SinusoidDelta

I have a feeling I'll regret posting this...

Check the -220 Appendix B figure B4-2. Climbing to 10,000 ft doesn't use enough fuel to drain the externals, not even close. Unless I'm interpreting the chart wrong.

I'm assuming thats because they don't take off fully fueled?

25,000 meters? You can't be serious. I don't think you could even zoom climb to 80kft with 3 bags and you could never do it with full fuel as you have to burn fuel to fly. I don't know if "maneuvers like hell" is a technical term but let's not go down this path. Make points with data and it will speak for itself. I've done quite a few tests and while I've found inaccuracies, none are of the severity you are claiming.

Yes I was implying CAS was correcting the issue for you. Commanded roll was 0 so it applied differential stabilator to maintain a zero roll rate. F-15 is not FBW, it's hydraulically boosted augmented controls. At high air speeds it would cause some asymmetry.

It sounds to me like CAS was doing its job then.

I was just surprised seeing in Tacview how the missile hit his underside dead center at Mach 2 and he was able to keep on flying.

I had 2 kills (TwinScroll). Spade and Crow. The export in my Tacview has them registered. I also had a direct hit on Octuplefire but he seemed undamaged although damage registered in the export log.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/da1ff08igzrq7s5/Tacview-20160118-032715-DCS.acmi?dl=0 Haven't watched much of it but it appears to be in tact. The replay was all done at 1.0x time.

Replaying from my track now (I'm TwinScroll). I'll upload to Dropbox within an hour or two.

AFAIK they never made it into USAF Eagles, only exports. And the 220's and 229's are used in f-16's.

Your acmi seems to be ok for me. Is everyone using the same version of Tacview?

Max throttle is correct at 96% RPM. Idle rpm is correct and should be 65%-66%, on the ground and in the air. IRL between mach 0.8-1.4 idle was increased to MIL 79-80% to avoid compressor stalls. The ground thrust at idle is low according to a few sources but that's another discussion. I'm sure you know thrust isn't instantaneous and it will take time to get that speed back up. The F-15 is a slippery bird with a lot of mass, bring the nose up and it will decelerate quickly.

Being that most fighters climb best subsonic, I think transonic drag would impact climb performance greatly.

The f100-pw-229 engine. The highest thrust engine put into an eagle, no vMax 'feature', much improved spool response, 11 afterburner stages and the bad ass blue shock diamonds below:

That's kind of a critical variable to do without... Where did you read that?

Just a wild guess about the canopy, probably unlikely. It seems like the 800 knot limit was in response to a fatal compatibility flight profile test [ame=http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/ExecSum2002/F-15C_GulfofMexico_30Apr02.pdf]Accident Investgation Report here[/ame] The left vertical stabilizer delaminated and a large section of the front leading edge broke off at 780kts@ 24,000 ft. The pilot initiated ejection but had no chance of surviving... Some more applicable information I've found:

Which control surfaces will detach from the jet in level flight? Has this ever happened in operation? I think the canopy would unlatch before the ailerons detatched. NASA hit 2.7 with F100's. We should be able to hit Mach 2.2 at 37kft, pitch up and Mach should keep increasing while climbing to 50kft. I can't get that to happen in DCS which is why I had to dive to 34kft

That isn't an optimal method for minimum time to climb in the eagle or any jet for that matter. Regardless, the mirage climbs like a bat out of hell in DCS. My gut tells me it's too fast but I can't find any documentation to back that up. Does anyone know where to find that data?

Make sure to put a fuse in line if you are powering from your PC USB ports.

Don't take it too personal. I think most agree with you, it sounds very appealing. A technical solution to do it just doesn't exist for us. I was thinking maybe in the eagle, illuminating the target with flood after launching a sparrow. The missile determines the target reflected radar signal by sampling rear facing wave guides. If they aren't from the launching aircraft or the target is illuminated by more than one radar, it'd probably be unable to resolve the target at all.

I'm sure this tactic would be beneficial in certain circumstances. Unfortunately it can't be done in DCS, so it's irrelevant.

:D Great post!

Should have 1.5 safety margin. A risk? Yes. Instant death, probably not.

Just fooling around, it isn't a hard limit at 2.606 but I can't get much faster. Also the dynamic weather in the MP server was completely insane. The nose was yawing all over the place above mach 1.6 yet the slip indicator didn't budge. Either I don't understand the concept of side slip or the HDI isn't being honest. Regardless I'm sure I could go faster with ideal conditions.