Doesn't A-10C feel more flight capable in real life?

1. Again, civil aviation requires different skill set and knowledge compared to military aviation.

 

2. Your USAF test pilot school graduate is not a bad pilot. He was just trained to work in completely different environment.

1. Did you even read what I wrote? For the third time, that's exactly what I wrote already twice.

2. ? If this would have been the case he would never have been able to become a FO at an airline at all.

Btw, I'm not aware of a required different skill set between a Captain and an FO.

I feel I can be helpful here. This bbrz dude let slip in another thread that he does not believe that IAS is affected by altitude, nor that drag can affect thrust. This was after calling negative lift on the ground roll in certain tricycle gear airframes a made up, nonsense theory. Ditto for the idea that a wing generates less lift at high density altitudes, according to him that's untrue and engine performance is the ONLY affected factor.

I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I'm doubtful he is who he claims to be.

I feel I can be helpful here. This bbrz dude let slip in another thread that he does not believe that IAS is affected by altitude, nor that drag can affect thrust. This was after calling negative lift on the ground roll in certain tricycle gear airframes a made up, nonsense theory. Ditto for the idea that a wing generates less lift at high density altitudes, according to him that's untrue and engine performance is the ONLY affected factor.

 

 

 

I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I'm doubtful he is who he claims to be.

Engines work in that exact same way as it equates to less volume of air being pushed by the engine to create thrust.

DCS does have altitude engine performance modeled and I would assume airframe lift at altitude as well.

..and again, as a former A10 pilot, what DCS has modeled in my earnest opinion seems accurate. I have only a few years (260 flight hours) on the A10 so I would believe a more tenure pilot observations than mine. My only complaint has been with known loadouts to what I was equipped in the past and DCS do not match up in my opinion and believed it to be an issue of drag but it's only a thought and I may be inaccurate.

...again, this is a VIDEO GAME and while I understand the topic of being accurate matters, it will never ever be exact..because it just can't.

My complaint here has been with some of the people adding information is that they are speaking to what trained military pilots can or can't attest to when they have not one single understanding of what real training consists of.

The A10 has a climb rate, roll rate, etc which is limited by it's flight abilities. That said, pilots have found clever known ways to increase some of those numbers by manipulating the aircraft's control surfaces, an example of being air brakes to increase roll rate.

Yes there are current and former pilots that will engage in hyperbole and exaggerating the aircrafts performance abilities but generally as a norm pilots in the larger percentage are very accurate on the abilities of the airframe.

The only addition I would like to see with the A10 is a higher resolution cockpit which apparently is coming and flexing of her wings under stress for immersion.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I feel I can be helpful here. This [...] dude let slip in another thread that he does not believe that IAS is affected by altitude, nor that drag can affect thrust.

You wanna call someone out for talking nonsense, without even telling them you're going behind their back?

Start at the beginning:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4041830#post4041830

Not really how it works. 1) The speed you rotate at is not the one you take off with. It's usually about 10kts less than your take-off speed. 2) That speed is dependent on weight, density altitude, temperature, wind, etc and is not static across maps, missions, or loadouts. You can use a bunch of performance charts to figure out not only your rotation speed, but your climb out speed and roll distance. It'll provide you with a better idea of how 'things are done'. Finally, 3) It doesn't take it a while to get past 50 knots, that's just indicated airspeed catching up on the lack of flow given to the probe. Get the CDU to display your ground speed from taxi to roll and you'll see what I mean.

 

Maybe if you provided us with the mission you can't take off on, or at least its weather data and your weapons/fuel weight, we can help you with specifics. In so far as controls being a possible issue, you can just hit Right Ctrl + Enter to see if brakes or the throttle are actually holding you back, but I kind of doubt it's not just an overweight hog.

And then let everyone be the judge of the discussion that ensued, and that you said you were stopping.

And while that discussion doesn't particularly belong to the "Power Problem" thread, it certainly doesn't belong here, either.

Some comical bias being displayed in this thread...

You wanna call someone out for talking nonsense, without even telling them you're going behind their back?

Going behind his back? I mentioned him by his username on a public forum, bud.

I also don't know why me extricating myself from a frustrating discussion would matter. If you're a first-week student pilot, you know that IAS is not fixed across density altitudes. He got testy so I walked away. He's claiming to be a former ATP and it deserves a mention when he uses that to claim authority on good and bad pilots.

Well thinner air at higher altitude equates to less volume of lift per square inch..

 

Engines work in that exact same way as it equates to less volume of air being pushed by the engine to create thrust.

