Jump to content

karasawa

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    189

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by karasawa

  1. karasawa
    About 0.03 Mach
  2. karasawa
    Since the viper's turn rate is very sensitive to airspeed, the error could be as much as 0.5deg/sec.
  3. karasawa
    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.
  4. karasawa
    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.
  5. karasawa
    That may not be the most accurate to the quantum level, but that is accurate enough and much more accurate than your linear approximation. I have some critical thinking because I used to be a flight control engineer, and guess what, that "inverse proportional law" is exactly what the industry is using to convert aircraft performance from one weight to another. A 26000 lbs F-16C with DI=50 sustains 18.5deg/sec. At Mach 0.74 it sustains 18.25deg/sec, and that is still away from the 9G limit, which means that after the weight conversion, at Mach 0.74 it gets promoted to 19deg/sec without being truncated by the 9G limit, and that is with DI=50. I really don't find any reason why a F-16C with 2 amraams and 2 sidewinders has lower STR than a similarly loaded 402 powered hornet.
  6. karasawa
    That's exactly what I have mentioned in other threads: From 10000 ft on the viper actually out-rates everything in game.
  7. karasawa
    So we can come to the conclusion that the F-16C-50 and a 402 powered F-18 should be very close in terms of STR (difference is less than 1deg/sec), however in the game it is almost 2 deg/sec, which is ridiculous.
  8. karasawa
    Correction: GW adjustment in manual is linear approximation, not accurate. The true adjustment should be using "normal load factor is inverse proportional to weight" and do the math. Proof: Using linear approximation, 25000 lbs weighted F-16 with DI = 26 sustains about 18.5deg/sec, However, on another page, 26000 lbs weighted F-16 with DI =50 also sustains 18.5deg/sec. That is clearly contradictory if you think the linear approximation has high precision. A better reasoning is: 26000 lbs weighted F-16 with DI =50 sustains 18.5deg/sec. Since "normal load factor is inverse proportional to weight", 25000lbs weighted F-16 with DI=50 should sustain 19.24deg/sec, and 25000lbs weighted F-16 with DI=26 should sustain even higher than 19.24deg/sec One thing to counter the F-14 in a F-16 is to pull infinite half loops (Immelmann turn) to the vertical. The lower T/W ratio of F-14 makes it to drop altitude earlier than F-16 (from 5:14 in your video)
  9. karasawa
    Block50 is only 1300lbs heavier than the block30, and it gets a bigger engine, so there should no be much of a difference.
  10. karasawa
    I think you forgot to remove external pylons? (even it is shown "empty", pylon is still included by default. You need to remove them manually) After 2.7.2 patch F-16 can out-rate fulcrums and flankers comfortably, without pylons of course.
  11. karasawa
    One thing to counter the F-14 in a F-16 is to pull infinite half loops (Immelmann turn) to the vertical. The lower T/W ratio of F-14 makes it to drop altitude earlier than F-16 (from 5:14):
  12. karasawa
    Since the pilot is not fit for high G, I strongly suggest doing 2C fight above 10000 feet. You still enjoy the sustained G advantage at high speed, but you won't be pulling 9G (neither do other jets).
  13. karasawa
    I think you don't know the fact that a real F-16-50 sustains higher turn rate than the F-14, according to the flight manual. What we are hoping to see is that the FM tweak finally shows the real life difference.
  14. karasawa
    Did you remove the pylons?
  15. karasawa
    Block 50 is not significantly heavier than Block30. The added weight is 1300lbs, and the thrust is also higher. After the 2.7.2 update the viper can out-rate some jets (especially the fulcrum) at low alt if you remove the pylons.
  16. karasawa
    If you are doing guns only, don't take pylons (which is included by default, even it's shown "empty"). Now F-16's performance is severely influenced by even empty pylons. Maintain 10000 feet+, Mach 0.85+ and do 2 circle. F-16 can out-rate Mig-29, F-14 and Sukhois comfortably at this altitude.
  17. karasawa
    10000ft_M042_sustained_G_26000lbs.trk Condition: 26000 lbs total weight, drag index = 50 (6 amraams), 10000 ft, mach=0.42 F-16C-50 should sustain 3.2G at this condition, however there is no way I can sustain this G load in DCS at this condition. I'm doing 2.9G mostly. Please see attached.
  18. karasawa
    Technically smaller aircraft is more sensitive to pylon weight and drag.
  19. karasawa
    With DI=50 the viper is M1.9 capable at higher altitude. I don't think that shrinks to M1.2 under 30K. Refer to HAF charts please.
  20. karasawa
    There are at least two sources showing the viper used to fly at 900 knots at sea level.
  21. karasawa
    It seems someone thinks the viper should self-destruct immediately once surpassing 800knots at sea level, right?
  22. karasawa
    Sure.
  23. karasawa
    Calculating the slope is much more difficult than the proposed method. In signal processing, calculating the time derivative is always prone to measurement noise. You can do the math and you will see the proposed approach is equivalent to the time derivative of kinematic energy/mass, and is expressed in terms that can be directly measured. specific energy = 0.5 * v^2 d/dt(specific energy) = v * a = v * longitudinal acceleration The mass does cancel out. specific kinematic energy = kinematic energy / m = 0.5 * m * v^2 / m = 0.5 * v^2 time derivative of specific kinematic energy = d/dt (0.5 * v^2) = v * a = v * longitudinal acceleration
  24. karasawa
    That is also a function of altitude. At around 3000m (10000 feet), the viper has its best sustained turn rate at Mach 0.9, which is slightly higher than that at sea level. I strongly recommend doing 2 circle fight at around 10000 feet because at this altitude the viper suffers less from blackout. You can easily outturn a jeff, a fulcrum, or a hornet in a 2C fight as long as you stick to its optimal Mach number. Example: at 10000 ft and correct speed, the viper sustains 1.2deg/sec higher than the fulcrum. You are free to test it in DCS 2.7
  25. karasawa
    We can confirm at around 500km/h the turn rate in F-16 DCS is about 15% lower than that in real life.
×
×
  • Create New...