Flight model congratulations for the JF-17

Excellent job DEKA IRONWORKS team! You have done something unique in DCS...! A completely correct done flight model all around the angles of attack and beta combinations.

Followed by the DCS F-16, DCS AJS-37 and DCS F-5, the DEKA IRONWORKS JF-17 is at the top when it comes to flight model simulation realism.

I've thrown and tested this plane through a lot of AoA and beta situations and it never failed to impress me with how good/real the responses/reactions were.

I have no words to say! Hats down to you boys! Another product that's worth more than money can buy!

Regards!

How do you know?

How do you know?

I know!

There is one single thing that surely remained..., the deflection rates of the control surfaces, other than that, I tried and tried and couldn't find aerodynamic & flight mechanics issues with this aircraft, so I say it again: it's remarkably well done!

What’s up with control deflection rate?

how good/real the responses/reactions were.

Glad to hear it, but based on what?

Either Maverick is totally insane (callsign checks out), or he knows something we don't.

Either Maverick is totally insane (callsign checks out), or he knows something we don't.

Tbh yeah Deka did great job and continue to do so.

Sent from my Redmi K20 Pro using Tapatalk

There was a news where I saw Maverick did a test flight of Jeff with PAF, It got removed due to some confidential issues. No wonder he is the best source we got lol.

Tbh yeah Deka did great job and continue to do so.

PM me!

Glad to hear it, but based on what?

Based on the plane's 4 important moments of inertia and aerodynamic forces simulation all around the AoA and Beta combinations according to the flight conditions. As an AE I can assure you that this aircraft, followed by AJS-37 from Heatblur, F-5 from Belsimtek and F-16 from ED have the most realistic flight models that DCS has witnessed so far! The rest still need corrections! When I see how a plane behaves in any flight sim I can tell quite well where the problems are based on my years of experience and knowledge. I know sound arrogant, but I don't brag or anything. For me, what's important is the truth. When people ask "how would I know" that something is wrong or right, there's my answer: years of experience and correct understanding! I'm glad to know you guys and I'm open to discuss about every aspect regarding an aircraft's behavior (especially aerodynamics) and symptoms, so that people understand where I'm actually right or wrong, and not some guy with hidden interests or something.

What’s up with control deflection rate?

Show me a fighter plane which deflects it's hydraulically actuated flight controls (especially the elevators) in less than 0.5 seconds from one end to another. If you can confirm it to me from a real specification then I'd believe you. This isn't a big issue, but it will be an exploit if the real deflection rates of the elevators lower.

Either Maverick is totally insane (callsign checks out), or he knows something we don't.

Insane? Heheh! Do you consider me insane cause I've said that this aircraft is actually the best modeled in DCS? We can discuss why I consider it to be the best. I don't work for Deka, I have no connection with them whatsoever, I only admire their work and they own my respect for the flight model, NOT systems simulation, sounds, graphics and whatever childish delight that DCS aircraft have to offer. I'm all and only for flight models behavior.

There was a news where I saw Maverick did a test flight of Jeff with PAF, It got removed due to some confidential issues. No wonder he is the best source we got lol.

Tbh yeah Deka did great job and continue to do so.

 

Sent from my Redmi K20 Pro using Tapatalk

Well, there are plenty of "Mavericks" all around, so..., we don't necessarily have to be the same person. No, I didn't hear of DEKA until they came to DCS and made the JF-17, so that's another "mav" that was useful to them, not me. Speaking of "maverick", that's how they call the people who test stuff that others don't. They're like putting their skin into the battle for others to learn. And like you said I also confirm by how the plane behaves in mid-air under all the tested circumstances that DEKA IRONWORKS have done a great job in DCS. From my opinion, the best we had seen so far, period!

Well, there are plenty of "Mavericks" all around, so..., we don't necessarily have to be the same person. No, I didn't hear of DEKA until they came to DCS and made the JF-17, so that's another "mav" that was useful to them, not me. Speaking of "maverick", that's how they call the people who test stuff that others don't. They're like putting their skin into the battle for others to learn. And like you said I also confirm by how the plane behaves in mid-air under all the tested circumstances that DEKA IRONWORKS have done a great job in DCS. From my opinion, the best we had seen so far, period!

Sent from my Redmi K20 Pro using Tapatalk

Thanks for your attention in flight characteristics. It's quite interesting that I actually haven't seen many people test/review/criticise the flight model from a stability and control aspect.

I also reviewed and corrected the elevator ISA rate limit. It should be a maximum of 60 deg/s.

Speaking of the FM...

At some point it changed the behavior of the speed brakes, which went from being pretty effective to being pretty ineffective. Which is the correct behavior?

Insane? Heheh! Do you consider me insane cause I've said that this aircraft is actually the best modeled in DCS? We can discuss why I consider it to be the best. I don't work for Deka, I have no connection with them whatsoever, I only admire their work and they own my respect for the flight model, NOT systems simulation, sounds, graphics and whatever childish delight that DCS aircraft have to offer. I'm all and only for flight models behavior.

I was kidding when I said "insane"! :D

It was a bold post, without knowing your background.

I'm about accuracy with flight models, too. Nothing puts me off an aircraft faster than if it doesn't "fly right".

I fly gliders IRL, so I find it jarring when I can't glide them at the correct speed/AoA. It says a lot about the drag/lift model, and if that's wrong, the rest of it is off, too.

Speaking of the FM...

 

At some point it changed the behavior of the speed brakes, which went from being pretty effective to being pretty ineffective. Which is the correct behavior?

Yeah... so it's not my lack of recency here. The last few times I flew the Jeff I had to go around as I was too fast.

She would previously maintain speed at idle in landing config with brakes out at -20 deg. FPA, but now that seems reduced to around -10 deg. FPA.

Same with the F-16, too. Too hot initially (and I've several thousand hours in BMS, which I would hope is reasonably accurate, too).

This is with the latest OB, so it changed 1-2 patches ago.

Speaking of the FM...

 

At some point it changed the behavior of the speed brakes, which went from being pretty effective to being pretty ineffective. Which is the correct behavior?

Yes it's changed along with the previous CL/CD revamp.

The ΔCD0 created by speed brakes is corrected according to our new data, roughly the same as the CD0 of an clean aircraft at subsonic speeds, around 0.02-0.025 depends on speed.

This is random but would you be able to throw a number out there for what the washout is? It seems like there is definitely a few degrees of washout, but no much.

Also, is it accurate to say that it becomes aerodynamically stable at high speeds or is it just less unstable?

Yes it's changed along with the previous CL/CD revamp.

Huh...

The ΔCD0 created by speed brakes is corrected according to our new data, roughly the same as the CD0 of an clean aircraft at subsonic speeds, around 0.02-0.025 depends on speed.

Interesting! Thanks!

This is random but would you be able to throw a number out there for what the washout is? It seems like there is definitely a few degrees of washout, but no much.

Yes, around 3°.

Also, is it accurate to say that it becomes aerodynamically stable at high speeds or is it just less unstable?

Longitudinal static stability becomes positive at supersonic speeds, so yes it becomes stable. The changing is a gradual process usually between 0.8 and 1.2 mach.

@LJQCN101 Can you comment on the drag profile of the double pylons? Do they really induce that much drag? I'm referring to the magnitude and not the fact they induce more drag.

Well we are lucky they are designed so slim!

Thanks feeding my curiosity LJQNC101!

@LJQCN101 Can you comment on the drag profile of the double pylons? Do they really induce that much drag? I'm referring to the magnitude and not the fact they induce more drag.

It's 1.31x the drag index of a single pylon. Not that much.