BBCRF Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) is't realy? Edited June 21, 2020 by IronMike I7-8700K 4,7Ghz, MSI MPG Z390 Gaming EDGE AC , 32 Gb Ram DDR4 Hyper X, RTX 2080 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quid Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) It's probably spot on for a completely clean jet with 162lbs of fuel in it. You've also got the flaps down full and would have broken them in that position with such excessive "g". Read the first comment on YouTube for your video: yes, at such unrealistic settings, it probably would turn that well for about a quarter of the turn before both engines die of fuel starvation. Even a clean F-14A at such low fuel state will turn like a bastard. Paul T. Gillcrist, RADM (Ret) wrote about the F-14A's airshow demonstration to the Shah of Iran in the book "TOMCAT! The Grumman F-14 Story." In it, he explains that the F-14 started its show with only 2,500lbs of fuel (15.4%). The aircraft took off with full afterburner, executed a chunk of the show, bringing the fuel state even lower, then "at mid-field at about 1,000 feet and 350 knots with wings swept to 40 degrees [the Tomcat] went into a full-afterburner 360 degree turn staying within the field boundray and during its 8 1/2 "g" turn, accelerated to 400 knots."1 This implies that a clean, TF-30 powered F-14A, with somewhere in the vicinity of 10% fuel or less, will sustain more than 8.5g at 1,000 feet when starting at 350 knots, since the jet accelerated to 400 by the turn's end. You are showing an F110 powered F-14B at 1% fuel, clean, with flaps down. If it could be tested without trashing the jet, it probably would be somewhere around what your video shows. References: 1. Paul T. Gillcrist, RADM (Ret.), "TOMCAT! The Grumman F-14 Story, (Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing Ltd., 1994), 51. Edited June 20, 2020 by Quid grammar Rig: i9 10900KF @5.3GHz | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 3600MHz | ASUS ROG STRIX RTX 3090 24GB OC | ASUS Maximus XII Formula | 2x 2TB Intel SSD6 NVMe M.2 | VKB F-14CG on Gunfighter III Base | TM Warthog HOTAS | TM Rudder Pedals | HP Reverb G2 Hangar: FC3 | F-86F | F-4E [Pre-Ordered] | F-5E | F-14A/B | F-15E | F-16C | F/A-18C | Mirage 2000C | JF-17 | MiG-15bis | MiG-19P | MiG-21bis | AJS-37 | AV-8B | L39 | C-101 | A-10C/CII | Yak-52 | P-51D | P-47D | Fw 190 A-8/D-9 | Bf 109 | Spitfire | I-16 | UH-1 Huey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcdata Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 is't realy?Wow! The best response is in the YouTube comments. this person didn't even follow the guidelines what's in the charts. Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airhunter Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 1% of fuel? This is where you lost all credibility. 520 kph (280 kts) is also way past Vfe, so congrats you broke the jet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totmacher Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 It's probably spot on for a completely clean jet with 162lbs of fuel in it. You've also got the flaps down full and would have broken them in that position with such excessive "g". Read the first comment on YouTube for your video: yes, at such unrealistic settings, it probably would turn that well for about a quarter of the turn before both engines die of fuel starvation. Even a clean F-14A at such low fuel state will turn like a bastard. Paul T. Gillcrist, RADM (Ret) wrote about the F-14A's airshow demonstration to the Shah of Iran in the book "TOMCAT! The Grumman F-14 Story." In it, he explains that the F-14 started its show with only 2,500lbs of fuel (15.4%). The aircraft took off with full afterburner, executed a chunk of the show, bringing the fuel state even lower, then "at mid-field at about 1,000 feet and 350 knots with wings swept to 40 degrees [the Tomcat] went into a full-afterburner 360 degree turn staying within the field boundray and during its 8 1/2 "g" turn, accelerated to 400 knots."1 This implies that a clean, TF-30 powered F-14A, with somewhere in the vicinity of 10% fuel or less, will sustain more than 8.5g at 1,000 feet when starting at 350 knots, since the jet accelerated to 400 by the turn's end. You are showing an F110 powered F-14B at 1% fuel, clean, with flaps down. If it could be tested