Jump to content

DCS F16 turn performance


Yeti42
 Share

Go to solution Solved by NineLine,

Recommended Posts

Yes Bignewy you are right. No G lock discussions here.

Flying on both currently available dogfight servers I'd say the Viper feels more agile like you would expect her to be.. And commonly known Viper tactics and Viper BFM starting to work much better right now. And if it does thats a sign that the FM is going in the right direction. Maintaining airspeed works a lot better and is a lot more rewarding. Also gaining airspeed back is much easier.


Edited by darkman222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

It still overspeeds absurdly easily with no consequence.

 

Same like F-18 still can use paddle with high speed and maintain almost constant 10 G. Yesterday we fight a lot and i could say that maybe i dont know how to fight in F-16 but i think that in dogfight F-16 has no chance against F-18. If it is like in reality is ok for me 🙂   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just gave it a few tries. Glad to know they are working on it, but it's staying on the shelf until  max/min G and g-onset rates are at least in the ballpark of what they should be. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Windows 10 - Intel i7 7700K 4.2 Ghz (no OC) - Asus Strix GTX 1080 8Gb - 16GB DDR4 (3000 MHz) - SSD 500GB + WD Black FZEX 1TB 6Gb/s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FM is crazy better now.

 

In general it feels like speed is less affected by pitch inputs (until you get up to 7.5 or 8Gs).

 

The 350 -400 kt range feels a lot more viable now. Before I felt like going under 400 wasn't ever correct unless you were doing something specific (sacrificing energy for position).

 

The induced drag from about 4 - 6 Gs has had quite a reduction.

 

Unloaded acceleration remains unaffected from what I can tell but I feel like loaded acceleration has received a big buff when using "God's G." Whereas before I had to delicately fly through the bottom of my vertical loops to maintain an ok speed; now I feel like I have to pull 8 or 9 Gs just to not blast past corner speed.

 

I've not noticed any improvement in the low-speed, low-G range.

 

All in all I'd say the FM update makes the F-16 better at what the F-16 is known for.

Improvements in the 350-400 knot range help with dealing hostile instantaneous turns, especially when they're on your tail.

Players that spend a lot of time pulling 4-6Gs in a dogfight are going to be raking in the benefits from this update.

Given that the bottoms of rolls can be sustained at much higher Gs means that the rolling scissors is going to be more viable more often for the Viper pilot.

 

This pleases me.

And they're still working on "instantaneous turn rates and accelerated rates." If these rates are also going to be buffed in the future, the F-16 is going to be the best dogfighter ever 😃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 58 Minuten schrieb Theodore42:

The FM is crazy better now.

 

In general it feels like speed is less affected by pitch inputs (until you get up to 7.5 or 8Gs).

 

The 350 -400 kt range feels a lot more viable now. Before I felt like going under 400 wasn't ever correct unless you were doing something specific (sacrificing energy for position).

 

The induced drag from about 4 - 6 Gs has had quite a reduction.

 

Unloaded acceleration remains unaffected from what I can tell but I feel like loaded acceleration has received a big buff when using "God's G." Whereas before I had to delicately fly through the bottom of my vertical loops to maintain an ok speed; now I feel like I have to pull 8 or 9 Gs just to not blast past corner speed.

 

I've not noticed any improvement in the low-speed, low-G range.

 

All in all I'd say the FM update makes the F-16 better at what the F-16 is known for.

Improvements in the 350-400 knot range help with dealing hostile instantaneous turns, especially when they're on your tail.

Players that spend a lot of time pulling 4-6Gs in a dogfight are going to be raking in the benefits from this update.

Given that the bottoms of rolls can be sustained at much higher Gs means that the rolling scissors is going to be more viable more often for the Viper pilot.

 

This pleases me.

And they're still working on "instantaneous turn rates and accelerated rates." If these rates are also going to be buffed in the future, the F-16 is going to be the best dogfighter ever 😃

 

Yes, there was no improvement in the low speed range which would also reduce the high landing speeds.

After all, we are getting closer to the agile Viper it is in real life and I really appreciate it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new FM defintely "feels" better, but STR is still no match to the Hornet, and STR has no big improvements from the previous FM. 

 

https://dcs.silver.ru/77,70,71

 

According to the graph, STR has about 0.02-0.04 degrees/second improvement from the previous FM in the 340-400 kts range, around 416 kts and above the STR is the same as the previous FM. So if you rate fight the Viper in the speed it should be used for rate fight, you will get pretty much the same result as before this FM update. 

 

And look at the graph for the Hornet, its STR is still far better than the Viper in all speed ranges. Even if the Hornet does not use paddle to override its 7.5 G limit and rates at 360, its STR still beats the Viper rating at 430. 

