Balancing the F-14 - Page 11 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-10-2016, 06:30 PM   #101
Top Jockey
Member
 
Top Jockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Portugal
Posts: 311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hummingbird View Post
Ok so I found some EM charts for the MiG-29S, and compared to the F-16C the ITR is pretty much identical with both pulling exactly 7.2 G's at Mach 0.5 @ SL. That having been said the MiG-29 does have the advantage of being able to pull more AoA at low speeds.

In terms of STR however the F-16C as expected pulls ahead being capable of 22 deg/sec @ SL whilst the MiG-29S is capable of 21.2 deg/sec.


PS: All the data is assuming both aircraft carry 2x IR missiles & 50% fuel, i.e. clean.
Hello again,

I believe it's somewhat different... and, Turn Rates (Instantaneous or Sustained) are not measured in G's... but in degrees/second.

From researches I've made from many sites around the web, magazines, books, etc. many time ago (didn't keep the sources as they were plenty, and not all matched the same data), I got roughly these numbers:
(Sea level performance; don't recall the exact payload configuration.)

F/A-18C
Max Sust. T/R (deg/sec): 19.2
Max Inst. T/R (deg/sec): 28
Max AoA (deg): 55

Mirage 2000-5
Max Sust. T/R (deg/sec): 22
Max Inst. T/R (deg/sec): 30
Max AoA (deg): 29

F-16C
Max Sust. T/R (deg/sec): 24
Max Inst. T/R (deg/sec): 26
Max AoA (deg): 26 (AoA limiter)

MiG-29C
Max Sust. T/R (deg/sec): 24
Max Inst. T/R (deg/sec): 28
Max AoA (deg): 45

They do make some sense for me, although I thought the Hornet should have a better Sustained Turn Rate...
Again, keep in mind the F-16 does have the AoA limiter, which therefore limits its Instantaneous Turn Rate considerably.

But like I said: these numbers were some of the most repeated (and less controverse) throughout the several places i've compared.
That said, I can in no way claim their absolute veracity.
__________________
CPU: Intel i7 4790 K
GPU: GeForce GTX 770 ( 2 GB )
RAM: 16 GB DDR 3 ( 1.600 MHz )
HDD: WD 500 GB ( 7.200 rpm )
MoBo: ASRock H81 Pro BTC
Op. Sys: Win 7, 64 bit

FC3 , MiG-21Bis , F/A-18C

Last edited by Top Jockey; 10-10-2016 at 06:41 PM.
Top Jockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2016, 07:13 PM   #102
Darkbrotherhood7
Member
 
Darkbrotherhood7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Brazil
Posts: 932
Default

Excellent post, Top Jockey!

An F-16 pilot who flew the Hornet made a comparison between them.
https://fightersweep.com/2378/hornet...per-part-four/

Quote:
A good Hornet pilot will take the fight downhill, try to get slow, and use his superior maneuverability to bleed the Viper down into his wheelhouse – a close-in knife fight at slow speed. If he tries to take the fight uphill or flat, the F-16’s superior rate and thrust to weight ratio will prevail.
__________________
Mission: "To intercept and destroy aircraft and airborne missiles in all weather conditions in order to establish and maintain air superiority in a designated area. To deliver air-to-ground ordnance on time in any weather condition. And to provide tactical reconaissance imagery" - F-14 Tomcat Roll Call
Darkbrotherhood7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2016, 08:30 PM   #103
Top Jockey
Member
 
Top Jockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Portugal
Posts: 311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkbrotherhood7 View Post
Excellent post, Top Jockey!

An F-16 pilot who flew the Hornet made a comparison between them.
https://fightersweep.com/2378/hornet...per-part-four/
Thank you, nice article also.

By the way, (not intending to keep on the off-topic), but in the article you posted the below quote really states what I mentioned to Hummingbird about the AoA limiter effects on things like: Instantaneous Turn Rate; nose authority; maximum AoA; etc.

" ...the F-16’s computer limits the angle of attack, keeping the aircraft from stalling. This makes it easier for a young lieutenant to reef back on the stick without falling out of the sky or losing nose authority, and regain energy when getting slow. "
__________________
CPU: Intel i7 4790 K
GPU: GeForce GTX 770 ( 2 GB )
RAM: 16 GB DDR 3 ( 1.600 MHz )
HDD: WD 500 GB ( 7.200 rpm )
MoBo: ASRock H81 Pro BTC
Op. Sys: Win 7, 64 bit

FC3 , MiG-21Bis , F/A-18C
Top Jockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 01:52 AM   #104
Xenovia
Member
 
Xenovia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Outer Heaven
Posts: 569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkbrotherhood7 View Post
Excellent post, Top Jockey!

An F-16 pilot who flew the Hornet made a comparison between them.
https://fightersweep.com/2378/hornet...per-part-four/
i read an article from an F/A-18 Pilot who flew the F-16, and he prefered the Hornet over the F-16. Saying "It's definitely more fun to fly the Viper, but the Hornet is the aircraft that I would want to take into combat. The primary deciding factors are the superior ergonomics in the Hornet's cockpit design, and its avionics controls and displays."
__________________
Xenovia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 03:48 AM   #105
JazonXD
Member
 
JazonXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Canada, Onatrio, Milton
Posts: 448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top Jockey View Post
Thank you, nice article also.

By the way, (not intending to keep on the off-topic), but in the article you posted the below quote really states what I mentioned to Hummingbird about the AoA limiter effects on things like: Instantaneous Turn Rate; nose authority; maximum AoA; etc.

