"Mover" gives his thoughts

yeah, she bleeds too much energy and requires too much power to hold certain speeds. REally hoping this is fixed soon.

Maybe because Block 50 has different avionics than earlier Blocks?

Last time a user on the forum tested in game that the Viper is able to make 225 deg/s which is close to what I remember.

Remember from where, did u fly F-16 IRL? :D

Maybe because Block 50 has different avionics than earlier Blocks?

um what? Avionics have nothing to do with the fact that it requires too much power to hit X air speed and sustain X G / Airspeed in a turn.

Remember from where, did u fly F-16 IRL? :D

From real world data..... did you even read his posts?

Sensitivity is how gradual you are able to be, whilst I on the other hand am talking about the max G onset rate you can physically have the aircraft attain with an immediate full stick

You’re talking jerk... max jerk rate is way to low, so to speak

I don’t know how to write code to simulate a plane, so no idea what is off. It feels like it’s got the inertia of something 3x it’s weight, or that the weight isn’t properly centered on longitudinal axis (no weight out there clean). But since it’s pitch, too, seems like it’s something else. I though it was my setup too as I’m using a different stick for ssc. Almost like my controls were setup and top 25% of command authority was cut off the curve. Roll rate is measurably too slow, but it should be snappy, start and stop roll quickly. Point rolls are good example. F-16 should be able to fly crisp 8-pt rolls:

You’re talking jerk... max jerk rate is way to low, so to speak

[/url]

I guess you could call it that, but the proper wording is G-onset rate, which is how fast the aircraft is able to build up G's. i.e. the faster the G-onset rate the less time the aircraft spends reaching its instantanous turn rate.

On that note been reading up on the F-16C's DFLCS (which is an improvement over the NASA TP, and it should allow for 9.3 G's in a level horizontal turn, reaching 9.0 very quickly after which point it slows down. This is exactly how it works in another very famous F-16 sim.

In DCS the F-16's onset rate slows down to a crawl at around 8 G's however, and as a result reaching the 9 G load factor at the -16's corner speed plateau isn't possible unless you're going noticably faster to begin with (and interestingly without AB it wont do 9 G's instantanous even at 550 knots) - otherwise you lose too much speed in the process of waiting for the G's to build up. This is my biggest problem with the FM atm, that and a sort of initial resistance to control inputs.

Sidenote: The EF Typhoon which also features an DFLCS, and is 9.3 G rated, is capable of onset rates of 9 G/s.

The US TAC Centrifuges used for F-16 pilot training have an onset rate of 10 G/s:

http://medind.nic.in/iab/t06/i1/iabt06i1p1.pdf

Remember from where, did u fly F-16 IRL? :D

Maybe from MIL-STD/NASA/GD/LM posted figures.

The only reliable source I can find right now is from MIL-STD 1797A (military standard and DoD handbook) which provides verification guidance/procedures and requirements of flying qualities. The figure may not be relevant since it is a F-16A/B FSD aircraft and maximum commanded roll rate is also increased in DFLCS as I mentioned.

On that note been reading up on the F-16C's DFLCS (which is an improvement over the NASA TP, and it should allow for 9.3 G's in a level horizontal turn, reaching 9.0 very quickly after which point it slows down. This is exactly how it works in another very famous F-16 sim.

Can confirm that both NASA TP1538 and Analog FLCS have 9G limit while earlier version DFLCS has a 9.3G limit (8.3 in the system) which can be spotted in the F16D block25 DFLCS block diagram.

Since there's a ton of first-order filter in the control law, reaching last bits of commanded value may take some time due to the characteristics of such a filter. So the 0.3G could be added to compensate for that.

Another reason of that additional 0.3G is said to be due to a flaw in the pitch integrator that prevents the aircraft reaching its g-limit in time. Not sure if later DFLCS revisions further improve the integrator and remove that 0.3G. The design of pitch integrator changes time to time from NASA TP1538 to Analog FLCS and to DFLCS.

Can confirm that both NASA TP1538 and Analog FLCS have 9G limit while earlier version DFLCS has a 9.3G limit (8.3 in the system) which can be spotted in the F16B block25 DFLCS block diagram.

 

[ATTACH]220334[/ATTACH]

 

Since there's a ton of first-order filter in the control law, reaching last bits of commanded value may take some time due to the characteristics of such a filter. So the 0.3G could be added to compensate for that.

 

[ATTACH]220335[/ATTACH]

 

Another reason of that additional 0.3G is said to be due to a flaw in the pitch integrator that prevents the aircraft reaching its g-limit in time. Not sure if later DFLCS revisions further improve the integrator and remove that 0.3G. The design of pitch integrator changes time to time from NASA TP1538 to Analog FLCS and to DFLCS.

Copy that, hopefully ED will patch this in soon.

Sadly the G-onset rate thread in the bug section is closed, otherwise you could've posted it there. I'll let NineLine know.