Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About rynait

  • Rank
  1. rynait

    Energy Weapon Analysis

    Hello, I believe i have to disagree with the so called analysis. the laser dissapation "blooming" is the same regardless of energy output. bloom is result on the "element's 'color light' absorbion". The molecules do not become dense or change elemental behavior, when hit by higher energy (compared to lower energy hits). The blooming is the effect the molecules-element absorb some % of the 'color energy'. so the % of energy absorbed from high energy is the same as low energy. This implies the distance of a high energy laser is going futher longer [distance] than low energy laser, assuming you want the Burn-vaporize, or for sake of game, damage. Plasma unforuntately suffer different kind of "blooming" but could not be presented, I don't have such facts to back this but putting things here as logical deduction from xeno perspective.. Plasma is based on 'intermediate atomic excitment state [is either or combination of thermal, magnetic, or electric]. Since plasma mass [from xeno gun] has to deal with atmospheric molecule-element and has some sort of 'force field'. So the "bloom" would be logically dealt as a) force field is 'eroded' by atmospheric mass, resulting in plasma mass collaspe [poof...] b) atmospheric mass absorbs some of the plasma mass' state, changing the plasma mass into different state [weak or strong] c) plasma mass absorbs the atmospheric mass becoming heavier [short range?] d) only valid fact i can find, mixed elements prevents plasma to be formed in low energy gas discharge, lightning in rain storm generates high energy... mimimum 1 gV. thus you are not supposed to compare laser to plasma. they both have different energy coeffiicents; therefore different rules governing "weaponizing effect". R
  2. Hello, well, cant say much about the disprenancy. R
  3. Hello, Stellar are you talking about shoulder launched rockets and Hunter rockets? R
  4. Hello, Stellar is correct, AIM-120 is ABF, sorry I did not include that info. Little correction for Stellar, AIM-54 was designed against all kind of bombers and ICBM, not "anti-ship" only. Because of USA's rule of enagement with AIM-54 for nuclear-launch deterrent. Soviet did not launch their nukes against USA, therefore no reported kills. Iraq-Iran had their version rule of enagement [different], thus did report their kills with 54 [unknown how many was launched]. If we disregard the "starting year" in the game, My selection would be to replace all warheads in Vympel R-37, Novator KS-172, 'modernized' hybrid AIM 47 and AIM 54/120 (aim 54/120 had best electronics and 47 had best weight ratio), and hybrid AIM 9 [not decide what based on]. With atmospheric entry causes surface mass to reach hot plasma state, and our space program had to use fragile ceramics or ablative shield. Looking at xenonaut's crashed ships looked like "bare" skin; thus imagining heat and melt resistant alloy. HE warhead depends on molten metal flinging... thus I would remove those warhead and replace with varants of HE shpe, ABF and BF warheads. R
  5. Hello per StellarRat, lack of reported kills is because F14 is only aircraft capable to use 54 {this is naval interceptor and reconnaise}. [btw there is reported kills with 54 during Iran and Iraq war, but information is not given]. F18A/B did not have the specialized 54 support electronics. When AIM120 AMRAAM is introduced, F18 C/D can use because of existing IFF electronics {required to support BVR capability} [little sidenote, the IFF was introduced with F111 and YF-12 which is cancelled anyway], Later NATO aircrafts got their upgrades with IFF electronics. Maybe F14 was somewhat capable of carrying 120 without upgrade. here amraam RL specs... 1991 AIM-120 AMRAAM usa [nato] 23/18 kg mach 4 -- 70/105 -- 345kg BVR AR Well whole lot different beast (looking at heavy ratio, 120 is lighter than 54). R
  6. Hello but surface/ship moves slowly compared to propreller aircrafts, and big "alien" ships that you point out to, is faster than that. now xenopedia states avalanche torps is derived from AIM 54 Phoenix, thus Vympel R-33 is nearest comparable prior to 1979. I also tossing in the AIM 7 'Sparrow' and AGM 88 'Harm' to prove differences. here your RL missle specs. year model-mfg warhead kg speed--range [km]--weight [kg] homing 1959 AIM-7 Sparrow 20 kg abf mach 2.5 --10 --230 kg sarh 1976 AIM-7F 39 kg abf mach 4-- 70-- 231 kg sarh 1974-2004 AIM-54 Phoenix usa 61 kg HE mach 5 -- 212-- 462 kg SARH & AR 1972 AIM-54b [failures] =without homing coolants 1977 AIM-54c =digitial SARH capable of shooting down missle-rockets 1979 Vympel R-33 (AA-9 'Amos') 47.5 kg HE frag mach 4.5 -- 228 -- 490 kg AR 1979 AGM 84 'Harpoon' 211 kg HE Shpe mach .8 -- 185 -- 551 kg AR [sea 'skipping' altutitude = 910 m] 1963 AGM 45 'Shrike' 67.5 BF mach 1.5 -- 25 -- 117.06 PAR [Lofted altitude] 1985 AGM 88 'Harm' 66 kg BF mach 2.7 -- 106 -- 355 kg PAR/AR [Lofted altitude] [AGM 84 harpoon's ranges is reliant on aircraft's altitutde, max possible range with B-52 bomber shown] This chart proves few things; A) the AGM missles are slow. B) AGM is gravity dependent, can not climb nor maintain level altitude. C) AGM ratio weight-explosive-range is heavy. AIM-7 'sparrow' is heaviest ratio, dismal kills rate. D) AGM had short ranges vs AIM or vympel. E) from AGM sources, launch has to be +/- 3 degree on target. [ie must have aircraft lined up prior to launch] draw your own conclusion. R xenopedia did not say what differed between avalanche and phoenix, I assume is the homing replacement as indicated with the xeno-sidewinder
  7. hello, per drohne remember in the game xenopedia, Mig 31 'foxtrot' is an interceptor, not fighter. with RL facts; Those 1970's interceptors was designed without guns and were rushed into production because of era shift introducing Jet-strato type bombers and ICBM. also interceptors was designed to carry 400 kg plus missles. and at same time fighters still use guns-cannon until Mid 1980. Those aging fighters went through modernization-upgrade had their guns replaced with big radar and weighted ballast. R
  8. rynait

