Jump to content

Comparison of the dynamics of the R-24, R-27 and AIM-7 missiles


Stona_WT
 Share

44 minutes ago, zzoega said:

I know Matawg has a mod or something that allows him to see the planes AoA, Fuel in KG, how much kg of fuel he currently burns per minute and some more that I'm not remembering right now.

 

What I'm meaning to say is that maybe some coder is able to make such script for missiles too? Where it can show you the missiles weight and fuel in kg in real time? Just a guess but that might also count as "datamined" info.

 

And it's really strange they won't accept it in their bug reports.. As if they know it's wrong..

The program is called WTRTI

And it's impossible to make it to show missile data as missiles are handled by the server once they are fired, so your client doesn't receive missile speed/weight/acceleration, only the position and if it touches you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ACOMETS said:

@Smin1080p I am not sure but do you know if Missile data is recorded on client or not? if not it would be very kind of dev team to make a menu to trace missiles and the data on it which would make bug reporters really happy.

 

Client data (datamines) cant be used for reports. All the visible information in game (stat cards, in game testing) can be used.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Smin1080p said:

 

Client data (datamines) cant be used for reports. All the visible information in game (stat cards, in game testing) can be used.  

we at least can have a basis of what we are dealing with if they were available , I don't understand why we should rely on stat card as we all know it does not have true ingame value for the most part .

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Smin1080p said:

 

Client data (datamines) cant be used for reports. All the visible information in game (stat cards, in game testing) can be used.  

If I use math to determine end speed for primary booster in the AIM-7F per the manual and then measure it's speed in-game and show there is an error is that sufficient instead of using datamine to show the booster stage is overperforming? Or is the excuse that "thrust was configured to meet range criteria" still the go-to answer on that?

If so, can you explain why the missile has +30% max range over what the manual says at sea level...?

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, MiG_23M said:

If I use math to determine end speed for primary booster in the AIM-7F per the manual and then measure it's speed in-game and show there is an error is that sufficient instead of using datamine to show the booster stage is overperforming? Or is the excuse that "thrust was configured to meet range criteria" still the go-to answer on that?

If so, can you explain why the missile has +30% max range over what the manual says at sea level...?

 

Its down to the developers to make that decision. Its not simply a case of your method of calculating shows it may be wrong, therefor it is. 

 

Your welcome to submit reports with material to support your claims for consideration. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Smin1080p said:

 

Its down to the developers to make that decision. Its not simply a case of your method of calculating shows it may be wrong, therefor it is. 

 

Your welcome to submit reports with material to support your claims for consideration. 

It's wrong because the datamine information (which is literally the game) says it is wrong. The only reason it is wrong for 9 months now is because datamine info cannot be used for bug reporting.

 

Propellent weights outlined in two reports on the matter have shown it to be wrong but nothing has been done of it yet because it has not been acknowledged due to the use of datamine info. There is no good way to show that is the direct cause of the overperformance without datamine info, but the missile is shown to overperform by in-game testing. Further, in-game changes to the datamined info to correct the issue show that they resolve the issue thus they are exactly the problem in the first place.

 

The report has been made, waiting on a final answer from the devs. Right now k_stepanovich has claimed a 5-10% possible increase in rear aspect launch range over the manual but has provided no actual source for this data. What I have found is that implementation of the missile with correct thrust values does not account for the ramp-up and ramp-down of the thrust in the booster and instead applies max thrust immediately. If there is to be accurate range the average thrust must be considered for the booster rather than the peak for realistic performance.

In the case of the R-24 for example, they limit burn time to account for the fact that it uses peak thrust instead of ramp-up to peak and then ramp-down like it should. The burn time is not in line with real life because of this, but the R-24 has somewhat realistic range figures in-game because of it. The same constant is not applied to the AIM-7F for some reason.

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MiG_23M said:

It's wrong because the datamine information (which is literally the game) says it is wrong.

 

Datamined information cant be used in reports for the very reason that it can often appear wrong because its being interpreted wrong. Certain values have to sometimes be coded in particular ways to achieve certain in game outcomes. This is why values can often appear incorrect and why we don't allow reports from datamining, because the values there often are not a reflect of the real in game ones or people have misinterpreted them entirely. 

 

Even if it is the case that the values are wrong leading to an issue, datamines cannot be used for reporting. This criteria has been set by the developers for a reason and has been made clear many times now. Reports must use in game tests or the visible values the game provides. 

 

5 minutes ago, MiG_23M said:

The report has been made, waiting on a final answer from the devs. 

 

If this is the case, then there is no reason to be discussing it further at this time until there is a final outcome :good:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Smin1080p said:

 

Datamined information cant be used in reports for the very reason that it can often appear wrong because its being interpreted wrong. Certain values have to sometimes be coded in particular ways to achieve certain in game outcomes. This is why values can often appear incorrect and why we don't allow reports from datamining, because the values there often are not a reflect of the real in game ones or people have misinterpreted them entirely. 

 

Even if it is the case that the values are wrong leading to an issue, datamines cannot be used for reporting. This criteria has been set by the developers for a reason and has been made clear many times now. Reports must use in game tests or the visible values the game provides. 

