SgtPappy
-
Posts
1219 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SgtPappy
-
-
The are from educational brochure, very old, and some curves are not very accurate. But quite close to reality.
scilib.narod.ru/Avia/Cy27_F15/Cy27_F15.pdf
Thanks, Yo-Yo!
-
From what I've read everywhere this is the correct behavior. The Mig actually had a higher max AoA than the Sabre and consequently it could turn better, in theory. In practice, as Mig pilots didn't have G suits, American pilots were able to sustain tighter turns. But the G suit difference thing isn't present in the sim at the moment. That's why when you play against the Mig, it will still turn better.
So yeah Mig pilots should blackout faster. I guess this is the change that should be made.
Looking at the wing design of the MiG, it makes sense for it to be able to pull so hard without wing drop. Less sweep and huge wing fences make this possible. The issue I think has moreso to do with the T-tail. When the MiG does stall (and it currently is extremely difficult to do so), the T-tail was supposedly the cause of a nasty, unrecoverable spin, which we do not see at all in-game though we are told - albeit only anecdotally - that it should fall out of the sky in such circumstances.
I have only ever stalled the thing once and it was a completely gentle, recoverable spin.
To the topic at hand, I see what OP meant. It's been over a year and no manual. The MiG-15 has its manual already. Other than that, the Sabre looks and flies fantastically, except maybe the rudder; an issue which both the F-15 and MiG-15 share. It's fun and it's a nice break from missile combat.
-
Thanks Mirmidon!
Ragnarok (And correct me if I'm wrong but this is what I think:) I think our F-15C might benefit from the upgraded thrust rating of the F100. The charts we referenced are pre-1988 and I think the F-15's engines were producing ~23770 lbf of thrust each, but after the F-15E came out, their engines (the same F100-PW-220's at the time) eventually were producing 25000 lbf of thrust. I don't know if they simply trimmed the engine or something, but you often see two different figures for the F-15's thrust.
In DCS which is supposed to model modern F-15C's, this is probably the thrust we're working with, as you said, a 5% thrust increase.
-
Oh thanks so much for the info gentlemen. Hopefully more information will come to light sooner than later.
The only acceleration chart included in this document is:Acceleration from 600 Km/h to 1100 Km/h at 1.000 meters
Su-27: 15 Sec - F-15: 13.5 Sec F-16A: 16 Sec - Tornado F2: 22 Sec.
mirmodon, would I be able to trouble you for that page? I'd like to have a screenshot of the diagram just to keep my documents consistent.
-
I was wondering if anyone knew the source of these images:
I'm interested in finding the Su-27's level flight acceleration (Mach number versus time) and was hoping the technical document that holds the above images might have that information.
Thanks!
-
The exhaust can cause contrails (so can maneuvering)
Do you think if they produced contrails from vortices or pressure drop across surfaces, we'd be able to see them more easily as we maneuver?
If so, it would be nice to add to the game, perhaps when EDGE comes around. It might change how people fly.
-
Hello!, this is a mission, is still W.I.P as I am solving some problems right now.
I hope I can host it when it,s finished, like The Frontline
I am considering hosting a campaign or something like that in the future, but it would be with the help of the community
Regards!
Ohh okay! No problem. I will patiently wait then :)
-
This sounds like it will be a blast! There should be more missions like this.
For anyone interested, I'm GMT -5. Hopefully I can join you in this campaign.
EDIT: Can't find the server (or anything called operation spearhead) :( It is 16:30 GMT +1 right?
-
@SpeedStick, Did you install the necesarry files? Let me know if keeps faiing
@terence44 is usually "The Frontline Mig21/15/Su25
@SgtPappy I am working right now in another mission, stay tuned (Aim 7 and F15,s in sight!):thumbup:
Today I wasn`t at home, so I couldn`t start the server, tomorrow will be up at the same hour.
Sorry and thanks
Ohhh you're going to make me sooo happy! :thumbup:
-
Good posts, gents. Wow I've been doing so much wrong. I think this time I'll practise endlessly instead of giving in to just BFM fights on other servers.
I feel determined now!
-
Would this server happen to have F-15s in it?
I've always wanted to fly F-15s with 70's weapons against MiG-21bis' for a long time before the Fishbed was released. Perhaps if you're open to it, il_corleone, you can have F-15's armed with AIM-9P's and only 2x AIM-7Ms (since we have no AIM-7F's).
This would be my absolute favorite kind of combat :)
EDIT: Oh I guess there aren't F-15s :(
-
Looks like the key has been entered incorrectly on wiki try this
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
[-HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Eagle Dynamics\MiG-15bis\Keys]
That worked! Thanks!
-
I would prefer the full wing design but will happily fly either so long as the FM is accurate.
I think I'd much prefer the traditional Spitfire wings as well. It just won't seem like a Spitfire without it. Not to mention, the standard wings were far more common for the Mk. IX. I'm still excited though! Just not as much... :P
-
did you deactivate all of your modules before doing the upgrade?
if not this link will help your remove the dcs keys from your registry, allowing you to reactivate.
Oh I did not :(
Okay thanks, I will try this.
EDIT: All of them worked except the MiG-15bis. It keeps giving me the same error and so the same thing happens as with the original post but only with the MiG-15. Deleting its registry over and over does nothing.
-
I upgraded my hardware with a new motherboard and graphics card recently.
When I try to launch any single-player mission, DCS asks me to activate each module. I click activate for each one and DCS tells me activation was successful for each module. The mission then starts, but the plane I set as "Player"-controlled is AI-controlled and I have no choice but to close the mission.
The mission (which is hosted in the DCS MP session executable) then crashes to the SP debrief screen. The game doesn't close, but crashes, with a window saying "wait for program to respond?" or "Close". Clicking either option leads to the SP session debrief screen. So I restart DCS and I am asked again for activation and the cycle continues. However, the numbers of remaining activations does not decrease from this point.
What should I do? I have not tried multiplayer or any tutorials.
-
Excited for the new Spitfire! :D
Too bad it won't be standard wing. I feel like the clipped wing version would be a nice secondary plane, but there's nothing more iconic than the regular Spitfire wing
-
I am quite confident that said VN diagram is based on flight tests, anything else would make little sense in my mind.
Also I don't really like calling the ITR curve the stall line seeing as said curve will be greatly affected by control forces on aircraft without powered control surfaces - and looking at the MiGs ITR curve it shows very clear signs of control force limitations.
The thing is on a VN diagram, it defines the aircraft's capabilities to load itself. Anything beyond that is subject to endless discussion. I think the VN curve in the Soviet diagrams should therefore really define what G's our MiG can pull at a given speed.
-
Don't you trust the Russian VN diagrams?
AFAIK the Russian figures are based on flight tests with all sorts of measuring equipment (incl. accelerometers), just like the US tests. Thus pilot strength/control forces were always a factor.
No no, I do! I was just confused because the first one doesn't really agree with the second one in terms of Mach number at 7G, and Curly was postulating that they might be calculated, not taken from flight tests.
If they actually are from flight tests, well that works moreso to prove my point concerning the disparity between the real and DCS MiG-15 so I'd rather use the Soviet VN diagrams as fact.
Let's not forget that we do have control effectiveness modeled though, to an extent. A MiG-15bis at 0.78-0.82 Mach will barely pull any G's due to the heavy control forces needed. But you can and will physically stall if you pull G's under corner speed. So I understand your point but I'm not convinced that it would be recorded as the stall line on the VN diagram since the plane isn't actually stalling.
-
Well what I'm saying is that even though we see the ITR limit as it is, it would be known that the aircraft isn't flying near stall, but is hard on the controls. Also I'm pretty sure that just because the aircraft have a similar stall speed doesn't prove it will have the same ITR.
Other EM diagram comparisons (like the Su-27 vs F-15) do not have a huge disparity at the lower left of the plots but they have very different turn characteristics.
But yes, let's forget about the supposed Boyd diagram because we don't really know its conditions. Let's just look at the Soviet TO and the F-86 flight manual. Both have VN diagrams that are not suspect and we can see ITR but in G's instead. From what Curly said, these plots are using CL values and likely have nothing to do with pilot strength. They both show the disparity between the Sabre and MiG 7G corner speeds so I really don't think surface deflection is a factor.
I'd still like to find more VN diagrams of the MiG though to make sure.
-
No it's not the stall line unless you have powered control surfaces so that you can always pull full deflection no matter the speed, hence why pilot strength matters :)
In the MiG pulling full elevator deflection becomes harder and harder with increases in speed because of the lack of powered control surfaces, which in turn will effect the max attainable ITR.
The fact that both aircraft start out being able to pull the same ITR however tells us that airframe wise they should have the same ITR at most speeds, however as mentioned the MiG's ITR becomes limited with increases in speed whilst the Sabre's doesn't due to its powered controls. If the MiG had been equipped with powered controls however, then it most likely would've featured the same ITR as the Sabre at most speeds.