 

DCS does have altitude engine performance modeled and I would assume airframe lift at altitude as well.

 

..and again, as a former A10 pilot, what DCS has modeled in my earnest opinion seems accurate. I have only a few years (260 flight hours) on the A10 so I would believe a more tenure pilot observations than mine. My only complaint has been with known loadouts to what I was equipped in the past and DCS do not match up in my opinion and believed it to be an issue of drag but it's only a thought and I may be inaccurate.

 

...again, this is a VIDEO GAME and while I understand the topic of being accurate matters, it will never ever be exact..because it just can't.

 

My complaint here has been with some of the people adding information is that they are speaking to what trained military pilots can or can't attest to when they have not one single understanding of what real training consists of.

 

The A10 has a climb rate, roll rate, etc which is limited by it's flight abilities. That said, pilots have found clever known ways to increase some of those numbers by manipulating the aircraft's control surfaces, an example of being air brakes to increase roll rate.

 

Yes there are current and former pilots that will engage in hyperbole and exaggerating the aircrafts performance abilities but generally as a norm pilots in the larger percentage are very accurate on the abilities of the airframe.

 

The only addition I would like to see with the A10 is a higher resolution cockpit which apparently is coming and flexing of her wings under stress for immersion.

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

+1,000 :thumbup:

If you're a first-week student pilot, you know that IAS is not fixed across density altitudes.

If you understand how an airspeed indicator works, you would know that your opponent is correct.

Now...can we all just get along and discuss things without getting personal? :D

Wingflex would be nice to have. I find it very immersive in the Tomcat and the F-5E to see the wings flex all over the place. Especially the F-5E's implementation. It gives real weight to those sidewinders at the tip.

If we're listing off wishlist items, I'm kind of hoping the ANG relaxes its terms at some point and the A-10 gets similar weapons employment options as the F/A-18C. Would love to recreate some scenes from Level Zero Heroes, lol

If you understand how an airspeed indicator works, you would know that your opponent is correct.

 

Now...can we all just get along and discuss things without getting personal? :D

IAS changes with air density though. The higher you are, the faster you'll need to go for IAS to catch up. It is useful for an airframe because it standardizes performance points, but it's not fixed regardless of pressure altitude and temperature.

That or the PHAK failed me. I'm not a pilot by any stretch of the imagination and I'd love to be corrected. If there's something I'm not seeing that you think I should, feel free to use a PM if you feel this conversation's out of place.

If we're listing off wishlist items, I'm kind of hoping the ANG relaxes its terms at some point and the A-10 gets similar weapons employment options as the F/A-18C. Would love to recreate some scenes from Level Zero Heroes, lol

 

 

 

IAS changes with air density though. The higher you are, the faster you'll need to go for IAS to catch up. It is useful for an airframe because it standardizes performance points, but it's not fixed regardless of pressure altitude and temperature.

 

That or the PHAK failed me. I'm not a pilot by any stretch of the imagination and I'd love to be corrected. If there's something I'm not seeing that you think I should, feel free to use a PM if you feel this conversation's out of place.

Like I said, if you understand how an airspeed indicator works, you'll understand how IAS doesn't change. Temperature really isn't a factor in IAS. :smilewink:

I'm not a pilot by any stretch of the imagination and I'd love to be corrected. If there's something I'm not seeing that you think I should, feel free to use a PM if you feel this conversation's out of place.

I'll try to explain my understanding of how things work, using the C-101 as an example.

Batumi (33 ft)

For a given loadout at Batumi @ SL, it's performance charts give :

takeoff speed Vto = 126 KIAS

takeoff run = 3,300 ft

At Batumi 126 KIAS = approx. TAS / ground speed and produces enough lift for the aircraft to takeoff.

Groom Lake (4,476 ft)

Taking the same aircraft to Groom Lake @ 4,476 ft

takeoff speed Vto = 126 KIAS

takeoff run = 4,900 ft

At Groom Lake 126 KIAS is still the speed required to produce enough lift for the aircraft to takeoff.

However, the thinner air means 126 KIAS does not equal the required TAS / ground speed (the aircraft has to go faster for the same KIAS).

Also perhaps the engine is less efficient (less thrust) and takes longer to accelerate the aircraft to 126 KIAS.

This means a longer takeoff run than at Batumi but in both cases the takeoff IAS is the same.

IAS changes with air density though. [...]

 

That or the PHAK failed me.

I think the FAA's Pilot's Handbook on Aeronautical Knowledge is pretty spot-on, as far as I can tell from a purely sim-pilot perspective myself.

Everything you describe about IAS should indeed be correct for True Air Speed or TAS, but is actually wrong for Indicated Air Speed or IAS. In fact, the handbook explicitly states that takeoff, landing and stall speeds are usually given as IAS and don't normally vary with altitude or temperature.

IAS is dynamic pressure expressed as speed and that is all. And since the equation for dynamic pressure incorporates both density and velocity you need a higher velocity in a less dense medium to gain the same amount of pressure

And since dynamic pressure is part of the lift equation you will get your result: Lift.

IAS is dynamic pressure expressed as speed and that is all. And since the equation for dynamic pressure incorporates both density and velocity you need a higher velocity in a less dense medium to gain the same amount of pressure

 

And since dynamic pressure is part of the lift equation you will get your result: Lift.

Should have brought my popcorn..

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

IAS is dynamic pressure expressed as speed and that is all. And since the equation for dynamic pressure incorporates both density and velocity you need a higher velocity in a less dense medium to gain the same amount of pressure

 

And since dynamic pressure is part of the lift equation you will get your result: Lift.

I actually had to read that at least 3 times, but it makes a whole lot of sense. Thanks! :thumbup:

Edit:

I'll try to explain my understanding of how things work, using the C-101 as an example. [...]

Also a great example, thanks as well! :)

Damn was I wrong. Apologies to bbzr, way off base pal. I don't know why I kept thinking "you're taking off faster at higher density altitudes even if the dials are in the same spot" instead of "the dials are IAS".

I'll stick to my guns on negative lift though. Thanks for the explanations guys.

That's not true. IAS Stall speed increases with altitude normally. Takeoff and landing speeds are regulatory.

Again, I was talking about the FAA's Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge, which was brought up in a (semi-) related discussion, Chapter 8 Flight Instruments, Airspeed Indicator (ASI):

Indicated airspeed (IAS)—the direct instrument reading obtained from the ASI, uncorrected for variations in atmospheric density, installation error, or instrument error. Manufacturers use this airspeed as the basis for determining aircraft performance.

Takeoff, landing, and stall speeds listed in the AFM/POH are IAS and do not normally vary with altitude or temperature.

I don't actually know that to be true, but for starters I'll take the FAA's word over yours. :smartass:

I think the FAA's Pilot's Handbook on Aeronautical Knowledge is pretty spot-on, as far as I can tell from a purely sim-pilot perspective myself.

 

Everything you describe about IAS should indeed be correct for True Air Speed or TAS, but is actually wrong for Indicated Air Speed or IAS. In fact, the handbook explicitly states that takeoff, landing and stall speeds are usually given as IAS and don't normally vary with altitude or temperature.

Yup, IAS doesn't vary with altitude or temperature. The airspeed indicator measures differential air pressure between the aircraft pitot system that is connected to the inside of the diaphragm, and the aircraft static system that goes into the airspeed indicator case. Any change in barometric pressure will be seen on both the pitot side and static side of the indicator, so it results in the barometric pressure having no influence on what is indicated on the instrument. Its a really simple device that makes it so the pilot doesn't have to make the calculations in his head. If his stall speed is 62 knots, it will always show as 62 knots on the indicator, no matter what his altitude is. :)

FAA is dumbing down their manuals because of their target audience (pilots). I suggest you to find some engineering book if you want to understand aerodynamic effects.

The FAA is absolutely correct about IAS, for the reasons stated in my last post. :thumbup:

No it's not correct about Indicated stall speed not changing with altitude.. :)

Well, I'll take my 27 years of experience with certifying and troubleshooting these systems any day of the week over vague mentions of unnamed engineering books. :smilewink:

Which is exactly what you are doing. :)

FAA is dumbing down their manuals because of their target audience (pilots). I suggest you to find some engineering book if you want to understand aerodynamic effects.

Well, as a virtual pilot, I guess I fit the target audience profile. ;)

If you're saying that from an engineering point of view, stall speed (measured as IAS) increases with altitude, I'm not disputing that, because I certainly don't know.

But as long as a pilot operators handbook gives a stall speed as an absolute KIAS value (or mph or kph or whatever, as long as it's IAS) and does not advise to take altitude or density altitude into account, that's really good enough for me.

Plus: if I understand correctly what Drotik wrote about IAS being dynamic pressure, and that altitude and speed both influence dynamic pressure, I would assume that given the same dynamic pressure, the wings would generate the same aerodynamic lift, which in turn would mean that stall speeds would not depend on dynamic pressure.