Jump to content

Why AJS-37 flying 1.32M above the ground in level flight?


Shmal
 Share

Recommended Posts

@m4ti140 as mentioned earlier in this thread the F16 has the negative stores drag issue, and also as per the attached bug report it over a wee bit. Hence the suggestion, in the interests of fixing the bug asap, it might require ED to look into it the negative drag stores issue, particularly if they are responsible for weapons these days.

Anyway, enjoy your hyperbole.

Core i5 6600k@4.2Ghz | 32gb DDR4 3200Mhz | MSI 2070 Gaming Z | 500Gb OS SSD + 1TB Gaming SSD | Asus VG27AQ | Trackhat clip | Thrustmaster Warthog

 

F14 | F16 | AJS37 | F5 | Av8b | FC3 | Mig21 | FW190D9 | Huey

 

Been playing DCS from Flanker 2.0 to present :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Sideburns said:

@m4ti140 as mentioned earlier in this thread the F16 has the negative stores drag issue, and also as per the attached bug report it over a wee bit. Hence the suggestion, in the interests of fixing the bug asap, it might require ED to look into it the negative drag stores issue, particularly if they are responsible for weapons these days.

 

Anyway, enjoy your hyperbole.

Ah yes, a hyperbole. I.e. "I ran out of arguments so let's pretend this is a no-issue in an insulting tone". You really are incapable of a mature conversation without throwing sophisms everywhere, are you? You could have easily posted this reply without throwing in an insult at the end.

 

F-16 has so many problems with it, some being much more serious than this, and is seemingly so early in its development cycle it probably shouldn't have been released yet. Bignewy has in fact locked that thread with a big "yes we know, stop reporting this, the FM is not finished". I considered adding "except for F-16" to my post because I did not expect you to pull the exact module that is worthless to bring up here. Suggesting it must be a global issue because one of the most busted modules also has it is the real hyperbole here. DCS is a platform that has effectively been in development for more than 20 years at this point, there are still pieces of code from Flanker 2 within it, some of it probably has been written by people who no longer work for the company, so I assume there are many traps within its API that developers need to consciously avoid. If this was a global issue, then ALL aircraft would have it.

 

Anyway, this is my last post in this thread, I'm done interacting with borderline psychopaths. I will gather all materials and post a proper bug report thread, it would be nice if you did not continue to spread misinformation after that.


Edited by m4ti140
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2021 at 11:12 PM, m4ti140 said:

Ah yes, a hyperbole. I.e. "I ran out of arguments so let's pretend this is a no-issue in an insulting tone". You really are incapable of a mature conversation without throwing sophisms everywhere, are you? You could have easily posted this reply without throwing in an insult at the end.

 

F-16 has so many problems with it, some being much more serious than this, and is seemingly so early in its development cycle it probably shouldn't have been released yet. Bignewy has in fact locked that thread with a big "yes we know, stop reporting this, the FM is not finished". I considered adding "except for F-16" to my post because I did not expect you to pull the exact module that is worthless to bring up here. Suggesting it must be a global issue because one of the most busted modules also has it is the real hyperbole here. DCS is a platform that has effectively been in development for more than 20 years at this point, there are still pieces of code from Flanker 2 within it, some of it probably has been written by people who no longer work for the company, so I assume there are many traps within its API that developers need to consciously avoid. If this was a global issue, then ALL aircraft would have it.

 

Anyway, this is my last post in this thread, I'm done interacting with borderline psychopaths. I will gather all materials and post a proper bug report thread, it would be nice if you did not continue to spread misinformation after that.

 

 

Speaking of mature tone, right back at you (borderline psychopaths?). It is possible to post a bug without the hyperbole. Never pretended this was a none issue, in fact I specifically said the opposite. You asked for another negative drag example and it was provided. All the best and see you in the online skies.

  • Like 2

Core i5 6600k@4.2Ghz | 32gb DDR4 3200Mhz | MSI 2070 Gaming Z | 500Gb OS SSD + 1TB Gaming SSD | Asus VG27AQ | Trackhat clip | Thrustmaster Warthog

 

F14 | F16 | AJS37 | F5 | Av8b | FC3 | Mig21 | FW190D9 | Huey

 

Been playing DCS from Flanker 2.0 to present :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2020 at 5:28 AM, rossmum said:

so maybe the overall drag modelling needs some adjusting.

That's for sure. There are aircraft with contradictions like the Viggen where you cannot tell if this possible but your gutfeeling already tells you that something is wrong.

Flying 1600 kph all time but not having enough thrust to fly level with some ordnance and gear down on 100% military is such a contradiction. On some Persian Gulf maps I couldn't even keep the speed at low level and 100% military with gear up and the same loadout. You need to climb to like 1000+m to be able to fly on just military. Don't know if that's realistic.

Ah yes, I forgot the Viggen was never build for low level flight, sorry 😉

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 6/4/2021 at 3:06 PM, Lynnux said:

That's for sure. There are aircraft with contradictions like the Viggen where you cannot tell if this possible but your gutfeeling already tells you that something is wrong.

Flying 1600 kph all time but not having enough thrust to fly level with some ordnance and gear down on 100% military is such a contradiction. On some Persian Gulf maps I couldn't even keep the speed at low level and 100% military with gear up and the same loadout. You need to climb to like 1000+m to be able to fly on just military. Don't know if that's realistic.

Ah yes, I forgot the Viggen was never build for low level flight, sorry 😉

Apparently the engine is underperforming, which seems to have evaded testing due to drag issues. As you climb the ridiculous overperformance transforms into significant _under_performance. The aircraft should break Mach 2 in clean config higher up (like 7-8 km), but it doesn't, and from what I've seen it can't do that even after triggering the aforementioned negative drag bug. A review is long overdue.


Edited by m4ti140
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, m4ti140 said:

Apparently the engine is underperforming, which seems to have evaded testing due to drag issues. As you climb the ridiculous overperformance transforms into significant _under_performance. The aircraft should break Mach 2 in clean config higher up (like 7-8 km), but it doesn't, and from what I've seen it can't do that even after triggering the aforementioned negative drag bug. A review is long overdue.

 

Why do you think it should be breaking Mach 2? The flight manual certainly doesn't say or even imply it is capable of doing that. At ISA -15° it may be capable of touching the Mach 2 line (or at least it's theoretically capable of sustaining that speed in level flight) but I'm not sure you could get it to accelerate to 2.0 in reality without running out of fuel. It doesn't have variable geometry intakes so it really has no business above Mach 2.

 

I believe it is underpowered in DCS on mil power, though.


Edited by renhanxue
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2021 at 11:08 PM, renhanxue said:

Why do you think it should be breaking Mach 2? The flight manual certainly doesn't say or even imply it is capable of doing that. At ISA -15° it may be capable of touching the Mach 2 line (or at least it's theoretically capable of sustaining that speed in level flight) but I'm not sure you could get it to accelerate to 2.0 in reality without running out of fuel. It doesn't have variable geometry intakes so it really has no business above Mach 2.

 

I believe it is underpowered in DCS on mil power, though.

 

Nevermind, brainfart, I misremembered what the chart looked like. You're right, it shouldn't get near Mach 2 at ISA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2021 at 6:17 PM, m4ti140 said:

Apparently the engine is underperforming, which seems to have evaded testing due to drag issues. As you climb the ridiculous overperformance transforms into significant _under_performance.

The behaviour being totally underpowered on Persian Gulf maps was a bug which is gone. One symptom was the engine RPM going up and down on idle throttle. That's not happening anymore, now engine control only oscillates a bit when you throttle up or down.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Anyone retested since the patch given "Updates to sidewinder pylon drag coefficients."?

 

I did a quick test (standard ME parameters for Caucasus, 10-20m above sea level):

 

1580kph for a Viggen spawned in without weapons

1450kph for x-tank and rb24j/rb74

1540kph for x-tank jettison but retaining rb24j/rb74

1710kph for an x-tank and rb24j/74 fire off, pylon retain

1630kph for an x-tank and rb24j/74 fire off and pylon jettison

 

Still too quick it seems, odd behaviour with the pylon jettison slowing the jet down.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Core i5 6600k@4.2Ghz | 32gb DDR4 3200Mhz | MSI 2070 Gaming Z | 500Gb OS SSD + 1TB Gaming SSD | Asus VG27AQ | Trackhat clip | Thrustmaster Warthog

 

F14 | F16 | AJS37 | F5 | Av8b | FC3 | Mig21 | FW190D9 | Huey

 

Been playing DCS from Flanker 2.0 to present :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, retested it and threw some tracks in the other thread. Got to 1700 with all 6 missiles fired and tank jettisoned, when I jettisoned the rails it rapidly decelerated.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...