Gungho

I was voicing my opinion that the f16 was underperforming in 2023 and the moderators closed my thread and moved it to "wish list, and correct as is." This is very unprofessional from the team and I hope they foster more free speech instead of punishing it. I eventually gave up pushing the fact the plane was underperforming due to negative feedback. https://forum.dcs.world/topic/323031-f16-still-underperforming/page/12/#comment-5240637

Thank you for the help. I found my overclocked processor got burnt up by the bios auto overclock voltage. The asus Ai one click overclock sent 1.45 volts for 5.8 ghz for about a year now. Now i cant even hold stock clocks without adding extra voltage. This was my issue for kernel security failure bsods and dcs crashing. It wasnt the ram tho. Dcs runs fine on 16 gb. In this case i had 16gb just to test if my other 64gb of ram had a failure.

Greetings, I am so lost. I have been crashing in DCS more often. The issue has been getting worse and worse to now I can only get about 15 minutes of gameplay before i crash. I am also crashing in other games like TitanFall2. You can see this in my dxdiag log. I have reinstalled windows, reinstalled drivers, done everything I can and can't find the culprit. I have also did some research on how to read these files. However, I am losing my mind over this as DCS is a massive part of my life as a flight student. Any help will be appreciated. Sincerely, Michael dcs.log-20230930-221639.zip

Is the sd10 no good anymore? Slow hornet is dodging it head on with 8g turns.

Yup very good data proves why i lose in rate two circle fights against all the fighters. Nevermind glocking at 390+ knots of sustained rate. Hope they will fix this.

Best rate fighter My butt. Im constantly getting outrated by the f18. Doesn't matter what speed i hold or how i manage energy.

I know and its turn rate is waay better than in sim.

You slowdown fast and you dont even get that much instantaneous turn rate for exchange of that precious airspeed. It really isnt a fair trade atm.

I agree along with the poor energy retention of the viper. The cursor being so slow at max deflection of the slew axis gets me killed in bvr engagements.

I really like the attention to the pilots opinion. It really shows the dedication the mods have for the most realistic flight sim in the world. I am looking forward to the findings. My theory is that the rate of turn/heading change per second exchanged for the amount of speed change/energy bleed does not seem right. It bleeds too much energy for subpar turn rate. Or possibly like any plane the induced drag at slower airspeeds and higher angle of attack may also be too great. The f16 pilot may feel that the f16 should be easily recovering airspeed at these slowed airspeeds and medium angles of attack without dumping the nose for a 0g condition. Recovery of speed/energy may be possible at slow airspeeds and higher angles of attack with the f16. Doesnt mean we should give up all together a resigning attitude wont get us anywhere either.

If you watch the video at the end he does it at +-500ft agl. Not sure what his msl altitude is but it makes very little difference in the realm of possibility.

Original thread got moved. I wish to bring further attention that my favorite plane in real life is still butchered. Skip to 11:30 and my old thread that is now in “wish list” for some reason.

skip to 11:30 real F16 pilot says the energy bleed is still too fast. He says it is better but is still garbage. I flew the f18 yesterday and was just destroying in dogfighting with differential thrust. This is a new video! Like come on the hard paper data cannot discredit so many real pilot’s opinion.

Yeah i see them pop out when at low speeds. Yeah its funny people say to rate around at 430-450 kts when you blackout and cant sustain that rate at those speeds.

People are starting to catch on. For some reason the aoa you can pull during pitch up max deflection is much lower than the pitch down. I propose a change in the control input sensitivities as Minhal has pointed out in my previous post. The FLCS feels awful compared to the hornet. In this first video you can see the f16 has extremely impossible pitch down spiraling movement. Ive done testing on my own and this is achieved by staying below 250 knots to avoid g-lock from negative gs, pulling power to idle and applying full pitch down and full aileron deflection(maybe a little rudder). My theory is By entering a low speed spiral the fcs thinks that full pitch down is to decrease aoa and break the stall and gives much more aoa control for pitch down movements in the f16. Im not sure if this is the way the developers have intended the f16 to be able to do these maneuvers. As it stands right now when im flying the f16 the poor aoa it can pull, poor sustained rate, ocoupled with the insane energy bleed has caused me to be put in a defensive position. My only option is to do this goofy negative g high aoa nose down maneuver to force an overshoot. My opinion is that the f16 is still underperforming and bleeding too much energy for exchange for below average instantaneous rate. I heard in bms theres a switch that allows override of the flcs? The f18 has this and the f15c just lets you pull insane amounts of aoa. Meanwhile the f16 is severely limited by its flcs.

People are starting to catch on. For some reason the aoa you can pull during pitch up max deflection is much lower than the pitch down. I propose a change in the control input sensitivities as Minhal has pointed out. The FLCS feels awful compared to the hornet. In this first video you can see the f16 has extremely impossible pitch down spiraling movement. Ive done testing on my own and this is achieved by staying below 250 knots to avoid g-lock from negative gs, pulling power to idle and applying full pitch down and full aileron deflection(maybe a little rudder). My theory is By entering a low speed spiral the fcs thinks that full pitch down is to decrease aoa and break the stall and gives much more aoa control for pitch down movements in the f16. Im not sure if this is the way the developers have intended the f16 to be able to do these maneuvers. As it stands right now when im flying the f16 the poor aoa it can pull, poor sustained rate, coupled with the insane energy bleed has caused me to be put in a defensive position. My only option is to do this goofy negative g high aoa nose down maneuver to force an overshoot. My opinion is that the f16 is still underperforming and bleeding too much energy for exchange for below average instantaneous rate. Please see above videos. I believe the f16s flcs should not act in this way.

A real f16 pilot says the f16 is bleeding energy too quickly at 3:45 and 5:10 in the video. Ive been playing it since its early release mostly in the dogfighting servers and just get destroyed by f18s, mirages, and f15s pulling about 30% more aoa than me. I am experimenting with 330 knots v speeds minimum radius corner speeds instead of 430 maximum rate turns. 430 just is really easy to black out and even at a maximum radius turn I often get out rated by the mirage and f18s. i like the bvr performance of the f16 though but as soon as i dogfight despite the f16 being my most played module i do much better dogfighting in the 18 or 15 Then ive been trying to follow this advice with better results but i still feel like the f16 is underperforming what are your thoughts?

Maybe they are doing testing with dlss ha ha ha. Praying for dlss to be the gamechanger. I just sold my laptop 3080 ti and bought a 4090 12900k so i could keep up

I have observed a clear loss in fps, stuttering, and lag after the January 25 or 28. I thought it was just me but the loss was after my one week break from my computer and return the day before yesterday. I have also found others on youtube who have also seen this change. I have only tried singleplayer but im assuming the loss is also on multiplayer.

Thank you very much! this is a very professional response. I agree i went out today with the f14 and it did fine at high altitude shots. I hope you guys find a good balance on the performance and am Looking forward to the guidance improvements.

Wow okay i stand corrected. If they are using this real world data then i guess the aim54s are as they should be. However, it is now a fact that they are now completely outmatched by the aim120c as far as energy retention and long range shots is concerned. Maybe the other missiles in the sim are over-performing too.

Just because something is huge doesnt necessarily mean its going to slow down faster. I shoot rifles in real life and a higher caliber bullet like a .338 lapua magnum is going to retain energy+velocity at distance much better than a .223 or even a 6.5 creedmoor .260 Remington. The huge aim54s should retain energy much better than it is. You want a combination of weight and drag in fact. After reading this thread it seems like the update was made based on an opinion that the missile was overperforming and not made based on real world data? Your points made in your comments are true but i feel that they are over exaggerated with distances and engagement criteria. The same could be said with this patch. The missile was neutered too much and now it is underperforming simple as that unless this patch was made based on real world data? Basically if a heavy and big piano was dropped off a balcony its going to fall at the same i initial rate as a pen right? 9.8m/s^2? Only thing is drag to worry about generally that would make the pen hit the ground faster. The same is with a missile but actually the phoenix is going to retain its speed better than an amraam. So my basic “opinion/feelings”based on watching videos and me watching it launched last night is that a medium range missile amraam has better Pk than a long range aim54 at the same distance to target and closure rate.

First of all Why the heck would heatblur release an unfinished update to break the aim54s. They made the missile “more realistic” but said the guidance is broken. Instead they should have left the aim54s as they were until tIll they get both the realism AND the guidance before they release it. But here we are with a completely useless f-14 until the next patch. I witnessed yesterday a f-14 in a light configuration fire a phoenix at near pointblank 15-20 nm at a hot su27. The missile was well below subsonic before even the 10 mile mark. Throughout the session i watched multiple launches. 0 hits with good guidance. The issue i was seeing was that the aim54 loses so much velocity so quickly its hard to believe nasa wanted to modify these missiles to fly mach 5. I dont have data to back it up but common sense would find it hard to believe a high mass medium drag missile would lose its energy so quickly. High mass would mean it would retain its energy better and increase its ballistic coefficient. These missiles dont look to be that draggy either. The Iranians would throw all their aim54s in the garbage can if they were using heatblur’s “realistic”missiles . Sorry for the rant but i hate to see our baby neutered so badly. Im skeptical that a mere guidance change will make a big difference as the issue is energy retention. Is it really supposed to be this slow? Edit:just watched a video of it and the missile feels like it has parachutes or speedbrakes deployed

I kinda vented off this thread post late last night so i apologize if it was hard to read. However, it is true that these problems are there and i love this SIM and care that is why i want to give feedback for something simple to fix. The game is plenty challenging with AA missiles like the strela short range and long range missiles sa10. Dedicated Antiair like the tunguska and shilka I am fine with the level of accuracy that it has due to the radar bonus. However, I think nerfing the AIs gun accuracy, particularly the BMPs, and tanks would be a small incremental fair change that wouldnt deminish much from the experience. Iron sight AA like the ZSU 23mm is in the grey area. It is dedicated anti air but i still believe they are a little too effective.

Problem: I was flying in a snowstorm and couldnt see the AI 5 NM away when i see laser accurate tracers from ZSU-23mm iron sight cannons flying at my a10. this brings me to the next problem is the AI’s dispersion and accuracy is too high. Even iron sight ZSU23s will destroy you if you are flying straight line 10000 ft and under. It feels very unrealistic. Same goes with manpads. They never miss. Dont even get me started on radar guided guns like the shilka and tunguska. Next is the accuracy difference between a T72 tank and zsu 23mm and dare I say shilka are not much different. I took out all the “AA” around a tank batallion in my a10C2. Thinking that i have gotten rid of the main threat and the accuracy of the T72s heavy machine are not that great against air targets i proceeded to do A10 gun runs on the “defenseless” tanks. God i was wrong their laser accurate machine guns peppered and destroyed my engine and wings. You basically cant have fun with the A10 anymore. No gun runs basically means no fun. Unless you think shooting one APWS rocket at 5Nm and cranking left 20x for your TGP is fun. Mavericks are in short supply unfortunately. solution: do not allow manually guided iron sight ZSU23mm cannon have superman vision and shoot you through snowstorms and cloud layers. Reduce accuracy of fire but keep volume of fire high. Everything stays realistic and fun at the same time.