 

 

If this is the case, then there is no reason to be discussing it further at this time until there is a final outcome :good:

In this case the datamine info being changed to the correct info shows that it fixes the issue at hand, and the testing proves as much. I will leave the issue alone until I get the final response from the developers. If it is not satisfactory I will attempt to further show the issue using in-game methods.

It would make me feel a bit better however if the devs were able to show a video of the tests they conduct or their methodology so that the community might be able to show that perhaps something is not being tested accurately if that might be the case.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 16/01/2023 at 16:26, Killedog said:

Russian missiles getting better every day

 

https://streamable.com/nmfmlm

image.png
You tried to fire at a target that was already close to notching, and then they chaffed.
 

On 16/01/2023 at 17:03, Conejero00 said:

Don't you love that not even 1 chaff is needed for this

No chaff at all was needed because target was close to a notch and a friendly (larger RCS, higher closure rate) target passed right in front of the missile.

All he had to do to avoid a teamkill was quickly switch to IRST lock on the original target and back to TRK PD and it would likely have yanked it off the friendly target and he'd be fine. I doubt it would have hit his original intended target still, but at least he wouldn't have teamkilled.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MiG_23M said:

close to a notch

image.png.b695f6f0d1a6f342985704257fc34a

This is the exact frame before launching. That is not close to a notch, but ~65º from the perpendicular of the MiG-29

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Conejero00 said:

image.png.b695f6f0d1a6f342985704257fc34a

This is the exact frame before launching. That is not close to a notch, but ~65º from the perpendicular of the MiG-29

Target was cold and the airspace directly in front of you was littered with targets. He was also close to the ground, I would never have attempted this shot in my life.

 

If you want to use the missile better try not firing it at side aspect or cold targets and especially not when they're near the ground and erratically maneuvering.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how people with not even 1k battles arrive in top tier expecting missiles to work 100% of the time even when not used properly.

 

8 minutes ago, Conejero00 said:

image.png.b695f6f0d1a6f342985704257fc34a

This is the exact frame before launching. That is not close to a notch, but ~65º from the perpendicular of the MiG-29

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, MiG_23M said:

cold targets

Why is a cold target a problem btw? I thought radar missiles and pulse doppler radars had only probles with flanking targets, not cold nor hot

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, SXTREME said:

I like how people with not even 1k battles arrive in top tier expecting missiles to work 100% of the time even when not used properly.

 

 

This is not my video nor my plane, I was just commenting on how the missile behaved, I did not fire so I wasn't expecting at all the missile to work, as I had no say on the matter (The guy who indeed shooted it, Killedog, has 9k battles btw)

 

 

You know what I also like? How good the ignore button works on this forum

Edited by Conejero00
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Conejero00 said:

This is not my video nor my plane, I was just commenting on how the missile behaved, I did not fire so I wasn't expecting at all the missile to work, as I had no say on the matter (The guy who indeed shooted it, Killedog, has 9k battles btw)

 

 

You know what I also like? How good the ignore button works on this forum

Ignore button works not as it should. When you apply it on someone you don't see his activity, while he sees all of yours, he can comment, quote etc.... You just don't see him.
Too bad. It should work both ways like block on Facebook (no one sees each other)

  • Haha 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Smoak741 said:

Ignore button works not as it should. When you apply it on someone you don't see his activity, while he sees all of yours, he can comment, quote etc.... You just don't see him.
Too bad. It should work both ways like block on Facebook (no one sees each other)

Hmm, for me it's enough with what it does... I see how it working as you say could have advantages tho.
Anyhow, let's get on topic again ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Conejero00 said:

This is not my video nor my plane, I was just commenting on how the missile behaved, I did not fire so I wasn't expecting at all the missile to work

:fixsnail:

 

On 17/01/2023 at 01:03, Conejero00 said:

Don't you love that not even 1 chaff is needed for this

23 minutes ago, Conejero00 said:

Why is a cold target a problem btw? I thought radar missiles and pulse doppler radars had only probles with flanking targets, not cold nor hot

 

Weird dodge, you are clearly implying that the missile should have behaved otherwise despite the unfavorable conditions in which it was launched, to anyone that understands how these missiles work this is common knowledge. I am simply pointing out the irony of expecting something to work while not understanding the basics of the game itself, yet eager to complain when something doesn't go their way.

Edited by SXTREME
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 15/01/2023 at 00:51, MiG_23M said:

image.png

This is not the case

I await further replies and testing

24 nm = 27.62 mi not 24 mi like in your test shot (20 nm is a hair over 23 mi btw). The target wasn't particularly far off your nose by the impact time either, you had practically caught up to the missile at time of impact so I wouldn't say that's "significantly overperforming" according to the numbers seen above. 

On 18/01/2023 at 10:15, SXTREME said:

I like how people with not even 1k battles arrive in top tier expecting missiles to work 100% of the time even when not used properly.

 

 

I think the problem is the whole dunning-krueger effect at play here, as well as some horrendous community and CC misinformation regarding missile (haha missile tier is for Aces because missiles are just point and click to get autokills). Players that get to top tier often just don't know how missiles work, ESPECIALLY radar missiles. That's how we ended up with people saying the AIM-7E was acting like an AMRAAM for like 1-2 years -_-

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...