 

I also fought a real human piloted Eagle in the dogfight sever, despite rating at 400-430 in the Viper, I still had a hard time out-rating him, but he made a mistake by pulling too much to get a shot in the end, so I won by luck. 

 

IMO, Viper's FM, especially STR still needs tuning. It's still below what the HAF EM diagram shows according to the graph (https://dcs.silver.ru/77,70,71). 


Edited by SCPanda
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sustained Turn Rate may not have changed discernably but accelerating in a turn seems to be easier and turning faster than the STR seems improved as well.

 

This gives a lot more play in the turn and more options in a fight. For example, it really used to be that you had to unload to exploit the acceleration advantage of the F-16. But with the updated FM you can be pulling good Gs, but less than the STR, and get much more speed. So you have to sacrifice far fewer angles when unloading to accelerate.

 

The STR for the F-16 is well documented in many places. ED surly has in mind what they want the STR to be.

When making an FM I assume that one of the first things done is to get the STR where you want it. Then tweak everything from there. The STR of ED's Viper hasn't changed almost at all since the first few months of EA. That plus the fact that they report they're still working on "instantaneous turn rates and accelerated rates" but nothing about "Sustained Turn Rates" makes me think that the current STR of the Viper is basically where ED wants it, for better or worse.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is so much more the the Vipers rate fight than the STR line.  How does it accelerate under the STR line?  How does it decelerate above the STR line?  Both of these issues were far more broken than they are now.  If you think a rate fight is sitting at best STR and hoping for the best you are very mistaken.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I have said before, peak STR alone doesn't mean much. If the FM over-estimates the drag and compensates it with more thrust, the aircraft may have accurate peak STR value, but it still bleeds more speed in a turn. That is determined with equations of flight dynamics.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, karasawa said:

If the FM over-estimates the drag

IMO, this is the next big hill for the FM to climb.  The added thrust is nice in the straight and level and helps to compensate for the energy loss in turns, but doesn't solve it.  Getting there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did a couple of quick tests, and the STR still seems a bit low at low speeds, but it has indeed improved. Will need to do some more thurough tests before I can say anything definitive though.

 

That being said, the biggest felt change is going to be when the issues with ITR & G-onset are resolved. Once this is fixed the F16 is going to be & feel a lot more agile.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

STR tests vs the F-15C, both at 50% fuel clean, SL, and the F-16C will not gain on the F-15C at 300, 350 or 400 knots (both aircraft doing same speed).

 

FYI: According to available performance charts the F-16C should be beating the F-15C by about 0.4 G in sustainable load factor at Mach 0.6. 

 

So it seems at least one of the two are off by sizable margin sadly.


Edited by Hummingbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Solution
On 9/20/2021 at 10:13 AM, Hummingbird said:

STR tests vs the F-15C, both at 50% fuel clean, SL, and the F-16C will not gain on the F-15C at 300, 350 or 400 knots (both aircraft doing same speed).

 

FYI: According to available performance charts the F-16C should be beating the F-15C by about 0.4 G in sustainable load factor at Mach 0.6. 

 

Please post your data, we certainly didn't check how it performs vs other aircraft, we checked it against available reference data with SME review, thanks.

 

Test is based on GE-129 / 22k lbs GW / DI=0/ Max AB / Standard Day, see attached.

 

While not perfect, and needs a little tuning here and there, it is much more accurate than the previous version.
 

 

 

 

 

DCS_ F-16C Viper Sustained turn rate Rev1.pdf

  • Like 6

SigDCSNew.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Please post your data, we certainly didnt check how it feels vs other aircraft, we checked it to the numbers with charts and SME's, thanks.

 

Tested extensively at 400 KTAS now, and the fault appears to lie with the F-15C. It's sustaining 7.5 G @ 400 KTAS @ SL at 35,000 lbs clean, when  according to the charts it should be 7.3 G. The F-16C appears right on the money at 400 KTAS and 22,000 lbs clean, pulling 7.7 G's. 

 

So no complaints on the F-16 at 400 knots from here, will check at 300 & 350 knots.


Edited by Hummingbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hummingbird said:

 

Tested extensively at 400 KTAS now, and the fault appears to lie with the F-15C. It's sustaining 7.5 G @ 400 KTAS @ SL at 35,000 lbs clean, when  according to the charts it should be 7.3 G. The F-16C appears right on the money at 400 KTAS and 22,000 lbs clean, pulling 7.7 G's. 

 

So no complaints on the F-16 at 400 knots from here, will check at 300 & 350 knots.

