aimmaverick Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 In Lomac version 1.02 you can only achieve mach 2.3 despite the fact that Eagle is the best known for its top speed of mach 2.5. Was this deliberately implemented because its a "western jet" and developers are from Russia or what? Because all of ruskies aircraft have performance which match with published fact sheets just F-15C doesnt. Dont tell me now because of increased fuel capacity it is slower than F-15A. Both aircraft have the same top speed according to existing data. In all fact sheets i saw so far it is claimed to be mach 2.5+ just in Lomac its different!!!!! I would like to hear explination from ED development team what they think about that. And a question about thrust to weight for all planes in Lomac. Why do planes lose speed vhen flying verticaly up despite fact that flying let say a clean F-15 with 50% fuel which engine thrust alone is significantly higher that takeoff weight but it still cant accelerate into vertical? Acording to common sense and to what i know about aeronautics the plane which total weight is less than the thrust engines produce should accelerate into vertical to certain alltitude where because of thinner air engines wouldnt be able to produce so many thrust and the plane would start bleeding speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Well, yes, the F-15C doesn't reach its top speed. The Su-27 on th eother hand will exceed its published speed in LOMAC (2.5 or so as oppsoed to topping off at 2.34). For your other question: Sure, you can accelerate vertically if you meet a few conditions. First, you need a certain airspeed, so that the ram-air effect can increase your engine thrust (the max engine thrust is ONLY achieved at those speeds) Secondly, as the aircraft clims, the pressure drop and subsequent airspeed drop diminishes the ram-air effect, and thus the thrust your engines are producing as well. In other words, you can accelerate vertically, but only for a short time. [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 More sharing options...
D-Scythe Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 I've reached Mach 2.36 abouts in the F-15C in LOMAC, which is about right with weapon pylons and the gun. Mach 2.5 in the Flanker is not realistic IMO. Should've topped out at Mach 2.4 abouts at most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Coincidently, we had a speed/acceleration test last night. A full AB Mig-29S, a Su-27, and an F-15C all at 46.5k starting at the same speed (569 knots, I think) with the same weight of fuel, clean loadout. The MiG clearly proved best at acceleration, top speed acheived, and best fuel economy. The Su bested the 15 except for fuel economy (range until flame out). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuzzU Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Coincidently, we had a speed/acceleration test last night. A full AB Mig-29S, a Su-27, and an F-15C all at 46.5k starting at the same speed (569 knots, I think) with the same weight of fuel, clean loadout. The MiG clearly proved best at acceleration, top speed acheived, and best fuel economy. The Su bested the 15 except for fuel economy (range until flame out). Can you list the speeds? Buzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 I got M2.38 in the F-15 just now, it would have went a bit higher but I ran out of fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 I just made another attempt, this timw I changed the temperature to -20C seeing as turrbofan jet engines produce more thrust at colder temperatures. This time I got M2.39, I'm not complaining. This seems accurate to me. When the F-15 was designed it was required to have a top speed of M2.5 and this target was only reached in theory. One gripe I have though was that I was able to pull 12G at M1.55 and the wings remained on the jet. IRL this would cause the fighter to rip apart. Even the Eurofighter is limited to 6.5G while supersonic as any more would break it. And the Eurofighter is the first fighter along with the F/A-22 to reach 6.5G while supersonic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Can you list the speeds? I'm supposed to be getting a track of it sent to me. I'll host it when I get it. I'll put the speeds at flame out for all planes. Don't be confused by the fact that the MiG won this for top speed. All planes were still accelerating when they flamed out. If the Su or 15 had more fuel, they could have kept going and gone faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 I even tried it with one external tank and punched it off when it was empty but I still flamed out at the max I got was M2.39 at 38,000ft and about 730IAS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuzzU Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Can you make a quick mission starting at that altitude? Then fuel won't be a problem. Buzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Tried it already, and got the exact same result. Fuel ran out too quickly but still speed increasing painfully slowly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirdELTPoznan Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Started from 18300m with max speed but couldn't keep this speed... GROM- Grupa Reagowania Operacyjno Manewrowego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuzzU Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Started from 18300m with max speed but couldn't keep this speed... I see "pull up". At that altitude? Buzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 Can you make a quick mission starting at that altitude? Then fuel won't be a problem. The mission did start at that altitude and speed. As soon as it started we maxed throttle, hit altitude hold and watched them run. The MiG burned a full internal load of fuel and was still accelerating until it was empty. The initial speed was as fast as the editor would allow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 I see "pull up". At that altitude? Sure. He's diving at about 48 degrees and going mach 2.574. How much time do you think it would take to reach a point where he couldn't recover? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirdELTPoznan Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 I see "pull up". At that altitude? The faster you go the earlier Betty will linger. Cheers 3ELT GROM- Grupa Reagowania Operacyjno Manewrowego Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force_Feedback Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 It's a conspiracy, you fools, this is way bigger, this goes all the way back to 1947 man, both the US and the Russians are behind this, not to mention the greys. .... I just fail to see the point here, why do you need speed in lomac? All it does is guzzle fuel with AB on, making you having to find an airport in the middle of a battle, on all planes, even the su-25 :P Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuzzU Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 The faster you go the earlier Betty will linger. Cheers 3ELT I never went that fast, so I guess Betty was doing her nails. Buzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bflagg Posted July 26, 2005 Share Posted July 26, 2005 I guess we are all looking a bug and not noticing.. the hud readout at the bottom left is showing mach 2.38 (as above), but isn't mach1 720knts at sea level? why isn't the HUD speed tape showing 1440 kts? (and before anyone says .. well it's a 38k ,---- you can repeat this at 500ft) Thanks, Brett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Um, exactly because it's at 38k. if it's doable at sea level too (the tape shows the wrong airspeed) then it's either a bug or the instrumentation isn't able to show it problely, and by the way, you're nto supposed to be going so fast at that alttiude anyway, your canopy will implode ;) [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 More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I guess we are all looking a bug and not noticing.. the hud readout at the bottom left is showing mach 2.38 (as above), but isn't mach1 720knts at sea level? why isn't the HUD speed tape showing 1440 kts? (and before anyone says .. well it's a 38k ,---- you can repeat this at 500ft) Mach 1 = 661.7 knots or 761.5 mph at sea level. At 36,089 feet, geopotential of tropopause, Mach 1 is 573.8 knots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest aires84057 Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 NOT A RANT - this is an explanation why! F-15c eagle has always been gimped in this game - from day 1 - due to classified and non-classified info - it has to do with the fact that they used information from both the early version of the f-15c and a 2nd miisp upgrade (apg-70 era). Ok so what is missing on the f-15 - Engine(s): Two F100-PW-100, on some sites that you can search for; the eagle is listed with F100-PW-220 engine. This was started in 1983 and ended in 1985 as part of the MIISP 1st upgrade. If this game is supposed to sloted in the mid to early 1990's (1985-1995) then why does the eagle have the smallest engine in the game, vs other fighter aircraft. Link - http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=101 Another blend again - Radar - APG-70 was started in 1985 and completed by 1990ish sometime - some sites are unclear on this. so again why is this not in game. Reason: is because the apg70 radar is still somewhat classified and as such ED used a blend of the apg-63/apg-70 radar modes. (TWS - new ecm stuff that is on the apg-70) The list goes on and on but i think this get the point across. The f-15c eagle is gimped a little in this game. Watch "American fighter pilots" a documentary on the making of an f-15 pilot - there are scenes in the movie - that shows different MODES that the PACS display can go into - but these screens are brief. Same thing for some of the other display screens in the f-15c. The PACS screen can go into what looks like a falcon4.0 radar display, which shows the radar angles and things; ranges and what not. It also shows that the PACS display system can be dimmed to shows in a like a neon blue writing - for night flying. What ED has been able to program is all that anyone can find - without using classified information. Which will not be declassified for a $30 sim game - because the fighter is still in active service with the USAF and if it was too real then other countries could use that to there advantage to train there pilots and not a million's dollar sim. Although there is room for adjustments to the f-15 that could be done - engines and other minor issue that have been brought up in the past. But it is up to ED and ubi to do them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firesoldier845 Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 I'm not whineing either, but yeah if the F-15 can do Mach 2.5+ then it should be able to do it in game and if the SU and Mig are slower like Mach 2.3 or whatever it should be then they shouldn't be able to fly faster than that. It's not a Russian designer conspiracy but maybe a bug or some oversight or whatever. It says in the documentation that came with the game that F-15 was Mach 2.5+ so it should be able to do that. Russian planes like Mach 2.3 so they shouldn't fly faster. If what you all are saying is true than something is messed up. Oh and before you guys start flaming me, I never fly the F-15 online as many can attest so I'm not whineing. cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 Our track didn't get saved due to pilot error. :D We'll do it again soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kula66 Posted July 27, 2005 Share Posted July 27, 2005 For your other question: Sure, you can accelerate vertically if you meet a few conditions. First, you need a certain airspeed, so that the ram-air effect can increase your engine thrust (the max engine thrust is ONLY achieved at those speeds) So how come an F-15 will take off and immediately stand on its tail and climb vertically to 8000' ... I've seen it. What speed can it be doing just after take-off? 200-300kts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts