Jump to content

[CANT REPRODUCE] Viper Losing Speed Too Fast


AlexCaboose

Recommended Posts

Was doing some dogfights with some friends in 2.5.6 and it appears like the Viper is losing speed very quickly vs 2.5.5. The Hornet had no issue maintaining lead, and even at the Viper's corner speed, it wasn't able to sustain near enough Gs (5-6G at corner).

 

 

Perhaps someone with more technical knowledge available at hand can also submit some proof that the 2.5.5 Viper seems to retain energy a lot better.

 

I have a .trk file but it seems to be too large to submit so I have uploaded it here:

https://mega.nz/#!sYwTCJrL!sKcpbrMR7U2q5MTC0h6QUwGehCwlveNbul2uzfiSCqo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when drawing conclusions about flight perfromance, make sure we include the fuel load so we know the GW of both aircraft.

 

ps: Viper's performance is WIP

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

I9-9900K-Gigabyte 2080Ti Gaming OC, 32G DDR4000 RAM,

Track IR5, HOTAS Cougar + über Nxt Hall Sensor Mod, Slaw Device RX Viper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when drawing conclusions about flight perfromance, make sure we include the fuel load so we know the GW of both aircraft.

 

ps: Viper's performance is WIP

 

Both jets started with full fuel. With the 2.5.6 adjusted fuel flow, the Viper was out of fuel long before the F/A-18C. Even at near empty (1000lbs or less), the Viper could not sustain proper G and the F/A-18 had no issues keeping lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

I tried it myself, I did watch your track, although the first part I couldn't see in F1, but partway through it switched and I noticed you bounced around a lot. When you were nice and smooth, it seemed much better.

 

Also, note Wags video here, he is silky smooth.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
I'd like to point out that we can't even hold 9G for that long with "simulation" setting for G effect. Wags was able to do a full circle without any tunnel vision at all. Something here is not right.

 

Track or it didnt happen.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both jets started with full fuel. With the 2.5.6 adjusted fuel flow, the Viper was out of fuel long before the F/A-18C. Even at near empty (1000lbs or less), the Viper could not sustain proper G and the F/A-18 had no issues keeping lead.

 

then start using 80% of fuel on hornet vs 50% fuel viper. if you looking at rate fight, adjust fuel to compensate for the rate is the only choice right now.

 

50/50 won't do any good, hornet still has the upper hand on rate fight.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

I9-9900K-Gigabyte 2080Ti Gaming OC, 32G DDR4000 RAM,

Track IR5, HOTAS Cougar + über Nxt Hall Sensor Mod, Slaw Device RX Viper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

then start using 80% of fuel on hornet vs 50% fuel viper. if you looking at rate fight, adjust fuel to compensate for the rate is the only choice right now.

 

50/50 won't do any good, hornet still has the upper hand on rate fight.

 

I was mistaken. After checking the mission again, the Viper started with about 4700lbs of fuel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried it myself, I did watch your track, although the first part I couldn't see in F1, but partway through it switched and I noticed you bounced around a lot. When you were nice and smooth, it seemed much better.

 

Also, note Wags video here, he is silky smooth.

 

Wags looks much better. I tried to replicate this around 10K ft (since I don't believe the USAF tested 9Gs at 240ft ASL).

 

You'll see that even after G-Warmups, I black out much more quickly and lose speed much more rapidly. What you've shown in the clip Wags posted looks correct, but I really don't think that's reflective of what is in DCS currently on the Open Beta live branch (not the dev branch).

G Pulling.trk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
Wags looks much better. I tried to replicate this around 10K ft (since I don't believe the USAF tested 9Gs at 240ft ASL).

 

You'll see that even after G-Warmups, I black out much more quickly and lose speed much more rapidly. What you've shown in the clip Wags posted looks correct, but I really don't think that's reflective of what is in DCS currently on the Open Beta live branch (not the dev branch).

 

Hello,

 

No, if fact it is exactly as it is in DCS now. Note that I turned off the G effect. You can check these all for yourself publicly available supplemental document.

 

Except or a slight Ps energy loss above Mach 1.1 around 8k ft MSL (you should never being doing BFM at such speeds), all of the turn performance and acceleration rates match very closely the published data for the Greek F-16C with the GE -129 engine from sea level to 60,000 feet.

 

As mentioned earlier, we are working on a series of reports / graphs that compare the game data to real world data in regards to flight models and missile performance. We'll let the data speak for itself.

 

Please don't take this wrong way (not at all meant as a slight), but the problem I most often see if folks not flying the aircraft correctly to maximize performance.

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

 

No, if fact it is exactly as it is in DCS now. Note that I turned off the G effect. You can check these all for yourself publicly available supplemental document.

 

Except or a slight Ps energy loss above Mach 1.1 around 8k ft MSL (you should never being doing BFM at such speeds), all of the turn performance and acceleration rates match very closely the published data for the Greek F-16C with the GE -129 engine from sea level to 60,000 feet.

 

As mentioned earlier, we are working on a series of reports / graphs that compare the game data to real world data in regards to flight models and missile performance. We'll let the data speak for itself.

 

Please don't take this wrong way (not at all meant as a slight), but the problem I most often see if folks not flying the aircraft correctly to maximize performance.

 

Thanks

 

 

thanks matt, i remember you said ED had fine-tuned the f18`s performance to protect real-world user, so we`re not doing that on f-16 ?

 

with current G-on-set in DCS, it`s almost impossible to extract the maximum rate perf of the F16, normal F16 pilot should be able to endure 9G for atleast 15 sec? right now in-game endurance is way below that time. does ED have any intentions looking into that ?

 

thanks

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

I9-9900K-Gigabyte 2080Ti Gaming OC, 32G DDR4000 RAM,

Track IR5, HOTAS Cougar + über Nxt Hall Sensor Mod, Slaw Device RX Viper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...