 

Ok, if you have an issue with the F-15, you need to post in the proper section, this is the F-16 section.

SigDCSNew.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Progress with testing so far:

 

DCS F-16C, 22,000 lbs clean, SL:

200 KTAS = -to be tested-

250 KTAS = 4.1 G vs 4.3 G chart (a little off)

300 KTAS = 5.3 G vs 5.4 G chart (very close)

350 KTAS = 6.5 G vs 6.6 G chart (very close)

400 KTAS = 7.7 G vs 7.7 G chart (spot on)

450 KTAS = 8.85 G vs 9 G chart (close) [couldn't maintain 9 G @ 450 KTAS even with a very so slight alt drop of ~3 ft/s]

 

All in all the STR has definitely improved, and it only really needs very minor adjustments, mainly at 300 KTAS and below and at the very top at 450.


Edited by Hummingbird
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Ok, if you have an issue with the F-15, you need to post in the proper section, this is the F-16 section.

 

Roger, posted the F-16 data collected so far.

 

If you get time, it would be good if the devs could check the F-15C. It's usually right on the money, so it surprised me abit that it was pulling 0.2 G's over chart values at 35,000 lbs.

51 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Please post your data, we certainly didn't check how it performs vs other aircraft, we checked it against available reference data with SME review, thanks.

 

Test is based on GE-129 / 24k lbs GW / DI=0, see attached.

 

While not perfect, and needs a little tuning here and there, it is much more accurate than the previous version.
 

DCS F-16C Sustained Turn Tests ED.pdf 108.36 kB · 13 downloads

 

Excellent stuff NN, your results mirror mine. As it shows minor adjustments are needed, mainly at low speed, but the FM is going the right direction, kudos to the team!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consult reference data and set the mission to the correct Gross Weight (GW) and altitude to match the reference data and engine type. Fly constantly at the test Mach (airspeed must be constant in a level turn). Record the flight and replay in Tacview to note the G and turn rate while maintaining the test Mach.

In order to test STR, you have to be a pretty good pilot to keep the Mach consistent.

  • Like 1

SigDCSNew.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Glide said:

Would you mind posting a track showing your test flight technique?

 

I can record it for the next set of tests I do. But procedure is like NineLine described it, although I will add that it's important to remember to turn on infinite fuel, otherwise the aircraft becomes progressively lighter during the turn as fuel is burned, which will invalidate the results. 

 

The configuration I tested for the F-16C was 22,000 lbs (which is below 50% fuel btw) / clean / SL / ICAO and for F-15 35,000 lbs / clean / SL / ICAO.

 

 

 


Edited by Hummingbird
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NineLine said:

Please post your data, we certainly didn't check how it performs vs other aircraft, we checked it against available reference data with SME review, thanks.

 

Test is based on GE-129 / 24k lbs GW / DI=0, see attached.

 

While not perfect, and needs a little tuning here and there, it is much more accurate than the previous version.
 

DCS F-16C Sustained Turn Tests ED.pdf 108.36 kB · 31 downloads

Thanks for providing the data.

 

To ED F-16 team:

 

1) Do not take the "linear approximation conversion table from HAF manual" for high-precision. We are on a regime that 0.5deg/sec error could mean big difference. The correct way is to use the law "sustained G should be inverse proportional to weight" to convert the performance among different weights.

 

Using linear approximation will under-estimate F-16's performance. 

 

2) The speed of sound in your reference is 333 m /s, while that in game is 345 m /s. So you should not compare the turn rate under the same mach number, but under the same true speed. 


Edited by karasawa
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, karasawa said:

Thanks for providing the data.

 

To ED F-16 team:

 

1) Do not take the "linear approximation conversion table from HAF manual" for high-precision. We are on a regime that 0.5deg/sec error could mean big difference. The correct way is to use the law "sustained G should be inverse proportional to weight" to convert the performance among different weights.

 

Using linear approximation will under-estimate F-16's performance. 

 

2) The speed of sound in your reference is 333 m /s, while that in game is 345 m /s. So you should not compare the turn rate under the same mach number, but under the same true speed. 

 

How important is the error is Mach then? 

"Subsonic is below Mach 1, supersonic is up to Mach 5. Above Mach 5 is hypersonic. And reentry from space, well, that's like Mach a lot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, karasawa said:

Since the viper's turn rate is very sensitive to airspeed, the error could be as much as 0.5deg/sec.

I meant, if you match TAS the Mach will be different, and how much does that difference matter? 

"Subsonic is below Mach 1, supersonic is up to Mach 5. Above Mach 5 is hypersonic. And reentry from space, well, that's like Mach a lot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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