Mover

I can't speak to that. I have no idea.

I didn't say "in DCS."

You could say that, but you'd be incorrect. The Hornet is not a rate fighter. Going 2C or uphill against an F-16 in a Hornet is a great way to die. ("Go up to blow up"). And it's been said many times (but is always worth repeating), but the paddle switch in the Hornet is NOT used in BFM. Sorry for the thread hijack, BIGNEWY, I'll stop.

If it could reach a higher G than the F-16 at the same speed, you're correct. Or if the F-16 is at a much higher speed at 9Gs. But the broad statement that an F/A-18 outrates an F-16 that I originally addressed is incorrect. I used the formula to demonstrate why, generally speaking. A caveat to that would be a Swiss Hornet which can also pull 9Gs with big motors, but here, we're talking about the variant available in DCS.

I posted the formula above. It is correct. Turn rate is independent of aircraft type. If the F-16 can pull 9Gs at a given airspeed and the Hornet can only pull 7.5 at the same speed, the Viper's turn rate will be higher.

Yes, the definition of sustained is P/S = 0 for a given airspeed/altitude. Simple turn rate calculations, however, don't require any fancy calculators or tables. The formula above works for any aircraft.

I wonder if you guys realize how painful you make this sometimes. Jet performance numbers (E-M diagrams) are classified at worst and FOUO at best. I have no desire to go to jail over a video game message board. The fact that you even asked is a foul. The unclassified formula I gave you is how turn rates work. It does not matter what aircraft. If you could make a 747 pull 9Gs, its instantaneous turn rate would out rate a Hornet. Rate and radius calculations are basic math problems, regardless of the aircraft (the formula is always the same). Aircraft performance is what determines Ps, max G, g-onset rate, speed, and AOA. Instantaneous turn rate is the highest rate an aircraft can generate at a given speed. Sustained turn rate is a function of specific power, which largely depends on thrust to weight, wing loading, drag, etc. Thus, do the math.

No.

It does have a high instantaneous turn rate. It does not have a higher instantaneous turn rate. I'm not sure what he means by instantaneous AOA advantage, but that's what he said. I do agree the Hornet has an AOA advantage. Whether the AOA rate is higher or not is valid for a one circle discussion, but less so when speaking of turn rates in a two circle fight. Do the math. Believe me. Or don't. Either way, your statement was incorrect.

If you read the article you posted, that's not what he says either. I'm referring to your instantaneous turn rate comment. Do the math. I think people get confused on what instantaneous AOA vs instantaneous turn rate vs sustained turn rate means. The first is not really relevant to your statement. The second two refer to Ps on the E-M diagram. The only way, mathematically, a Hornet is out rating a Viper is if the F-16 is in a two bag, TGP configuration and limited to 7.33Gs.

Ehhh, no. I won't get into numbers from the Em Diagram, but the first part of this statement is mathematically incorrect. To calculate turn rate: (degrees per second) = (Gradial x 1092)/KTAS

You don't even need a TGP on the jet to drop unguided bombs. The jet (should) uses the radar for Air to Ground ranging. You can drop in CCIP via a diving or level delivery.

Why not just make your own from your videos?

The first fight was one circle vertical. The second fight was out of plane two circle that eventually transitioned to one circle and then a BFM error by Trigger that gave SungHo a big opportunity. Sungho's own words (as quoted above) were that he knew a two circle fight wouldn't work against the Flanker. This is the perfect example of Dunning Kruger. There's nothing left to say. Congrats to Sungho and thanks to everyone for participating.

You either didn't watch the fights or have zero idea what "rate fight" even means. Or you're just trolling at this point. Watch the fights. Watch the interview with SungHo at the end. Try again.

:smilewink:

Because the intent of the tournament is to raise money for charity. I have nothing to prove. Whether or not you believe I'm a "good gamer" or a "beginner at DCS" is irrelevant.

:megalol: Okay. You guys are ridiculous. :thumbup:

I agree. But to be honest, it's hard to tell the difference between 7 and 8.. or 8 and 9. Ops limits are ops limits. There's a lot of whining going on here and quibbling. Everyone that has done or is doing this job for a living has said that we adhere to G-limits in real life. There really is no further discussion.

:lol: Real life > you hurt yourself and GLOC. DCS Life, anyone can (and does, ad nauseum) argue about silly things like this as an "expert." As I said above, breaking the jet is still an F-Kill.

I've tried it in DCS. Just like in the real jet, you have to really be doing poor BFM to be anywhere above 7 Gs most of the time. It's just not a high G fighter. It doesn't need to be. 7.5 to 8.0G over-G depends on whether there was an associated 811 MSP. DCS does not model this. The NATOPS limit is 7.5 Fly better. Yes, I eyeball the G-meter. It's in the HUD in the Hornet, so it's not that difficult. The T-38A has no HUD, so you have to look inside the cockpit. It's something you do in any jet with G-limits. It sounds like you guys are going too fast and not being very smooth on the controls. This IS realism. Even if you win in real life (reference the 12 G F-15 story), it's still considered an F-Kill (Firepower Kill) for you, since your jet is unusable after and must be inspected/repaired.

Thanks, Bozo!

One example does not a trend make. Nor does it indicate sound tactics.