    Realistic Aircrafts mod v1.0

    Hello Ishantil, That is what i did. However you have to remember some things are kept a secret, thus need to "check multiple sources". * Currently all prototypes or designs uses "theoretical stats". * With deployed aircrafts, I use mfg stats first, checking other sources, drawing on average. * Few french, soviets and "secret" aircrafts has this kind of statstical contradictions. * did not record "radar range", because of multiple electronics and anomalous data. the game aircraft ratio's logic could not be made because of anamolous "near" to RL; two aircrafts and one missles in the game. According to SoloA, he had to tune range, altitude, speed [very little], weight [slightly higher] of each aircraft stats individually (with objective of game balance), thus no ratios. I have thought of another technique that might help develop ratios, * make 5 'test' aircrafts with base f16 stats (xenopedia state f17 is modified f16). * create 5 test aircrafts, change stats out for each; X-orig = f16 [no changes], thus determine comparative balance measures X-altit = "top" altitude, [to establish feet ratio] (optimimal altitude is 39 to 44 thousand feet for jet engine) X-speed = speed, [establish game's Mach 1 "speed"] X-mass = hardpoint & weight (missle has weights stats) [establish if empty or full] X-far = range [establish km ratio] Then make ratio apply to SoloA's aircrafts. Now there are new game balancing information, appearing in v19.7 and forum suggestions. This might establish ratio making process. R ps excel with stats is updated, in worksheet "game aircraft calc"; I reorganized RL list (to match SoloA's mod), and made "offset calculation, by %" between RL and mod that way you can see why is not a "ratio that applies to all"
  9. rynait

    Realistic Aircrafts mod v1.0

    hello, not much of an official... there was few conflicting information and "dis-information" out there. This is the information i managed to gather off the web. I am not an authority on this specs. multiple worksheets in there... here is the link aircraft specs R
  10. rynait

    Realistic Aircrafts mod v1.0

    Hello, I already have spreadsheet of known aircrafts and missles, all based on earlier v16 talks. Shall I attach this excel spreadsheets with the stats and figures? R
  11. Hello, noticed at start, you could manufacture a hunter scout car without researching, and yet I see there is a hunter scout car research. What give? I thought you supposed to research first to enable scout car manufacturing. R
  12. rynait

    Kabill's Air Combat Balance Mod

    hello gizmogomez, older version, there was mod attempt (not downloaded) for cluster missles. That means pack of x number missles in 1 hardpoint. but I do not recall how many allowed in a cluster. the catch, you are fire(ing) from 1 hard point right away; translated there is x on hardpoint, then x missles is launched at once. R
  13. rynait

    Foxtrot Gameplay Video

    Hello Kabill, there is an mod, already made by SoloA, using real life aircraft-missles. there are few gripes about numbers of the hardpoints. Dev said max 4 of combination hardpoints. R AIM 47 is nuclear tipped.
  14. rynait

    Foxtrot Gameplay Video

    Hello Stellarat, I am talking about how convoluted game missles (per xenopedia) versus RL. I suspect dev had original plans that will change the air-combat plans. R