Coyote_One Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 Did I miss something or is the harrier extremely underpowered now in the hover? You used to at least get off the ground with a full tank and empty wings but now she wont even budge. What happened?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tj1376 Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 you leave ground chocks in? Gotta remove em first... TJ Also- did you see this thread? TJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coyote_One Posted May 10, 2021 Author Share Posted May 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Tj1376 said: you leave ground chocks in? Gotta remove em first... TJ Lol yes, way ahead of you on that. They definitely decreased the power in this thing at some point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tj1376 Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 (edited) From his post - i cant figure out the quote system here when trying to go from one thread to another. This is his work, not mine: Hi guys, I have just done another climb test with the latest flight model update. The results are very interesting! The original test was this and I have added the latest figures in BLUE: Reading in the NFM-400 performance manual you get the following data for a climb with these conditions: Engine = 408 Drag Index : 17.7 GW at start of climb : 22,000 lbs (7200 lbs of fuel) CLB Speed : 300 KCAS / .75 M Max thrust climb, this is 109% / 710 degrees C JPT for the -408 engine Test carried out in ISA conditions, winds calm EXTRAPOLATED DATA FROM THE CLIMB CHARTS VS DCS : TIME TO CLIMB - DCS - NEW FM / FUEL REMAINING - DCS - NEW FM / DISTANCE - DCS - NEW FM SL to 10,000 ft = 0:48 mins / 0:25 / 0:35 / 7040 lbs / 7094 / 7016 / 3.5 nm / 2.5 / 3.8 SL to 20,000 ft = 1:42 mins / 0:54 /1:27 / 6850 lbs / 7010 / 6855 / 10.5 nm / 5.1 / 9.1 SL to 25,000 ft = 2:30 mins / 1:13 / 2:04 / 6770 lbs / 6967 / 6771 / 16 nm / 7.1 / 13.2 SL to 30,000 ft = 3:24 mins / 1:35 /2:57 / 6660 lbs / 6922 / 6671 / 24 nm / 9.6 / 19.8 SL to 35,000 ft = 5:00 mins / 1:56 / 4:25 / 6580 lbs / 6881 / 6545 / 32.5 nm / 12.0 / 30.1 SL to 40,000 ft = 7:34 / 2:24 / 7:46 / 6430 lbs / 6836 / 6363 / 53 nm / 15.3 / 54.4 Comparing the BLACK figures to the BLUE figures Razbam have done a really good job at making the flight model more in line with what NFM-400 says is possible. The fuel burn in particular is very accurate as is the distance. Unfortunately I know the FM change may annoy some people out there that were enjoying the really powerful engine/low drag FM. On the positive side, the overhead break has become more realistic and doing a VNSL is also much better now. TJ Edited May 10, 2021 by Tj1376 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coyote_One Posted May 10, 2021 Author Share Posted May 10, 2021 Ooof... Rough.... The harrier we all knew and love is gone. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mizzy Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 13 minutes ago, Coyote_One said: Ooof... Rough.... The harrier we all knew and love is gone. Why do you say that ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fri13 Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 25 minutes ago, Coyote_One said: Ooof... Rough.... The harrier we all knew and love is gone. More like that we get more reasons to love it with all more realistic features it has.... 3 i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S. i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rlaxoxo Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 Ye but the Harrier we "knew" is gone. Kinda depressing : / 2 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Youtube Reddit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aernov Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 Now we will learn to fly the almost-real one though. Seems like a good thing to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kotor633 Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 vor 1 Stunde schrieb Coyote_One: Ooof... Rough.... The harrier we all knew and love is gone. But only you believe that ... What Razbam is now doing with the Harrier was more than long overdue. And the right step in the right direction. 3 ************************************** DCS World needs the Panavia Tornado! Really! ************************************** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFlyGuy Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 Making Things realistic is of course the right Direction, but nobody here knows whats realistic when it comes to the Flight Model of the Harrier. For me it feels strange that a VTOL Aircraft can barely make a VTOL Takeoff without any Weapons and 50% Fuel on Board, without consuming half of the Water on Board. For me it seems believable that the Harrier would Hover in such a Configuration at 102 - 104% Engine Power without using any Water at least for a short Period of Time. Maybe the max. Takeoff Weight for a vertical Takeoff has been too high before the Patch, but now its definetly too low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fri13 Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 2 hours ago, Rlaxoxo said: Ye but the Harrier we "knew" is gone. Kinda depressing : / But our Harrier was by performance wise over its capabilities. It is still slightly IMHO and should get little more nerfing. It is not bad/sad thing that we get lower performance when it is now more realistic. i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S. i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fri13 Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 19 minutes ago, TheFlyGuy said: Making Things realistic is of course the right Direction, but nobody here knows whats realistic when it comes to the Flight Model of the Harrier. For me it feels strange that a VTOL Aircraft can barely make a VTOL Takeoff without any Weapons and 50% Fuel on Board, without consuming half of the Water on Board. The Harrier primary means to take-off are short ones, not the vertical. You are severely limited for vertical take-off. After almost any take-off your primary task is to fly to tanker and refuel yourself to mission requirements, especially when you have weapons. The Harrier is primarily using vertical landing after it has consumed its ammunition and it is low on fuel. That is when it can go and land vertically to some road base or forest. And when you take-off with couple bombs or rockets, you are so low on fuel that you are operating just on front line, and even then you want to have that short take-off run to get up in speed. What was previously possible perform vertical take-off with loading of 4200 lbs fuel and 4x GBU-12 and 2x 2.75" rockets was just crazy. Get a nice 100 meters run and you got up with much larger loadouts without problems. 3 i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S. i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
200rabbits Posted May 10, 2021 Share Posted May 10, 2021 1 hour ago, TheFlyGuy said: For me it seems believable that the Harrier would Hover in such a Configuration at 102 - 104% Engine Power without using any Water at least for a short Period of Time. Maybe the max. Takeoff Weight for a vertical Takeoff has been too high before the Patch, but now its definetly too low. You can hover dry starting at VREST max hover weight for somewhere under 4 mins before the engine starts to break down in DCS with the current patch (just tested). You can VTO with no wind from an altitude of 550ft at 21200lb total weight with wet thrust, though you'll be down to ~150lb of water and it's a bit dicey. At the nominal 20755lb VTO weight you can do a comfy wet VTO and still have ~350-380lb of water left. You can VTO dry at 19504, but again it's a bit dicey. Much happier under 19000lb. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts