Degraded Su-27 aerodynamic lift - Page 17 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-27-2018, 12:07 AM   #161
jackmckay
Member
 
jackmckay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Croatia
Posts: 393
Default

I can get along many things said here but one not. How come someone can develope sucessfull simulator product without advanced knowledge of science behind? What competence to relly on? Its like saying GFYS to wing tunnel guys and going for test ride. Airfoils are so damn important if one wants to discuss expected performance. Airfoil makes charts in first place and egg. slats are integral part of airfoil metamorphosis regarding to flight regime. I take side on this discussion and that goes along Maverick's claims. Eagle is OPed again. Tune it down a litlle bit. And set blackout point before wing rip offs in Flanker or other ones. That should be closer to reality. Eagle pilots should learn to conserve energy as on high AoA heavy buffet occurs unsimulated in DCS. Hugs and kisses to everyone here


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
jackmckay is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 12:13 AM   #162
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,535
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmckay View Post
I can get along many things said here but one not. How come someone can develope sucessfull simulator product without advanced knowledge of science behind? What competence to relly on?
PM Yo-Yo, ask him for his resume.

Quote:
Its like saying GFYS to wing tunnel guys and going for test ride. Airfoils are so damn important if one wants to discuss expected performance.
We don't need to discuss expected performance because the performance is already known. How come you're unable to test the FM against known data collected by flying said aircraft?

Quote:
Eagle pilots should learn to conserve energy as on high AoA heavy buffet occurs unsimulated in DCS.
It's simulated as per NASA studies by ... flying the real aircraft. Not CFDs, not wind-tunnels. What a novelty, I know. Get over yourself
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Last edited by GGTharos; 02-27-2018 at 12:17 AM.
GGTharos is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 12:20 AM   #163
jackmckay
Member
 
jackmckay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Croatia
Posts: 393
Default

If its allready well known to ED then why it is so drasticly and obviously changed with each new update? How come module flight performance margin is not sealed from beginning?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
jackmckay is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 12:51 AM   #164
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,535
Default

Can you prove that it's drastically changed?

I'm well aware that the flight control system changed, which presents its own challenges. The flanker FM conforms to the data we have. The eagle FM conforms to the data we have. It's also well known that tuning an FM takes a long time - I participated in testing the eagle FM and it certainly took a long time to tune that up to match data. As development went on, more and more data came in that clarified things and provided more accuracy for some of its behaviors. I've no doubt that the Su-27 went through a similar process.

You have nothing but speculation based on what-ifs. Like I said, the discussion is not worthwhile because all you're doing is discussing feelings, not anything concrete.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 01:20 AM   #165
Vitormouraa
Veteran
 
Vitormouraa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SC, Brazil
Posts: 3,242
Default

Still, haven't seen anyone pointing out the Eagle or Flanker's problems/issues with real-life performance charts. Article or pilots reports don't have much value I believe.

ED isn't going to change anything in the FM because someone said it was wrong. It's important to make these affirmations based on real data, and not articles or theories taken from the internet.
__________________


SplashOneGaming is a community of viewers, players, and content creators built on combat flight simulation. Flowing through our veins is years of flight simulation experience in a multitude of different platforms. We welcome and encourage all of you to join us, whether you are seasoned or green, looking to learn, teach, or just trying to find someone to fly with.
Discord
Website
Vitormouraa is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 01:44 AM   #166
SinusoidDelta
Member
 
SinusoidDelta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitormouraa View Post
Still, haven't seen anyone pointing out the Eagle or Flanker's problems/issues with real-life performance charts. Article or pilots reports don't have much value I believe.

ED isn't going to change anything in the FM because someone said it was wrong. It's important to make these affirmations based on real data, and not articles or theories taken from the internet.
Agreed. The arguments in this thread are purely conjecture.
SinusoidDelta is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 05:25 AM   #167
Weta43
ED Testers Team
 
Weta43's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Aro Valley Wellington New Zealand
Posts: 6,547
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmckay View Post
If its allready well known to ED then why it is so drasticly and obviously changed with each new update? How come module flight performance margin is not sealed from beginning?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Remember this :

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironhand View Post
I think you're mistaken about changes to pitch response. I have 1.5 Flanker tracks that play back perfectly with 2.5 plus the hot fixes. So none of that's been touched. If it had, those tracks would be broken.
__________________
Cheers.
Weta43 is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 04:46 PM   #168
HWasp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 85
Default

I have found an SU-27SK flight manual on the internet in russian.

http://www.avsimrus.com/f/documents-...ual-21438.html

According to this the aircraft should reach the 8g limit at around 740 kmh indicated at 1000 m and 50% fuel with 2 R27 and 2 R73 and the AOA limit increases to 24 degrees from 22 as the aircraft slows from M0.7 to M0.5

If I remember correctly (cannot test until saturday) the FBW limited AOA stays af 22 deg without override and the plane reaches the 8g limit at a higher speed with the same conditions.

In direct control mode (S) I was able to complete 360 turns at around 13 sec (bleeding speed from 600kmh to less than 250) but with the limiter it feels a bit too sluggish. I think that if there is any problem here, that might be regarding the pitch axis control law not increasing the limit AOA to 24 and the really slow g onset. In direct control everything is great if I manage not to kill myself

I cannot upload from my tablet for some reason, thats why I could only give you the link, not the actual pages
HWasp is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 05:15 PM   #169
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,535
Default

That 50% fuel load does not include all the tanks. Turns out it's closer to 30% of total fuel.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline  
Old 02-27-2018, 11:55 PM   #170
HWasp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 85
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
That 50% fuel load does not include all the tanks. Turns out it's closer to 30% of total fuel.
Are you sure? That data is from the table at page 51\269 (according the reader prog.).
HWasp is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:51 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.