Very nice and useful feature - full support! I wonder if this could be supplemented by 3d (toroidal) projection of fire zone (launch envelope + kill envelope) of given system, similar to this one:



This would enable us to evaluate what was relative position of impact point versus missile range (kill zone) -

If you switch the leftmost one, the angle tracking control is given to the two optical angle tracker officer, sitting at the top of the SNR, in the "doghouse".
[not simulated]

Middle one is the jamming target identification switch.
(if you have more than one jammer strobe in the screen, you can highlight it at the other display)
[not simulated]

Easy and clear! Like it!

I already knew the switch on the left "Vizir" is a dog house!

Doghouse and there is optical channel viewing purposes!

I realized everything is!

Good idea, but how bad would the slow down be if you wrote data out more frequently - the elevation profile is potentially useful and interesting, but currently shows very coarse steps because of the widely spaced discrete intervals and lack of smarts in GE.

As I understand there is shown the affected area SAM KRUG.

As I understand it should be left to -10 km, -20km-, -30km affected area in a DOGON!

As I understand minimum target height of 150 meters (0,15)

Maximum distance of 50 km.

Target height is 24.5 km in the boost phase missile.

On the passive can be all of 26 km.

In the DOGON worse as always!

Good idea, but how bad would the slow down be if you wrote data out more frequently - the elevation profile is potentially useful and interesting, but currently shows very coarse steps because of the widely spaced discrete intervals and lack of smarts in GE.

At the current test, it is one coordinate per 10 second, for each flying object.
I can change it to one coordinate per each second, to have more granularity, and nicer missile path...

http://www.mediafire.com/file/54rzne02fi6e3un/Asuluk2.gpx

Just do not forget to click on settings...



... and pull the "animation speed" to the leftmost.

More detail in the missile path. Some spiking from the velocity profile, unsure if this is data provided by you or computed by GE.

Launcher Height is given as 5m, with the terrain set at -19m. Is this correct? It is possible that the launcher is on an elevated platform, but 24m seems a large value for the missile height above 'flat' ground around, given that most seem to be in revetments in their 'war' positions.

I think that a better solution could be found or built for the purpose later, particularly with navigating and viewing the data (GE is clumsy for working with these tracks, as it can only display one at a time and navigation of the 3d world is not as convenient as some games have managed. - I recall the Falcon ICMI being quite flexible, with view points pinnable to a single unit, padlocked to another, or free flying/steerable... Still hugely better than nothing, and would be really useful with a 'parameter/range' model for the missile overlaid for the currently selected missile, if that was possible...

Launcher Height is given as 5m, with the terrain set at -19m. Is this correct? It is possible that the launcher is on an elevated platform, but 24m seems a large value for the missile height above 'flat' ground around, given that most seem to be in revetments in their 'war' positions.

No.

The program calculates the steps in 100ms.
What you see is the first round second (missile could theoretically fly for 100~900ms) before the first point.

(GE is clumsy for working with these tracks, as it can only display one at a time

No.

It can display more than one.

Unclear of me... only query/display the velocity/height profile for one at a time, both are displayed as paths in the 3d world - and there are tools that allow the time history to be interpreted - each node of the track can be marked, the 'length' of the displayed portion of the track can be shortened by dragging the partial 'left bracket' on the playback track, and the 'current' point of the velocity/height profile will display as a red arrow with it's associated parameters displayed.

The first data point was (IIRC) listed as 20.1 m/hour, so ~20+m height gain seems improbable? I'll check it again later, but this was my initial impression - the velocity was negligible, but the position seemed 'out'.