Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turn rate has tanked with new update

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Turn rate has tanked with new update

    With the new update the sustained turn rate of the Tomcat has decreased below EM chart values for some reason, so much so that the F-15 is actually matching the F-14 in sustainable load factor at 0.5-0.6 mach atm. There also seems there's an issue with stores drag, as if removing stores doesn't help with drag at all.

    #2

    Comment


      #3
      Interestingly performance at altitude doesn't seem much off, it's mainly at low altitude where about 0.4-0.5 G's is missing in sustainable load factor.

      Comment


        #4
        It's porked

        Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

        Comment


          #5
          That's a move in the right direction, isn't it? Wasn't it over performing before?

          Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

          Dances, PhD
          Jet Hobo
          https://v65th.wordpress.com/

          Comment


            #6
            Show some tacview evidence of your findings. Chances are they are how they should be.
            BreaKKer "Holdback"
            CSG-2 - CVW-3
            VF-154 Black Knights RIO


            CSG-2 Website

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by TheBigTatanka View Post
              That's a move in the right direction, isn't it? Wasn't it over performing before?

              Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk
              No, it was performing basically spot on before. Now it's missing some 0.5-0.6 G's compared with the real life charts.

              Comment


                #8
                Right on, thanks.

                Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

                Dances, PhD
                Jet Hobo
                https://v65th.wordpress.com/

                Comment


                  #9
                  DCS F-14B, 55,678 lbs, 4x AIM-9 + 4xAIM-7, Std. ICAO (15 deg C), Sea level (unlimited fuel):

                  KTAS/Mach vs G's
                  450/0.68 = 7.00 G
                  425/0.64 = 6.65 G
                  400/0.60 = 6.25 G
                  350/0.53 = 5.25 G
                  300/0.45 = 4.60 G
                  250/0.38 = 3.70 G
                  200/0.30 = 2.70 G



                  RL chart values for same weight & load out but at 5 kft:

                  Mach vs G's
                  0.68 = 6.25 G
                  0.64 = 5.85 G
                  0.60 = 5.70 G
                  0.53 = 5.25 G (Same as the DCS F-14 at sea level !)
                  0.45 = 4.15 G
                  0.38 = 3.30 G
                  0.30 = 2.35 G


                  Based on this the expected RL performance at SL would be:

                  0.68 = 7.35 G (+0.35 G vs DCS)
                  0.64 = 6.95 G (+0.30 G vs DCS)
                  0.60 = 6.60 G (+0.35 G vs DCS)
                  0.53 = 5.85 G (+0.60 G vs DCS) !
                  0.45 = 4.75 G (+0.15 G vs DCS)
                  0.38 = 3.80 G (+0.10 G vs DCS)
                  0.30 = 2.75 G (+0.05 G vs DCS)



                  In short a our cat has suffered a noticable drop in performance above 0.45 mach (at 0.53 the difference is big), and a slight one below that, as compared with the real thing.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Good to know, hopefully HB can look into this and fix it
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Heatblur should be able to quickly test this and overlay the performance over the available charts, and then see if something funny is going on with thrust, drag or lift with decreasing altitude and/or with drag when removing/adding stores.

                      And yes hopefully they can fix this soon. Feels very odd how it's performing now, esp. the wild dip in turn performance above ~0.5 mach.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Thank you Hummingbird, saw your remarks in the other thread as well. We're not sure what or why this happened, and are looking into it.
                        Heatblur Simulations

                        Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

                        http://www.heatblur.com/

                        https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Thanks IronMike, appreciate the quick response!

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by IronMike View Post
                            Thank you Hummingbird, saw your remarks in the other thread as well. We're not sure what or why this happened, and are looking into it.
                            I knew this was going to happen when the anhedral was adjusted on the stabs....
                            Originally Posted by Larkis

                            “Imo im glad he is gone. He was a really mean, narcissistic and disrespectfull person. Everyone has to cheer him that hecwas a real tomcat driver and only his way is the best way. And when you question him or want to discuss stuff like "shutdown hud for landing" he get angry and offensive very fast. Im glad he is gone...”

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Update notes say:
                              • Adjusted F110 AB thrust below mach 0.7.
                              • Adjusted subsonic airframe drag per SME comments

                              Perhaps one of these had some unwanted effects? Or maybe something went wrong implementing them.

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Originally posted by Hummingbird View Post
                                Update notes say:
                                • Adjusted F110 AB thrust below mach 0.7.
                                • Adjusted subsonic airframe drag per SME comments

                                Perhaps one of these had some unwanted effects? Or maybe something went wrong implementing them.
                                I agree. It contributed some unexpected negative effects - the turning performance of F-14B is considerably downgraded, and not matches real life performance.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by Sonoda Umi View Post

                                  I agree. It contributed some unexpected negative effects - the turning performance of F-14B is considerably downgraded, and not matches real life performance.
                                  it drives me nuts when patch notes say adjusted x or y. WHIICH WAY HAS IT BEEN ADJUSTED???? lol
                                  7700k @5ghz, 32gb 3200mhz ram, 2080ti, nvme drives, valve index vr

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by eatthis View Post

                                    it drives me nuts when patch notes say adjusted x or y. WHIICH WAY HAS IT BEEN ADJUSTED???? lol
                                    IKR? I always do expect things to be worse when it says that - just to be positively surprised when it's gotten better and not to be disappointed when things get worse.

                                    At least our SME does have an idea already and it's probably going to be addressed soon™.

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by eatthis View Post

                                      it drives me nuts when patch notes say adjusted x or y. WHIICH WAY HAS IT BEEN ADJUSTED???? lol
                                      Same!!! Whenever I read that something got "adjusted" it drives me mad, as I would like to know if it gut tuned down or up!
                                      Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

                                      DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by QuiGon View Post

                                        Same!!! Whenever I read that something got "adjusted" it drives me mad, as I would like to know if it gut tuned down or up!
                                        I did try asking before the patch went live, as I couldn't understand why thrust below 0.7 M had to be adjusted as the a/c was already perfectly matching the charts, but they must have missed it:
                                        https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/englis...49#post7138149

                                        I actually thought they might have increased thrust a bit and then adjusted L/D to take account for it, or vice versa.

                                        But yeah, it would indeed be nice if they wrote in which direction or if at all their adjustment are meant to affect performance going forward.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X