Jump to content

Su27 Tempurature Dependent Thrust


M0ltar
 Share

Recommended Posts

Is the new thrust model in Beta and Alpha for the Flanker and Flanker-D accurate? I personally have no idea, I just noticed a pretty large change in power and acceleration all through the power range. I used to be able to climb at 90% no problem after departure from an airfield, but now find it very very slow and I have to keep my climb rate very low. Also 85% thrust, which I used to use for cruise, is not almost completely unusable. I find that if I do use that power setting to cruise decelerate to 500-600 IAS in no time.

 

I by now means am an expert on this subject which is why I felt like asking here would be he best place to see where others think this should lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might be that now we have to follow a more standard procedure. I think the manual indicates a Mach 0.5 climb to 12,000 meters at full military power.

 

What I noticed this morning, and this may have been there for awhile already without me noticing it earlier, is that ambient temperature also has an effect on tire "friction". You turn much more rapidly in hot weather than cool.

YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU1...CR6IZ7crfdZxDg

 

_____

Win 10 Pro x64, ASUS Z97 Pro MoBo, Intel i7-4790K, EVGA GTX 970 4GB, HyperX Savage 16GB, Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB SSD, 2x Seagate Hybrid Drive 2TB Raid 0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's good news overall, however, I am concerned a little that the AI doesn't have the same limitations - which would make dogfights a little tough as they could easily outclimb you. Wasn't there a push by ED to have the AI share the same limitations in terms of flight modelling, at least to some extent?

PC: Intel Core i7-7700K 4.2GHz | MSI GTX 1080 TI | ASUS Maximus IX Hero | 32GB DDR4 RAM | 2TB Samsung 870 EVO SSD | Win10 Pro 64bit

Gear: HP Reverb | JetPad FSE | MTX Sim Rig | VKB Gunfighter Pro Mk.III w/ MCG Ultimate (center) | VKB Gunfighter Mk.III w/ SCG-R Premium (side)

 

VKBNA_LOGO_SM.png

VKBcontrollers.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do like the more realistic approach. does the Eagle and Mirage have the same dependency applied to it? Could be at a significant disadvantage if not.

 

Interesting about the tire friction. I'll have check that out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

Interesting about the tire friction. I'll have check that out.

I only discovered it this morning because I was attempting to use a TRK with a climb to 10,000 m to test the effect of temp on thrust.

 

I set the temp to 15°C for the first run and saved the TRK. Then opened it in the ME and changed the temp to 0°C, saved it, and began viewing it. Lo and behold, I ran off the taxiway after a turn because I didn't turn sharply enough. ???? Went and watched the original and it played back correctly. ??? Went and altered the original 15° to 35°C. Saved and watched the TRK and ran off the taxiway again after the turn. But this time because I had turned too sharply. :idea:


Edited by Ironhand

YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU1...CR6IZ7crfdZxDg

 

_____

Win 10 Pro x64, ASUS Z97 Pro MoBo, Intel i7-4790K, EVGA GTX 970 4GB, HyperX Savage 16GB, Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB SSD, 2x Seagate Hybrid Drive 2TB Raid 0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds normal - all PFM-type FMs should have this; not just Mirage and Eagle, but also A-10, F-5, MiG-21, etc.

 

I don't remember if a bug regarding this was fixed in the F-15, but it's had this temperature dependence for a long time ( but with a bug which reversed hot/cold performance ).

 

In general it matches the -1 climb charts, something that isn't available in the flanker manual IIRC.

 

Broadly speaking there are several climb techniques depending on what you want to achieve; you can sometimes find them in manuals, or you just might find the most fuel efficient one.

 

1) Most fuel efficient climb to altitude

2) Minimum horizontal range to climb to altitude

3) Minimum time climb to altitude

 

These techniques tend to prescribe different entry/exit and sustain speed/mach numbers based on using MIL or MAX power.

 

Is the new thrust model in Beta and Alpha for the Flanker and Flanker-D accurate? I personally have no idea, I just noticed a pretty large change in power and acceleration all through the power range. I used to be able to climb at 90% no problem after departure from an airfield, but now find it very very slow and I have to keep my climb rate very low. Also 85% thrust, which I used to use for cruise, is not almost completely unusable. I find that if I do use that power setting to cruise decelerate to 500-600 IAS in no time.

 

I by now means am an expert on this subject which is why I felt like asking here would be he best place to see where others think this should lie.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's good news overall, however, I am concerned a little that the AI doesn't have the same limitations - which would make dogfights a little tough as they could easily outclimb you. Wasn't there a push by ED to have the AI share the same limitations in terms of flight modelling, at least to some extent?

 

You're right, the AI use a simple flight model, and can do some pretty outrageous stuff. It definitely needs more attention, but of course, until 2.5 is out, I don't think we'll see movement on anything else apart from individual modules owned by 3rd party developers.

 

I'm sure ED will have a list as long as your arm regarding bug fixes and improvements for many years to come. We can only hope they share our viewpoint on what matters most.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do like the more realistic approach. does the Eagle and Mirage have the same dependency applied to it? Could be at a significant disadvantage if not.

 

Interesting about the tire friction. I'll have check that out.

 

I haven't tested the Eagle but the Mirage has the same dependency applied.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...