without trashing the jet, it probably would be somewhere around what your video shows. References: 1. Paul T. Gillcrist, RADM (Ret.), "TOMCAT! The Grumman F-14 Story, (Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing Ltd., 1994), 51. ok ok ok, let's compare like with Shah of Iran :) let's test with 15% fuel (1134kg, 2500lbs) alt same (20m), full flaps [TABLE]IAS (km/h) TAS (km/h) turn rate (d/sec) turn time (sec) aoa ny mach roll pitch flaps noseflap stick Y 580.0 580.6 29.13 12.36 10.83 8.27 0.4740 83.42 1.50 1.00 no data 0.6760 560.0 560.5 29.48 12.21 11.51 8.07 0.4577 83.31 1.66 1.00 no data 0.6960 540.0 540.5 29.83 12.07 12.26 7.85 0.4413 83.21 1.85 1.00 no data 0.7173 520.0 520.5 30.16 11.94 13.10 7.62 0.4250 83.11 2.09 1.00 no data 0.7400 500.0 500.5 29.83 12.07 13.92 7.23 0.4086 82.89 2.43 1.00 no data 0.7564 480.0 480.5 29.31 12.28 14.78 6.80 0.3923 82.72 2.91 1.00 no data 0.7707 [/TABLE] test with 10% fuel (735kg, 1620lbs) alt same (20m), full flaps [TABLE]IAS (km/h) TAS (km/h) turn rate (d/sec) turn time (sec) aoa ny mach roll pitch flaps noseflap stick Y 580.0 580.6 29.88 12.05 10.83 8.48 0.4740 83.58 1.47 1.00 no data 0.6732 560.0 560.5 30.23 11.91 11.51 8.27 0.4577 83.48 1.62 1.00 no data 0.6932 540.0 540.5 30.59 11.77 12.27 8.05 0.4413 83.37 1.81 1.00 no data 0.7146 520.0 520.5 30.91 11.65 13.10 7.81 0.4250 83.28 2.05 1.00 no data 0.7373 500.0 500.5 30.43 11.83 13.92 7.37 0.4086 83.03 2.39 1.00 no data 0.7527 480.0 480.5 29.92 12.03 14.79 6.94 0.3923 82.84 2.86 1.00 no data 0.7672 [/TABLE] "Своя FM не пахнет" (С) me https://dcs.silver.ru/ DCS World Sustained Turn Test Data Asus Z97M-PLUS, Intel Core i5 4690K OC 4126MHz, 16Gb DDR3 DIMM 2250MHz (10-10-10-26 CR2), GeForce GTX 1060 6GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airhunter Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 ok ok ok, let's compare like with Shah of Iran :) let's test with 15% fuel (1134kg, 2500lbs) alt same (20m), full flaps [TABLE]IAS (km/h) TAS (km/h) turn rate (d/sec) turn time (sec) aoa ny mach roll pitch flaps noseflap stick Y 580.0 580.6 29.13 12.36 10.83 8.27 0.4740 83.42 1.50 1.00 no data 0.6760 560.0 560.5 29.48 12.21 11.51 8.07 0.4577 83.31 1.66 1.00 no data 0.6960 540.0 540.5 29.83 12.07 12.26 7.85 0.4413 83.21 1.85 1.00 no data 0.7173 520.0 520.5 30.16 11.94 13.10 7.62 0.4250 83.11 2.09 1.00 no data 0.7400 500.0 500.5 29.83 12.07 13.92 7.23 0.4086 82.89 2.43 1.00 no data 0.7564 480.0 480.5 29.31 12.28 14.78 6.80 0.3923 82.72 2.91 1.00 no data 0.7707 [/TABLE] test with 10% fuel (735kg, 1620lbs) alt same (20m), full flaps [TABLE]IAS (km/h) TAS (km/h) turn rate (d/sec) turn time (sec) aoa ny mach roll pitch flaps noseflap stick Y 580.0 580.6 29.88 12.05 10.83 8.48 0.4740 83.58 1.47 1.00 no data 0.6732 560.0 560.5 30.23 11.91 11.51 8.27 0.4577 83.48 1.62 1.00 no data 0.6932 540.0 540.5 30.59 11.77 12.27 8.05 0.4413 83.37 1.81 1.00 no data 0.7146 520.0 520.5 30.91 11.65 13.10 7.81 0.4250 83.28 2.05 1.00 no data 0.7373 500.0 500.5 30.43 11.83 13.92 7.37 0.4086 83.03 2.39 1.00 no data 0.7527 480.0 480.5 29.92 12.03 14.79 6.94 0.3923 82.84 2.86 1.00 no data 0.7672 [/TABLE] Again, you oversped the flaps. There is no perf. data in the aircraft performance manuals for those envelopes of flight let alone full AUX flaps deployed. So congrats, you broke it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totmacher Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 Again, you oversped the flaps. There is no perf. data in the aircraft performance manuals for those envelopes of flight let alone full AUX flaps deployed. So congrats, you broke it. Flaps don't broken in DCS game. OverG is realistic. Ok, let's see with 2,500lbs fuel without full flaps... turn rate 26.32 deg/s, turn time 13.68 sec :music_whistling: "Своя FM не пахнет" (С) me https://dcs.silver.ru/ DCS World Sustained Turn Test Data Asus Z97M-PLUS, Intel Core i5 4690K OC 4126MHz, 16Gb DDR3 DIMM 2250MHz (10-10-10-26 CR2), GeForce GTX 1060 6GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLTeo Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 With that amount of fuel you're still looking at a jet with a ~1.25:1 thrust:weight ratio, no extra drag, plus a wing that by definition optimizes itself to fly at low Mach numbers (and Mach 0.5 isn't even that low). 