Ohhh I see what yo mean lol forgive my mistake :)
But then it technically wouldn't be the stall line right? Because they would know they're not stalling. They won't get enough deflection to stall and no buffet would occur, or am I missing something? Also, at low speeds, that's no excuse because they should be able to get full deflection and then at higher speeds, there would be something of a discontinuity in the curve, i.e. it wouldn't be modeled by that consistent spline that we see.
I hope I'm not sounding too aggressive. Still trying to figure this issue out.
-
When I do some of these tests I get some pretty wild deviations in G forces (it spikes quite abit), but I am always able to pull a higher G at ~310 knts in the F-86 than in the MiG-15bis.
As for Boyd's chart, it's probably taking into account things such as stick forces etc., whilst ingame you might very well be able to pull slightly harder than what'ever average pilot strength figure Boyd arrived at.
Stick force is a significant factor where even a small change can have a big impact due to the steep nature of the ITR curve.
Also note that the MiG-15bis features about the same stall speed as the F-30 Sabre, and as a result its ITR curve starts at pretty much the same spot, thus a higher pilot strength figure will also yield a more similar ITR curve until a certain speed.
That having been said Boyd's chart also shows a rather significant 3 deg/sec advantage in STR for the MiG-15bis, which I have to say I really don't feel like it has ingame at all - basically you have to use the vertical to win a STR fight against a well flown Sabre ingame.
The stall line is the stall line. I also posted the MiG-15bis VN diagram here: http://airspot.ru/book/file/1108/MIG15bis.pdf. Page 42 in the pdf (real page 73, 74). Doesn't matter how strong you are, you are not going to be able to pull G past the point when your wing stalls. But I'm not too sure how stick force into account so I can't comment much on that. Either way, the MiG's VN diagram yields the same results when compared to the Sabre's. Huge difference in corner speed. I'm not sure if the stick force can account for that difference.
Comparing these, the MiG is still turning too well at too low of a speed. It's as simple as it's simply not supposed to turn at 7.0Gs at the speeds it can right now according to every publication so far, Soviet or American.
-
I have come to believe that the DCS MiG-15bis ITR is too high, based on some tests I evaluated against real data. The full post is here in a different thread, but I thought I should bring this up in the bugs sub-forum so that BST can see it: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2421737&postcount=74
Essentially, I found that the MiG-15's 7G corner speed is the same as the Sabre's in-game, although John Boy'd real-world tests plotted on an EM chart state that the Sabre should have a significant advantage in that category; able to hit 7G @ 5000' at a speed 52 knots lower than the MiG. Unless of course, Boyd's plot is wrong, but I cannot find a more reputable source.
I have also heard from some that MiG's sustained turn rate might be too low, but I'll have to test that next weekend.
My aim is not to nerf the MiG. I love flying it very much, but I certainly do not enjoy flying it as much (or flying against it) now knowing that its turn performance is too high and inaccurate. Please BST, take a look at this at least for the sake of accuracy. Thanks.
-
Blaze, those look awesome! I'm a big fan of your Korean War skins.
And speaking of the Korean War, here are some shots from some fun times on different servers.
-
Yes, I have exactly same impression of the two FMs.
I wish I knew what was going on as well. According to all accounts I've read, the MiG should have terrible stall characteristics. "Postwar American tests of a MiG-15 revealed that the MiG had virtually no stall warning and would snap into a spin, clearly dangerous characteristics for inexperienced pilots." - from Sabres Over MiG Alley: The F-86 and the Battle for Air Superiority in Korea - K. Werrell
Not sure what to make of that compared to our MiG :S
Full systems lock on time?
in Military and Aviation
Posted
Does it actually take up to 30 seconds for an Su-27 or F-15 radar to achieve STT on a target?
I was reading about BVR combat here: https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2013/04/27/usefulness-of-bvr-combat/, which analyses how effective BVR combat has been in the last 50 years or so.
If you read down near the bottom, a post by P.N. Sinha (post 8 in the comments under the article), he/she quotes how radar systems take time to achieve lock - up to 15 or so seconds and an IR missile takes 1-3 seconds. It even goes as far as to make an example using an F-22 in a hypothetical ECM-ridden situation taking 30+ seconds to lock a target.
Is this true? If so, I would assume it should be commonly known, but in DCS, lock ons are instantaneous with any type of missile.