zxrex Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 I don't think the airbrakes are very effective. Is that correct modeling? They don't seem to add much drag if at all. I have no idea if this is how they are on the Viggen just wondered if anyone else had noticed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Case Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 On the fighter version of the Viggen they inhibited the speedbrakes completely, the switch on the throttle was used for something else, so one could guess they weren't very effective. http://www.masterarms.se A Swedish Combat Flight Simulator Community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kayos Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Ya, they seem next to useless. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattebubben Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 (edited) This seems correct to me. They were known to not be very effective and were said to have almost no effect at low speeds. I mean just look at how small the airbrakes are in relation to the aircraft size/mass. The Viggen is easy enough to slow down as it is, just use the inherent drag of the Delta and canards to slow her down. And the Landing gear can be brought down safely at speeds below 600 and with the Air brake / Flaps out she will slow down quite quickly to landing speeds etc. From what i can find the primary area of use for the Air Brake might have been during formation flying where it was often quicker to adjust the speed to maintain station on the lead aircraft using the air brake then constantly adjusting the throttle. For slowing the aircraft down significantly the fastest way would be to just throttle down and maybe do some slight maneuvering to bleed the speed to below 600 kph and at that point lower the gear. Edited February 7, 2017 by mattebubben 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rotorhead Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 And how could they be effective, if there ale like... HOLES in them?? ;) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cp Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 And how could they be effective, if there ale like... HOLES in them?? ;) They're speed holes, they make the plane slow down faster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grunf Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 The Viggen is an airbrake, doesn't need additional ones. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goblin Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 The Viggen is easy enough to slow down as it is, The airbrakes were notoriously ineffective. Coming out of afterburner made you feel like you had stopped, according to a Viggen pilot I know. ;) And, as mentioned, they weren't used on the JA... So, I think they are close enough in the module. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outbaxx Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Airbrakes The holes are there because there were vibrations in the dorsal fin without them, the holes had a small reduction of the brakes, and the upper air brakes won't open very much, you can see that if you look in external view. That is because if the were opened more they caused pitch instability. According to a book I've read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zxrex Posted February 8, 2017 Author Share Posted February 8, 2017 Ok. Got it. Airbrakes are correct. Even ones with holes in them. More pics of blondes would be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainyday Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 About the airbrakes, manual says the following: "When the landing gear is deployed, the airbrakes will automatically retract. In order to extend the airbrakes, the switch has to be held in an open position." That doesn't seem to be the case in the game - I can toggle the airbrakes on & off as I please whether I have landing gear down or not. Which is not correct, I presume? A-10C Warthog | AJS-37 Viggen | F-5E Tiger II | Mig-15bis | MiG-19P Farmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuiGon Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 The manual is indeed contradicting with how it works ingame. I don't know which is correct though, but I assume it is the manual. Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbarossa Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 Ok. Got it. Airbrakes are correct. Even ones with holes in them. More pics of blondes would be nice. :megalol::megalol::megalol: My Specs: Win 11 64bit, AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D @ 4,2GHz, 64 GB, Radeon RX7900 XTX, 500GB + 2000GB SSD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisherman82 Posted January 21, 2019 Share Posted January 21, 2019 (edited) Another question about airbrakes, when I flick the switch I hear a sound best described as a "plopp". Like a drop of water falling into water. Is this a known bug or WIP thing? Edited January 21, 2019 by Fisherman82 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts