Hummingbird

Well this was my final estimation: So I was pretty dang close I'd say. Also 1.5 DPS is definitely not negligable, that translates into quite some angles after a couple of turns. Hence why we care about so much about 0.1 G.

If the aircraft doesn't follow the charts then it's obviously not accurate performance wise. A pilot is human like everyone else, and hence he won't know the exact performance at every single knot and foot, that's what the EM charts are there for. The FM is currently off, and HB knows this and has acknowledged it, so let's not make this into something it isn't.

and still does...

Also do the test again after Dec 16th where the a/c performance fix hits.

A fix is on the way

Thanks creason

Perhaps I don't, I only know what I can read in the NATOPS manual where the CADC schedule for the maneuver flaps/slats is illustrated: It says they don't deploy beyond 0.58 mach at SL, an envelope which ofcourse extends further the higher you go due to the thinnening air, which in turn also lowers the lift curve and reduces the amount of available G. In other words all I was saying was that 8.2 G's in a Cat with maneuver flaps/slats out indicates a strong pull - and the resulting flap damage could be due to a combination of fatigue and the G's being assymetrically applied.

The F14 was bench tested to 13.3 G's, and the wings still held. Heck 12.5 G's have been pulled by aircraft in service with zero signs of airframe damage. HB knows all this as well, so you don't need to worry about the wings coming off your cat. At such G's you should be worried about breaking your electronics first, as they break somewhere above 11.5 G IIRC - which HB actually models.

I do think the maneuver slats/flaps jamming was an exceedingly rare thing though, considering the speed/AoA range where they would at all be deployed. First time I've ever heard of it, but I guess it would be possible at very low alt. So I'm quite happy you didn't decide to model that, as I think Victory's incident was likely helped along by long term fatigue (top gun birds are afterall punished a lot) and was a very rare exception.

8.2 G's below 0.58 mach (maneuver flap/slat envelope), damn that was some yank :D

Correct, and yes I was above the AoA necessary throughout :)

G's over 7.5 were pulled many times, and the aircraft had no problems with that, the airplane possessing the same ultimate load limit as the F-15, and was tested even further. But using full flaps was for landing only, using it during heavy maneuvering was playing dice with the aircraft. So really, just leave the aux flaps to when you're landing.

Aux flaps at 7.5 G?? Yeah... no. Having wings & maneuver devices in auto is all you need to be most effective in the F-14. This aux flap exploit simply wasn't used at the speeds & G's you guys are claiming, esp. since it wouldn't be needed at all in order to beat the other US fighters in mock fights. At the speeds where aux flaps are viable (225 kts and below), the F-14 is already vastly better in auto than the F-15 or F-16, both of which don't like going that slow.

Yeah hopefully you can squeeze it in for the semi regular wednesday update. Also please have a look at the CADC schedule for the maneuver slats/flaps, as currently they don't deploy in the 0-0.58 mach range as they should, but instead only 0-0.50 mach.

@IronMike Any rough idea when we might be getting the performance fix?

No, it actually matches them very precisely. Only at 0.3 mach does the DCS F-15 minutely overperform achieving 2.7 instead of 2.6 G @ SL under the 41,000 lbs 4x4 condition. ED's F-15 is very accurate performance wise, and so was HB's F-14 before this recent patch - but it's being fixed, so no worries.

Well I mean that depends on wether you're slowing down or speedin up to that mach number ;) In short the scenario I was trying to get across was a hard max rate turn starting at a higher speed, say 0.7 mach, that eventually slowed you down to 0.58 mach where the slats/flaps should then start to gradually deploy. That's how I mainly tested it, i.e. initiating a turn that can't be sustained from 0.7 mach until speed bleeds to the point where the maneuver devices deploy. So in short, yes the maneuver slats/flaps need to deploy between 0-0.58 mach, whilst ingame they are currently only deployed from 0-0.50 mach.

Before we get more OT with people desperate to keep the flap exploit, here's the real life turn performance of the F-14 & F-15 compared at 5 kft & 10 kft, and finally the F-15 at SL and how you should expect the F-14 to compare there: F-14B/D vs F-15C sustainable load factor (G vs Mach), same load out (4xAIM9 + 4xAIM7 & ~55% fuel), ICAO Std. day. F-14 = 55,620 lbs F-15 = 41,000 lbs @ 5,000 ft M 0.3 = 2.35 vs 2.15 (+0.20 to F-14) M 0.4 = 3.60 vs 3.05 (+0.55 to F-14) M 0.5 = 4.80 vs 4.05 (+0.75 to F-14) M 0.6 = 5.70 vs 5.10 (+0.60 to F-14) M 0.7 = 6.40 vs 6.30 (+0.10 to F-14) M 0.8 = 7.00 vs 7.50 (+0.50 to F-15) @ 10,000 ft M 0.3 = 1.95 vs 1.80 (+0.15 to F-14) M 0.4 = 2.90 vs 2.60 (+0.30 to F-14) M 0.5 = 4.10 vs 3.40 (+0.60 to F-14) M 0.6 = 5.00 vs 4.30 (+0.70 to F-14) M 0.7 = 5.50 vs 5.25 (+0.25 to F-14) M 0.8 = 6.00 vs 6.40 (+0.40 to F-15) ________________________ Expected F-14 perf vs RL F-15 perf @ Sea Level, based on the real life 5 kft & 10 kft figures above M 0.3 = 2.85-2.90 vs 2.60 (+0.35-0.40 to F-14) M 0.4 = 4.25-4.30 vs 3.65 (+0.60-0.65 to F-14) M 0.5 = 5.65-5.70 vs 4.80 (+0.85-0.90 to F-14) M 0.6 = 6.50-6.55 vs 6.00 (+0.50-0.55 to F-14) M 0.7 = 7.40-7.45 vs 7.40 (~equal) M 0.8 = 8.20-8.25 vs 8.80 (+0.55-0.55 to F-15) In short the bolded figures to the left in the last list is what we should expect the F-14 to be capable of achieving at SL at a weight of 55,620 lbs carrying 4x AIM9's + 4x AIM-7's. Source(s): The original F-14 & F-15 performance manuals.

Just because the airframe can take that many G's in certain configurations, doesn't mean that the aux flaps can. Keep in mind that in order to hit 10+ G's you have to be going mightily fast, way faster than any speed reasonable for applying flaps. Even maneuver flaps didn't deploy past 0.58 mach at SL. You guys are way to dependant on using aux flaps at speeds where the real pilots quite simply wouldn't. In other words, using auxilliary flaps above 275 kts just wasn't done.

Right, it wasn't until now that I noticed it, but they don't come out until 0.5 mach when it should be 0.58 according to the manual. As for buffeting, it feels less atm, maybe because you can sustain less AoA due to a lack of thrust.

Flight model updates is what I'm waiting for, all these new weapons systems etc I couldn't care less about so long as the aircraft isn't performing as it should. STR below 0.45 M is still way too low, whilst ITR is too low in several regions and G onset rate is painfully slow.

Copy that, thanks.

Good to hear, it was far to easy to abuse this earlier. That said are the torque tubes G limited or speed limited? Had a discussion yesterday with a fellow flier and he recalls NATOPS talking about a 2.5 G limit for the auxilliary flaps.

Yes, every condition was exactly as on the charts and I later did it at both alts, and it's significantly underperforming at both SL and 5 kft. It appears HB have fixed it internally though, so now we just gotta hope for a quick patch.

The cat is currently underperforming, and in some regimes substantially so, there is no doubt about it. This is based on directly comparing ingame performance with the actual EM charts for the real life aircraft.