26 deg/s is honestly not that surprising, especially for something with much more thrust than an F-14A. Honestly, whatever it is you're trying to prove, it just shows you do not understand EM charts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp3nc3r Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 maybe invulnerability turned on as well ? usually if you full pull at that speed the wings would break off. so basically turning on all things to prevent the plane from desintegrating does not proof that the FDE are off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quid Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 (edited) Flaps don't broken in DCS game. OverG is realistic. Ok, let's see with 2,500lbs fuel without full flaps... turn rate 26.32 deg/s, turn time 13.68 sec :music_whistling: None of the charts are modeled there, but using Gillcrist's description of the less-powerful F-14A's show, that looks about correct. You're on the deck at corner velocity with F110 engines at 15.4% fuel, clean. The F-14A did it with TF-30s at 8.5g entering at 350 - above corner velocity, wings at 40 degrees, not 20-22, and accelerating, albeit probably closer to 1500lbs of fuel. You're using an F-14B with F110s at 8g and AT corner velocity (~310), wings at ~22 degrees with maneuver flaps out (auto), and sustaining albeit with 2500lbs of fuel (only 1000 extra pounds). Seems like it's right where it should be. Edited June 21, 2020 by Quid Wrong percentage. Rig: i9 10900KF @5.3GHz | 64GB G.Skill DDR4 3600MHz | ASUS ROG STRIX RTX 3090 24GB OC | ASUS Maximus XII Formula | 2x 2TB Intel SSD6 NVMe M.2 | VKB F-14CG on Gunfighter III Base | TM Warthog HOTAS | TM Rudder Pedals | HP Reverb G2 Hangar: FC3 | F-86F | F-4E [Pre-Ordered] | F-5E | F-14A/B | F-15E | F-16C | F/A-18C | Mirage 2000C | JF-17 | MiG-15bis | MiG-19P | MiG-21bis | AJS-37 | AV-8B | L39 | C-101 | A-10C/CII | Yak-52 | P-51D | P-47D | Fw 190 A-8/D-9 | Bf 109 | Spitfire | I-16 | UH-1 Huey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMike Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 If you want to test the EM charts, then you need to test it like in the EM charts. 10000lbs of fuel and either a 4x4 or 2x2x2 loadout depend on which of the two charts you use. Then, add 3° turnrate with flaps deployed, this comes from grumman, but there are no charts for flaps. However, you overspeed, you get the penalty of drag, kaput flaps and so on. The flight model is exact, and if you fly with 1% or 15% fuel and no loadout, yes you get a turning monster. No one does that anyway, except some, who try to prove that our "flight model is wrong", without even knowing how to read the proper EM charts and how to test them with results that really say something. But even so, what you show is realistic. You will just have to finally come to terms with it, no matter how much you believe that it is not. The FM hits the EM charts on point. Flaps add 3°/sec turnrate. Flaps that overspeed will penalize you. Let us please move on from this issue, because - unfortunately I have to say it that bluntly - unless you show us something that comes from Grumman that contradicts the 3°/sec turn rate boost (which comes from Grumman, too), we will not change it, just because you feel it is "OP". If you think it is, please go ahead and "win" in BFM with 1% or 15% percent fuel... A complete null-argument. Sorry guys, but really this kind of testing or "proof" leads nowhere. 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/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totmacher Posted June 22, 2020 Share Posted June 22, 2020 Hello IronMike! Please check and compare this data! [TABLE]IAS (km/h) TAS (km/h) turn rate (d/sec) turn time (sec) aoa ny mach roll pitch flaps noseflap stick Y 440 474 15,04 23,94 16,58 3,51 0,3938 76,67 6,25 0,2857 no data 0,6224 460 495,5 15,68 22,96 15,84 3,82 0,4116 77,01 5,03 0,2857 no data 0,6207 480 517,1 16,29 22,1 15,18 4,13 0,4295 77,67 4,3 0,2857 no data 0,6195 500 538,6 16,79 21,43 14,48 4,44 0,4474 78,28 3,7 0,2857 no data 0,6101 520 560,1 16,97 21,21 13,8 4,67 0,4653 78,69 3,28 0,2857 no data 0,5938 540 581,7 17,14 21,01 13,17 4,9 0,4832 79,08 2,94 0,2857 no data 0,5782 560 603,2 17,24 20,88 12,56 5,11 0,5011 79,44 2,65 0,2857 no data 0,5622 580 624,8 17,12 21,03 11,88 5,27 0,519 79,67 2,41 0,2857 no data 0,5447 600 646,3 17,1 21,05 11,4 5,45 0,5369 79,95 2,22 0,2857 no data 0,5335 620 667,9 17,17 20,96 11,07 5,65 0,5548 80,28 2,07 0,2857 no data 0,5755 640 689,4 16,43 21,92 11,89 5,57 0,5727 80,21 2,25 0 no data 0,6434 660 711 16,56 21,74 11,71 5,78 0,5906 80,56 2,13 0 no data 0,6396 680 732,5 16,51 21,8 11,42 5,95 0,6085 80,78 2,01 0 no data 0,6325 700 754 16,43 21,91 11,15 6,09 0,6264 80,99 1,91 0 no data 0,6254 720 775,6 16,25 22,15 10,94 6,2 0,6443 81,12 1,84 0 no data 0,624 740 797,1 16,14 22,31 10,78 6,33 0,6622 81,29 1,77 0 no data 0,6299 760 818,7 15,96 22,55 10,63 6,43 0,6801 81,41 1,71 0 no data 0,6353 780 840,2 15,68 22,96 10,49 6,48 0,698 81,47 1,67 0 no data 0,6399 800 861,8 15,95 22,57 10,35 6,76 0,7159 81,82 1,58 0 no data 0,6494 820 883,3 16,1 22,37 10,22 6,99 0,7338 82,08 1,51 0 no data 0,6576 840 904,9 16,2 22,23 10,11 7,2 0,7517 82,31 1,44 0 no data 0,6657 860 926,4 16,55 21,75 10,01 7,53 0,7696 82,64 1,37 0 no data 0,6757 880 947,9 16,65 21,62 9,73 7,76 0,7875 82,84 1,29 0 no data 0,6793 900 969,5 16,8 21,43 9,42 8,01 0,8054 83,05 1,21 0 no data 0,6816 920 991 16,33 22,05 8,88 7,97 0,8233 82,99 1,15 0 no data 0,668 940 1012,6 16,39 21,97 8,58 8,18 0,8412 83,16 1,08 0 no data 0,6574 960 1034,1 15,96 22,55 8,24 8,14 0,8591 83,11 1,04 0 no data 0,6418 980 1055,7 15,22 23,65 7,91 7,93 0,877 82,92 1,03 0 no data 0,6244 1000 1077,2 14,54 24,76 7,66 7,74 0,8949 82,73 1,02 0 no data 0,6093 1020 1098,7 13,73 26,23 7,34 7,46 0,9128 82,45 1,01 0 no data 0,5917 1040 1120,3 13,09 27,51 6,97 7,27 0,9307 82,23 0,9859 0 no data 0,5736 1060 1141,8 12,73 28,29 6,63 7,21 0,9486 82,15 0,9465 0 no data 0,5586 1080 1163,4 12,19 29,54 6,32 7,04 0,9665 81,96 0,9269 0 no data 0,5433 1100 1184,9 11,72 30,71 6,02 6,91 0,9844 81,79 0,8996 0 no data 0,5288 1120 1206,5 11,3 31,85 5,74 6,79 1 81,63 0,8697 0 no data 0,5155 1140 1228 11,08 32,49 5,56 6,77 1,02 81,6 0,8465 0 no data 0,5045 1160 1249,6 10,83 33,24 5,36 6,74 1,04 81,57 0,8231 0 no data 0,492 1180 1271,1 10,68 33,7 5,13 6,77 1,06 81,59 0,7853 0 no data 0,4753 1200 1292,6 9,99 36,03 4,64 6,5 1,07 81,24 0,7409 0 no data 0,4495 1220 1314,2 8,49 42,38 3,8 5,64 1,09 79,85 0,6997 0 no data 0,4046 1240 1335,7 6,64 54,22 2,87 4,48 1,11 77,16 0,6664 0 no data 0,3407 1260 1357,3 5,14 70,02 2,13 3,59 1,13 74 0,6048 0 no data 0,2795 1280 1378,8 4,11 87,57 1,56 2,97 1,15 70,5 0,5412 0 no data 0,2252 1300 1400,4 3,31 108,7 1,1 2,51 1,16 66,01 0,4652 0 no data 0,1748 [/TABLE] Here test config https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=236060&d=1589796419 compare with (1.24 degree/sec better in DCS) https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/59488976/71751688-a195e880-2e7c-11ea-9c3f-a1d93688ed16.png "Своя FM не пахнет" (С) me https://dcs.silver.ru/ DCS World Sustained Turn Test Data Asus Z97M-PLUS, Intel Core i5 4690K OC 4126MHz, 16Gb DDR3 DIMM 2250MHz (10-10-10-26 CR2), GeForce GTX 1060 6GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMike Posted June 22, 2020 Share Posted June 22, 2020 (edited) Hello IronMike! Please check and compare this data! [TABLE]IAS (km/h) TAS (km/h) turn rate (d/sec) turn time (sec) aoa ny mach roll pitch flaps noseflap stick Y 440 474 15,04 23,94 16,58 3,51 0,3938 76,67 6,25 0,2857 no data 0,6224 460 495,5 15,68 22,96 15,84 3,82 0,4116 77,01 5,03 0,2857 no data 0,6207 480 517,1 16,29 22,1 15,18 4,13 0,4295 77,67 4,3 0,2857 no data 0,6195 500 538,6 16,79 21,43 14,48 4,44 0,4474 78,28 3,7 0,2857 no data 0,6101 520 560,1 16,97 21,21 13,8 4,67 0,4653 78,69 3,28 0,2857 no data 0,5938 540 581,7 17,14 21,01 13,17 4,9 0,4832 79,08 2,94 0,2857 no data 0,5782 560 603,2 17,24 20,88 12,56 5,11 0,5011 79,44 2,65 0,2857 no data 0,5622 580 624,8 17,12 21,03 11,88 5,27 0,519 79,67 2,41 0,2857 no data 0,5447 600 646,3 17,1 21,05 11,4 5,45 0,5369 79,95 2,22 0,2857 no data 0,5335 620 667,9 17,17 20,96 11,07 5,65 0,5548 80,28 2,07 0,2857 no data 0,5755 640 689,4 16,43 21,92 11,89 5,57 0,5727 80,21 2,25 0 no data 0,6434 660 711 16,56 21,74 11,71 5,78 0,5906 80,56 2,13 0 no data 0,6396 680 732,5 16,51 21,8 11,42 5,95 0,6085 80,78 2,01 0 no data 0,6325 700 754 16,43 21,91 11,15 6,09 0,6264 80,99 1,91 0 no data 0,6254 720 775,6 16,25 22,15 10,94 6,2 0,6443 81,12 1,84 0 no data 0,624 740 797,1 16,14 22,31 10,78 6,33 0,6622 81,29 1,77 0 no data 0,6299 760 818,7 15,96 22,55 10,63 6,43 0,6801 81,41 1,71 0 no data 0,6353 780 840,2 15,68 22,96 10,49 6,48 0,698 81,47 1,67 0 no data 0,6399 800 861,8 15,95 22,57 10,35 6,76 0,7159 81,82 1,58 0 no data 0,6494 820 883,3 16,1 22,37 10,22 6,99 0,7338 82,08 1,51 0 no data 0,6576 840 904,9 16,2 22,23 10,11 7,2 0,7517 82,31 1,44 0 no data 0,6657 860 926,4 16,55 21,75 10,01 7,53 0,7696 82,64 1,37 0 no data 0,6757 880 947,9 16,65 21,62 9,73 7,76 0,7875 82,84 1,29 0 no data 0,6793 900 969,5 16,8 21,43 9,42 8,01 0,8054 83,05 1,21 0 no data 0,6816 920 991 16,33 22,05 8,88 7,97 0,8233 82,99 1,15 0 no data 0,668 940 1012,6 16,39 21,97 8,58 8,18 0,8412 83,16 1,08 0 no data 0,6574 960 1034,1 15,96 22,55 8,24 8,14 0,8591 83,11 1,04 0 no data 0,6418 980 1055,7 15,22 23,65 7,91 7,93 0,877 82,92 1,03 0 no data 0,6244 1000 1077,2 14,54 24,76 7,66 7,74 0,8949 82,73 1,02 0 no data 0,6093 1020 1098,7 13,73 26,23 7,34 7,46 0,9128 82,45 1,01 0 no data 0,5917 1040 1120,3 13,09 27,51 6,97 7,27 0,9307 82,23 0,9859 0 no data 0,5736 1060 1141,8 12,73 28,29 6,63 7,21 0,9486 82,15 0,9465 0 no data 0,5586 1080 1163,4 12,19 29,54 6,32 7,04 0,9665 81,96 0,9269 0 no data 0,5433 1100 1184,9 11,72 30,71 6,02 6,91 0,9844 81,79 0,8996 0 no data 0,5288 1120 1206,5 11,3 31,85 5,74 6,79 1 81,63 0,8697 0 no data 0,5155 1140 1228 11,08 32,49 5,56 6,77 1,02 81,6 0,8465 0 no data 0,5045 1160 1249,6 10,83 33,24 5,36 6,74 1,04 81,57 0,8231 0 no data 0,492 1180 1271,1 10,68 33,7 5,13 6,77 1,06 81,59 0,7853 0 no data 0,4753 1200 1292,6 9,99 36,03 4,64 6,5 1,07 81,24 0,7409 0 no data 0,4495 1220 1314,2 8,49 42,38 3,8 5,64 1,09 79,85 0,6997 0 no data 0,4046 1240 1335,7 6,64 54,22 2,87 4,48 1,11 77,16 0,6664 0 no data 0,3407 1260 1357,3 5,14 70,02 2,13 3,59 1,13 74 0,6048 0 no data 0,2795 1280 1378,8 4,11 87,57 1,56 2,97 1,15 70,5 0,5412 0 no data 0,2252 1300 1400,4 3,31 108,7 1,1 2,51 1,16 66,01 0,4652 0 no data 0,1748 [/TABLE] Here test config https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=236060&d=1589796419 compare with (1.24 degree/sec better in DCS) https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/59488976/71751688-a195e880-2e7c-11ea-9c3f-a1d93688ed16.png Thank you for this extensive body of work. Is this flown with flaps out? Also, we need an acmi and track to see how you are flying the turns please. Personally I trust only 1 person in the world to fly such tests exactly, which he does for us. Else we run tests computed, because most humans are not capable of flying the turns each time exactly. Also was your fuel set to unlimited? Edited June 22, 2020 by IronMike 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/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totmacher Posted June 22, 2020 Share Posted June 22, 2020 Thank you for this extensive body of work. Is this flown with flaps out? Also, we need an acmi and track to see how you are flying the turns please. Personally I trust only 1 person in the world to fly such tests exactly, which he does for us. Else we run tests computed, because most humans are not capable of flying the turns each time exactly. Also was your fuel set to unlimited? Yes, fuel is unlimited. All params in .trk file in attach. I'm don't touch flaps. And I don't trust human too, but there is not human. This is handmade "test turn autopilot" who moving Joystick instead human :) And he don't make any mistake. But .trk files in F-14 module sometimes can play with errors. f-14-turn.trkacmi_and_trk_file.zip "Своя FM не пахнет" (С) me https://dcs.silver.ru/ DCS World Sustained Turn Test Data Asus Z97M-PLUS, Intel Core i5 4690K OC 4126MHz, 16Gb DDR3 DIMM 2250MHz (10-10-10-26 CR2), GeForce GTX 1060 6GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLTeo Posted June 22, 2020 Share Posted June 22, 2020 If you mean you're having an AI execute the turn, then you're comparing apples and oranges. AIs do not use the same FM as player aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totmacher Posted June 22, 2020 Share Posted June 22, 2020 If you mean you're having an AI execute the turn, then you're comparing apples and oranges. AIs do not use the same FM as player aircraft. No, this is no AI. This is program, who see flight params in game and send command to virtual joystick. "Своя FM не пахнет" (С) me https://dcs.silver.ru/ DCS World Sustained Turn Test Data Asus Z97M-PLUS, Intel Core i5 4690K OC 4126MHz, 16Gb DDR3 DIMM 2250MHz (10-10-10-26 CR2), GeForce GTX 1060 6GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMike Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 (edited) Ok, great, thank you. Our Flight model engineers will take a closer look. So far it looks however that we're off by up to 1.2 seconds - you can see that best for mach 0.6. This is within an acceptable margin of error tbh, anything below 1.5 seconds being off is not really worth touching upon and I doubt many FMs would fall within that margin, without feeling "forced" or "scripted". A flight model consist of 2 parts: performance and feel. If anything your test proves that we are extremely close. (You need to compare with the Ps=0 curve on the EM chart, in case someone did not know.) Fat Creason will take a look if possible to bring it even closer, but I doubt that he will touch upon it, unless the margin would be 1.5 seconds or bigger. Anything below that is not really noticeable and will not make a difference between you winning or losing in the Tomcat. Ppl will have to come to terms with it that she simply was an outstanding turner and that she is not "OP" or "pay to win" as commented below the initial video (comments have since been removed), just because they get outturned by it. You shouldn't be turning with a Tomcat in the first place, there are many ways to beat it, and those 1.2 seconds more or less do not make a difference or make it "unbeatable". Thank you again for your effort and for these tests, it is nice to compare them with our internal tests. Edited June 23, 2020 by IronMike 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/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airhunter Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 If you are losing to a Tomcat in BFM it is entirely YOUR fault and YOU not knowing how to fly your aircraft (or enter your fight). The Tomcat has a huge lifting body when clean, exceptional high lift devices and vortex lift. If you are flying a Hornet or Flanker, go one-circle with it, get it slow. Every plane can technically and practically win against any other plane if he fights his fight. Anything except a controlled environment (agreed upon merge and guns only) will lead to different results and is very dependant on the reaction time, SA and the pilots "skills" so to speak. You wouldn't want to merge in a Tomcat when you are facing a Mig-29 or SU-27 online, or anything with an HMD and HOBS missiles. Reality is, unless you really have the drop on someone or he overhoots without shooting you beforehand, a guns only scenario is fairly rare and I'd say almost never happens in any sandbox online environment. You also cant really control the weather or temperature of the environement you are flying in. What if it's mid summer and 40°C outside? What if it's winter and -15°C? There are far too many variables in a practical engagement that you'd find a practical application for any EM or performance charts. The Tomcat is also made for BVR and pre-merge engagements. You have all the tools you need to cover all ranges (the AWG-9, the Phoenix, Sparrow, TCS for VID far before the merge, good SA via datalink and all aspect Sidewinders). If you really think this sustained turn advantage which apparently only some external autopilot can fly perfectly gives you the edge against any other 4th gen you find yourself in the merge with then I don't know what else to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falby Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 I can't remember where I read it but I seem to remember one Tomcat pilot saying if he ever had to use his guns it was because he had mucked up. It was quite a while ago so I may be mis-remembering! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaiju Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 (edited) Something else. Under DCS we are all virtual pilots and do not feel the G. We can therefore in the same way say that all the other planes are "cheating" and the debate will not end. I have already seen in dogfight players in su27 or F16 take out the landing gear in full dogfight. If some are not happy to lose vs F14 and want to be The Killer in dogfight servers they have to buy it (at the moment it is free) and will see that it is not so easy to fly F14. sorry for my english I'm french Edited June 23, 2020 by Kaiju IN WIN D-Frame Red - EKWB - Asus ROG PG348Q - Asus Maximus XI Formula - i9 9900K 5.1Ghz - Asus Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080Ti Strix OC 11Go - DDR4 Corsair Vengeance LPX 64Go 3000Mhz - Windows 10 64 - x2 SSD PCIe M.2 NvMe Samsung 970 Pro (1To RAID 0) - Virpil V.F.X Grip and MongoosT 50CM2 Throttle - Thrustmaster TPR - HP Reverb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raubritter Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 (edited) Guys, let's leave the tips and evaluation BFM/AFM. Now there is already a discussion of the conformity of the FM with EM charts with the application of tests. I believe that HB knows what he is doing and will clarify the situation. Edited June 23, 2020 by Hummel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronMike Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 (edited) Guys, let's leave the tips and evaluation BFM/AFM. Now there is already a discussion of the conformity of the FM with EM charts with the application of tests. I believe that HB knows what he is doing and will clarify the situation. Maybe I should be a bit more clear on this: there is nothing wrong with the FM (= we believe there are no major deficiencies with the FM, we are not infallible ofc, there can always be minor issues). Anything that falls below a margin of 1.5 seconds is acceptable and negligable - and I would like to see where all other modules fall in to place flying an entire EM chart, again without feeling forced or scripted. A human will never fly turns that precise like a machine does (being off by 1.2 seconds) and will most likely be on point or even slower. Thus there is nothing to fix really. I would also like to add that EM charts themselves are extrapolated from theoretical values, since it would literally be impossible to test the plane IRL at a constant fuel state, especially with Afterburners on, like in these charts. That said, since we are perfectionists, we will look at that last 1 second margin, too, if time allows, but no promise for now. I btw seriously doubt even class D simulators would attempt to get below that kind of a small margin, as EM charts aren't even in the list of FAA/EASA tests. I do hope that we can put the debate if the Tomcat turns as it should or not to bed now. If anyone brings it up, you can reply that "it is within a 1.2 second margin of error, which is more than acceptable," (and most likely more precise than most consumer flight models that exist today). :) Edited June 23, 2020 by IronMike 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/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
totmacher Posted June 24, 2020 Share Posted June 24, 2020 If anyone brings it up, you can reply that "it is within a 1.2 second margin of error, which is more than acceptable," (and most likely more precise than most consumer flight models that exist today). :) Exactly :) ! But dufferent of turn rate 1.3 deg/sec equal different ~1500kg (~3500 pounds) of weight! Please see data with 59110 pounds gross weight: [TABLE]IAS (km/h) TAS (km/h) turn rate (d/sec) turn time (sec) aoa ny mach roll pitch flaps noseflap stick Y 420 452,4 12,87 27,97 17,15 2,9 0,3758 76,11 9,48 0,2857 no data 0,6514 430 463,2 13,51 26,65 16,89 3,11 0,3848 75,69 7,76 0,2857 no data 0,6546 440 474 14,02 25,68 16,57 3,29 0,3937 75,61 6,53 0,2857 no data 0,6566 450 484,7 14,32 25,14 16,2 3,43 0,4027 75,72 5,81 0,2857 no data 0,6556 460 495,5 14,61 24,65 15,83 3,58 0,4116 76,01 5,3 0,2857 no data 0,6548 470 506,3 14,89 24,18 15,49 3,72 0,4206 76,35 4,89 0,2857 no data 0,654 480 517,1 15,16 23,75 15,17 3,86 0,4295 76,76 4,54 0,2857 no data 0,6535 490 527,8 15,43 23,33 14,84 4,01 0,4385 77,1 4,22 0,2857 no data 0,6509 500 538,6 15,61 23,06 14,47 4,14 0,4474 77,39 3,93 0,2857 no data 0,6445 510 549,4 15,7 22,93 14,12 4,25 0,4564 77,6 3,69 0,2857 no data 0,6368 520 560,1 15,78 22,81 13,79 4,36 0,4653 77,82 3,48 0,2857 no data 0,6295 530 570,9 15,86 22,69 13,47 4,46 0,4743 78,04 3,29 0,2857 no data 0,6223 540 581,7 15,94 22,58 13,16 4,57 0,4832 78,27 3,12 0,2857 no data 0,6152 550 592,5 16,03 22,46 12,87 4,68 0,4922 78,5 2,97 0,2857 no data 0,6085 560 603,2 16,04 22,44 12,56 4,77 0,5011 78,67 2,82 0,2857 no data 0,6006 570 614 15,99 22,52 12,19 4,85 0,5101 78,78 2,68 0,2857 no data 0,5911 580 624,8 15,95 22,57 11,88 4,92 0,519 78,91 2,57 0,2857 no data 0,5847 590 635,6 15,93 22,59 11,62 5 0,528 79,07 2,46 0,2857 no data 