" ...the F-16’s computer limits the angle of attack, keeping the aircraft from stalling. This makes it easier for a young lieutenant to reef back on the stick without falling out of the sky or losing nose authority, and regain energy when getting slow. "
Just out of curiosity, do you have the data for the F-15C's sustained and instant turn rates? I know it differs compared to the E especially since those usually have CFT and -229 engines.
__________________
BRRRT!

My PC:
Spoiler:
--Intel Core i5-4570--EVGA GTX 970 SSC @ 1560mHz Core and 2000mHz Memory--2x4GB Kingston HyperX Blu DDR3 @ 2133mHz CAS 9--MSI Z87-G41 PC Mate--480GB Sandisk Ultra II, 1TB Seagate SSHD--Fractal Design Define R5 Windowed--

Peripherals:
Spoiler:
Track IR 4--Logitech Extreme 3D Pro--Corsair K70 Cherry MX Blue--Alienware TactX Mouse--

A huge car and aviation enthusiast, gun nut and computer nerd!

FC3, P-51D, A-10C, MiG-21Bis, M2000C and F/A-18C!
JazonXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 04:31 AM   #106
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,628
Default

You can find the F-15's -1 'out there', including the F-15E's. IIRC most E mount the same -220's that the C do.
__________________

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   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 06:11 AM   #107
LJQCN101
3rd Party Developer
 
LJQCN101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top Jockey View Post
F/A-18C
Max Sust. T/R (deg/sec): 19.2
Max Inst. T/R (deg/sec): 28
Max AoA (deg): 55

Mirage 2000-5
Max Sust. T/R (deg/sec): 22
Max Inst. T/R (deg/sec): 30
Max AoA (deg): 29

F-16C
Max Sust. T/R (deg/sec): 24
Max Inst. T/R (deg/sec): 26
Max AoA (deg): 26 (AoA limiter)

MiG-29C
Max Sust. T/R (deg/sec): 24
Max Inst. T/R (deg/sec): 28
Max AoA (deg): 45
Highly doubted the source. Even with a powerful GE-129 F-16C Block50 with a clean configuration and 34% fuel at SL, it can only do a near 22 STR and 25 ITR, as shown in: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=133922.

Also in a MIG-29, it does come with an AOA limiter which allows a maximum of 26 degs, at least in the G model:




A clean MIG-29G with 50% fuel at SL can be concluded from the performance chart of GAF T.O.1MIG-29:

Max Inst. G:
0.7Mach - 9G
0.6Mach - 9G
0.5Mach - 7.3G
0.4Mach - 4.7G
0.3Mach - 2.6G

Max Sust. G:
0.7Mach - 9G
0.6Mach - 7.6G
0.5Mach - 5.8G
0.4Mach - 4.2G
0.3Mach - 2.5G

One thing to mention is that in the 0.6-0.7 Mach region, Max Sust. performance of a 50% fuel MIG-29G is even on par with a 34% fuel F-16C Block50 (up to 22deg/s max), both clean and on SL.

PS: When reading or drawing an E-M chart for inst. / sust. performance, you basically should go for the G's, not the deg/sec, which is especially unreliable at low speeds.

Last edited by LJQCN101; 10-11-2016 at 07:07 AM.
LJQCN101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 12:10 PM   #108
red_coreSix
Member
 
red_coreSix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 419
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LJQCN101 View Post
Also in a MIG-29, it does come with an AOA limiter which allows a maximum of 26 degs, at least in the G model
The AOA limiter in the MiG-29 can be overwritten by applying a certain amount of pressure to the stick.
red_coreSix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 01:25 PM   #109
Hummingbird
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Top Jockey View Post
Hello again,

I believe it's somewhat different... and, Turn Rates (Instantaneous or Sustained) are not measured in G's... but in degrees/second.

It isn't different, it's official.

Also yes if you want to nitpick then turn rate is usually defined in deg/sec, however turn rate figures are based directly on the G's measured by an accelerometer at the specific speeds, that's how you arrive at the deg/sec, not the other way round. So if you want the most reliable turn rate figure (esp. at low speeds) then take the G's measured at the specific speed and do the conversion (EDIT: I see LJQCN101 already explained this). Finally the MiG-29's data is all provided in G acceleration.



Last edited by Hummingbird; 10-11-2016 at 02:04 PM.
Hummingbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2016, 01:40 PM   #110
Hummingbird
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2,569
Default

Same period F-16C Block 40/42 for comparison (I was looking at Block 52 earlier):



The Block 40/42 with the GE-100 engine actually manages to pull 7.8 G's instantanous & 6.5 G's sustained at Mach 0.5, whilst topping out at 9 G's sustained at Mach 0.63.

Max ITR & STR are 26.2 deg/sec at Mach 0.5 and 23 deg/sec at Mach 0.63.


In short I don't know how anyone arrived at the figures you posted Top Jockey, but the above are the real world figures, i.e.:

F-16C
Max ITR ~ 26 deg/sec
Max STR ~ 23 deg/sec

MiG-29
Max ITR ~ 24 deg/sec
Max STR ~ 21 deg/sec


But mind you these figures are for two completely clean aircraft bar 2x IR missiles, a condition in which you would/will never see them entering combat. But since it's the only condition in which we have data for the MiG-29 it's our only way to compare atm. That having been said we really also should've been comparing at 10 kft and not SL.

Last edited by Hummingbird; 10-11-2016 at 02:31 PM. Reason: 9 G's sustained @ Mach 0.63, 6.5 G's @ Mach 0.5
Hummingbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
balance, f-14, mig-31

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 05:32 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.