +0.100000 +0.125000 +7.600000 +7.625000#-----------------------------------------------------
ENGINE THRUST (LBS)
#-----------------------------------------------------
+0.000000 +0.000000 +3520.000000 +3520.000000 +0.000000
-
Aim-120b - WPU-6/B motor boost-sustain thrust profile.
Aim-120c - the WPU-16/B all-boost design.
http://enu.kz/repository/2011/AIAA-2011-6941.pdf -
There you go
-
Numbers are wrong…
-
-
Numbers are wrong…
And since the real number are classifed, this has no chance of being “right”. Just “good enough”.
-
Numbers are wrong…
that is one of the most immature post i have read for a long time…
it reminds me 15 years ago
-
that is one of the most immature post i have read for a long time…
My schlong has the thrust characteristics of an AIM-120…!
Now - THAT is one of the most immature posts you have read for a long time.
Arapr0n
-
no chance of being “right”. Just “good enough”.
Well not even good enough…
that is one of the most immature post i have read for a long time…
it reminds me 15 years ago
Yeap. But the fact is written above. And since no interest is present to improving these, I’ll just stop here. Please disregard my post and continue on the original topic.
-
Well not even good enough…
Yeap. But the fact is written above. And since no interest is present to improving these, I’ll just stop here. Please disregard my post and continue on the original topic.If you hve “good enough” values pls. share and enlighten us. I’m eager to know any AAM or AGM thrust char.
-
Me too. Always. If we let a little bit the ego to the side, we can learn a lot.
-
If you hve “good enough” values pls. share and enlighten us. I’m eager to know any AAM or AGM thrust char.
“Only eggs cannot make a good omelette”.
-
Well not even good enough…
Yeap. But the fact is written above. And since no interest is present to improving these, I’ll just stop here. Please disregard my post and continue on the original topic.
LOL its been 8 months a developper is working on the subject. the improvment of missiles Fm IS HUGE compared with 4.32.
the fact that thrust data is not exactly the real does not mean the performance are not good.
but stating that nobody is interested in working on missiles is
-
lack of respect for the ones spending hours on the subject
-
a total lack of knowledge of the BMS team spirit.
-
-
Me too. Always. If we let a little bit the ego to the side, we can learn a lot.
In that case it is not a matter of ego. From an external point of view it is almost impossible to estimate exact thrust data from a given motor - one can guess on size, on total impulse, on specific impulse, on overall timing. But the exact values, you will never get them - they are classified, and for good reasons.
Now, to improve the data put in the 120 .dat :
- either somebody has a method to evaluate thrust profile just from public data - in that case, please, share ;
- or somebody is willing to compromise classified data (and national security of a good deal of NATO countries in the process, which also means risking jail) just to get a bit more realistic 120 in a PC simulation. That would demonstrate a doubtful sense of priorities.
For your information, as long as the propellant weight total impulse is within a reasonable margin (which it can be from public data, cf first section of this), and the timing is reasonable as well, the overall kinematic performance of a BVR missile is barely affected by the exact thrust profile.
I’m closing the thread, I see absolutely no point in discussing this any further.