0,5792 600 646,3 15,94 22,58 11,4 5,09 0,5369 79,23 2,37 0,2857 no data 0,5746 610 657,1 15,97 22,54 11,22 5,19 0,5459 79,41 2,28 0,2857 no data 0,5708 620 667,9 16,02 22,47 11,07 5,29 0,5548 79,59 2,21 0,2857 no data 0,5675 630 678,6 15,26 23,59 11,99 5,1 0,5638 79,31 2,46 0 no data 0,6385 640 689,4 15,33 23,48 11,89 5,21 0,5727 79,52 2,39 0 no data 0,6368 650 700,2 15,43 23,33 11,83 5,32 0,5817 79,73 2,33 0 no data 0,6357 660 711 15,47 23,27 11,71 5,42 0,5906 79,9 2,26 0 no data 0,6333 670 721,7 15,47 23,27 11,56 5,5 0,5996 80,04 2,2 0 no data 0,63 680 732,5 15,44 23,32 11,42 5,57 0,6085 80,16 2,14 0 no data 0,6264 690 743,3 15,41 23,36 11,28 5,64 0,6175 80,27 2,08 0 no data 0,623 700 754 15,38 23,41 11,15 5,71 0,6264 80,37 2,03 0 no data 0,6196 710 764,8 15,35 23,46 11,03 5,78 0,6354 80,48 1,98 0 no data 0,6164 720 775,6 15,23 23,64 10,94 5,82 0,6443 80,53 1,95 0 no data 0,6187 730 786,4 15,16 23,74 10,86 5,88 0,6533 80,62 1,92 0 no data 0,6216 740 797,1 15,13 23,79 10,78 5,94 0,6622 80,72 1,88 0 no data 0,6249 750 807,9 15,07 23,88 10,7 6 0,6712 80,8 1,85 0 no data 0,6279 760 818,7 14,98 24,02 10,63 6,04 0,6801 80,86 1,82 0 no data 0,6307 770 829,4 14,87 24,21 10,56 6,08 0,6891 80,9 1,79 0 no data 0,6332 780 840,2 14,73 24,44 10,5 6,1 0,698 80,93 1,77 0 no data 0,6356 790 851 14,87 24,21 10,42 6,23 0,707 81,12 1,72 0 no data 0,6405 800 861,8 14,99 24,02 10,35 6,36 0,7159 81,29 1,67 0 no data 0,6452 810 872,5 15,08 23,88 10,29 6,48 0,7249 81,45 1,63 0 no data 0,6495 820 883,3 15,13 23,79 10,23 6,58 0,7338 81,58 1,6 0 no data 0,6536 830 894,1 15,16 23,75 10,17 6,67 0,7428 81,69 1,56 0 no data 0,6575 840 904,9 15,23 23,64 10,12 6,78 0,7517 81,82 1,53 0 no data 0,6618 850 915,6 15,41 23,36 10,06 6,94 0,7607 82,01 1,49 0 no data 0,667 860 926,4 15,57 23,12 10,01 7,1 0,7696 82,18 1,45 0 no data 0,6719 870 937,2 15,6 23,08 9,88 7,19 0,7785 82,28 1,41 0 no data 0,6739 880 947,9 15,67 22,98 9,74 7,31 0,7875 82,39 1,37 0 no data 0,6756 890 958,7 15,78 22,82 9,63 7,44 0,7964 82,52 1,33 0 no data 0,6784 900 969,5 15,81 22,77 9,43 7,55 0,8054 82,62 1,28 0 no data 0,6783 910 980,3 15,68 22,96 9,17 7,57 0,8143 82,63 1,25 0 no data 0,6751 920 991 15,38 23,41 8,88 7,51 0,8233 82,56 1,22 0 no data 0,6647 930 1001,8 15,38 23,41 8,74 7,6 0,8322 82,63 1,18 0 no data 0,6595 940 1012,6 15,43 23,32 8,59 7,71 0,8412 82,73 1,14 0 no data 0,6542 950 1023,4 15,39 23,39 8,42 7,77 0,8501 82,79 1,11 0 no data 0,6477 960 1034,1 15,04 23,94 8,24 7,68 0,8591 82,7 1,11 0 no data 0,6387 970 1044,9 14,68 24,53 8,07 7,58 0,868 82,59 1,1 0 no data 0,6296 980 1055,7 14,34 25,11 7,92 7,48 0,877 82,49 1,09 0 no data 0,6213 990 1066,4 14,02 25,68 7,79 7,39 0,8859 82,35 1,08 0 no data 0,6137 1000 1077,2 13,69 26,29 7,66 7,3 0,8949 82,29 1,08 0 no data 0,5585 1010 1088 13,29 27,08 7,51 7,16 0,9038 82,13 1,07 0 no data 0,5492 1020 1098,7 12,92 27,86 7,34 7,04 0,9128 81,98 1,07 0 no data 0,5397 1030 1109,5 12,62 28,53 7,17 6,94 0,9217 81,87 1,06 0 no data 0,5305 1040 1120,3 12,32 29,22 6,97 6,85 0,9307 81,69 1,06 0 no data 0,5205 [/TABLE] "Своя FM не пахнет" (С) me https://dcs.silver.ru/ DCS World Sustained Turn Test Data Asus Z97M-PLUS, Intel Core i5 4690K OC 4126MHz, 16Gb DDR3 DIMM 2250MHz (10-10-10-26 CR2), GeForce GTX 1060 6GB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freakerr Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 Maybe I should be a bit more clear on this: there is nothing wrong with the FM (= we believe there are no major deficiencies with the FM, we are not infallible ofc, there can always be minor issues).:) Mike, no one call your's Tomcat FM wrong. And especially how it feels. I personally find it most enjoyable 4th gen fighter for flight. Like on tips of fingers. But obviously here is something can be better. In my noob opinion Tomcat have too much lift or not enough drag until 1.15 mach. Correct me if i'm wrong, but chart seems so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLTeo Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 You're wrong. You need to check that the chart is at the same weight, drag index and altitude as whatever tests people are running in DCS. From the looks of it, it seems like the chart implies that the most G the Tomcat can hold is 4. That is absolutely not true for a turn executed at low weight and sea level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts