Thank you very much for the link!

I did not know!

In the next bugfix version-923.1, the (Dvina/Volhov) launchers will have their elevation limited to a maximum of 75 degrees.
(The SNR has 65degree elevation angle at this case.)
If you elevate the SNR over 65 degree, the SINHR PU lamps will extinguish, and missiles cannot be launched.

If you accidentally switch the ANT/EKV selector to EKV, while your missiles are flying, that those will be lost.
(It was quite hard to find a block diagram of the SNR, to check if the ANT/EKV switch is only for transmit, or for transmit/receive also.)

I still thinking about high level modeling of the radio proxy fuse behavior, depending on target distance and radar cross section, utilizing firing range data.

Thanks for the bug-finds!

In general, when the release of 923.1

Scheduled for February?

I still thinking about high level modeling of the radio proxy fuse behavior, depending on target distance and radar cross section, utilizing firing range data.

That will be very dificult task, but you have one advantage, you are modeling both the targets and the missiles path... You've already show us missile oscilations (H1/H2) gadgets work! You have data for the probabilty against distance, you know angle of approaching between target and missile, attack angle of missile could be known (between his nose-to-mottor line of the missile and vector of her flight path), you have details about the war head, you have a lot of results from real "PUSK"-s in different conditions ( at least for S-75) and very important - you know real PVO officers!.... I think you could start with "Dvina" or "Volkhov" missiles. The joice is obviouse, because:
1. A lot of information.
2. Relativelly simple (at least Dvina).

I think you can tune the SIM and make a special, let's say "developer's" version, where you can use mission editor with AAR, where it would summarizes for you parameters in the point of impact, so you can check works of your models... (Now I am really angry I have no skills in moddeling... ). But let's say it - even now you gave the world the most "realistic to the switch" SAM sim!

PS. About the video of the univercity - did you thought to contact with any similar institution for information/modeling support?

I played a bit with the firing range charts...

Against a MiG-17...
90% chance of detonation from radio proxy fuse, is at 73/116m (5E11/5H49)
50% chance of detonation from radio proxy fuse, is at 98/155m (5E11/5H49)
20% chance of detonation from radio proxy fuse, is at 110/175m (5E11/5H49)

Against a B-52, 20% chance of detonation from radio proxy fuse, is at 300/485m (5E11/5H49)
Against an F-4, 20% chance of detonation from radio proxy fuse, is at 170/270m (5E11/5H49)
Against an F-117, 20% chance of detonation from radio proxy fuse, is at 20/30m (5E11/5H49)

The question of which means 73/116m (5E11/5H49).

This 73/116 meter or ....

The question of which means 73/116m (5E11/5H49).
This 73/116 meter or ....

Using 5E11 radio-proximity fuse, 73m
Using 5H49 radio-proximity fuse, 116m

MIG 17 is not the target in the Simulator!

F-4, F-117, B-52 is yes, I agree, but not the MIG 17.

Hpasp,

I'm wondering if we can have few scenarios of Chinese using S75 to down RB57. It's probably not challenging like shooting Gary Powers, but interesting never the less. What say you?

I'm wondering if we can have few scenarios of Chinese using S75 to down RB57. It's probably not challenging like shooting Gary Powers, but interesting never the less. What say you?

I would need map of the event, location of the SAM batteries (preferably Google Earth Coordinates), and name of the Batteries.