Theodore42

Critical alt is when you are at 61 MP and 3000 RPM but going any higher would make you MP go down to 60. Ya prop pitch refers to RPMs. The P51 automatically governs the prop pitch though, so max RPMs in a Mustang is always going to give you the most power. In other aircraft without a governer you might have to decrease the prop pitch at high speed to keep the RPMs at best performance. Too high MP vs too low RPMs will damage the engine, so be careful! The manual has a bunch of safe engine settings but all you need are FT / 61MP and max continuous.

Airplanes that turn better than the Mustang at low altitudes are going to turn better than the Mustang at high altitudes. Mustang has a better supercharger, therefore mechanical energy advantage at high altitude. Mustang handles Mach better, therefore max speed advantage. Mustang has laminar wings, therefore superior retention of energy. None of these things help the Mustang turn better but if you put all 3 of them together you get the "boom and zoom" strategy I was trying to describe in my post.

The higher you go the less dense the ambient air becomes. MP stands for Manifold Pressure; pressure as in air density Notice that when the engine is off the MP is 29.92 inches, or whatever the ambient air pressure is where it's parked. The Supercharger blows air into your manifold to increase the MP above the ambient air density. The supercharger only has 2 speeds, so to maintain the MP you have to manually open the throttle as you climb out. The Mustang has an MP regulator that automatically keeps your MP "constant" (not really) Ok, so this is what happens as you climb out: Sea level at Full Throttle (FT) the MP is 61 and the MP regulator is limiting you from pressing it higher (unless you use WEP) As you climb, the ambient air pressure goes down and the MP regulator opens the throttle to keep the MP at 61 inches. CRITICAL ALTITUDE: FT but the MP regulator can't open up any more and you start losing MP. This is probably around 8,000ft. Above this altitude you are no longer producing max power... UNTIL the high blower kicks in! Specific Altitude (I think is what this is called): When you are FT at "max continuous" (46 MP & 2700 RPM). This might be around 10,000ft. NOTE: this is a different altitude than 46 MP & 3000 RPM Hi Blower: At around 17000 ft the high blower kicks in. So go back to the beginning and repeat: Climbing at FT and 61 MP: The MP regulator will again be able to keep your MP at 61 inches for several thousand feet, but eventually -- Critical Altitude: again, the MP regulator can't open up any more and you're going to start losing MP. Specific Altitude: MP 46 at 2700 RPM while FT 40,000ft is the ceiling for the Mustang and the MP is about 30 inches, so at 40,000ft the high blower makes the air pressure in the carburetor the same as it is on the ground, which is where we started The DCS manual for the Mustang is pretty complete imo, but you can find several authentic Mustang manuals - the engine in DCS is the V-1650-7 model

Check that that ball is centered in your turn indicator during your hi-G turn. It might be that you're pulling 6Gs, only sideways. The Mustang and especially the Jug need a lot of rudder inputs. Practice max G turns by flying at any altitude at corner speed (250-270mph). Do a slice and keep your nose low enough to sustain 6Gs and corner speed. You should be able to corkscrew down while keeping the ball centered, and Gs and corner speed sustained. This will teach you how much rudder to use in a turn. You don't want to do instantaneous turns like that in the Mustang however, as it is an energy fighter. I bought the Dora-9 after practicing dogfighting with the Mustang and that thing can point any direction it wants in the sky, at any time. It's ridiculous. I stopped trying to out-turn them in my Mustang after that. Yes, I made this mistake at first as well. It isn't "zoom-and-boom" but "boom-and-zoom." This difference is very important. The first and incorrect version implies the tactic is to accelerate very fast on your opponent ("zoom") and then "boom" him. The second version implies the correct tactic: attack your enemy and then zoom away from him (or his wingman if you killed him). The zooming away technique is where you can utilize one of the advantages of the Mustang: the laminar wings have relatively low drag at high speeds. After the "boom," sustain high speed as long as possible and pitch up a small amount. This will extend you away from your opponent while simultaneously making huge altitude gains on him because at high speeds you don't need to pitch up very high to climb at 6k fpm. The more time you spend sustaining high speeds in a shallow climb, the faster you'll gain energy on your opponent. If you manage to boom your opponent at low speeds, this is fine, but just zoom down to a happy Mustang speed and then sustain a shallow zoom upward. If you're escorting bombers then you'll always be able to zoom down on the enemy, but that isn't part of the "boom and zoom" tactic, it is more a part of the escort strategy. To practice THIS is really fun: make a new mission and drop a Mustang in at 40,000ft. Practice a dive accelerating to max mach (whenever your control surfaces start getting stiff and things start shaking). Then practice your "zoom" technique by going into a shallow climb and see how much altitude you can gain back. Repeat to the deck. This helps your high altitude dives (ie max speed in a dive = about 300mph indicated at 30,000ft and 400mph indicated at 20,000 ft.) Do this from 40,000 to the deck to learn the max dive speeds at all altitudes (VERY important for a warbird energy fighter!). Note that in other warbird forums they laugh at dumb Mustang pilots diving away from them because basically any warbird can out accelerate a Mustang in a dive. This is true. But anything that follows you to compressibility is going to have lost a few control surfaces about 50mph back. So controlled high speed dives are very advantageous, as is the climb out, as long as it's efficient. The most important maneuver for the Mustang and Jug to understand is probably the wingover. It is the most natural maneuver to execute at the end of a zoom tactic. It is simple: fly straight and level at cruise speed. Go into a climb. When you are going slow at the top of the maneuver, execute a 180 degree turn. These big, heavy airplanes will take the high alpha, turn it into a fast turn rate, and then dive back down heading the opposite direction, same altitude, same speed. It is a very efficient turn for big, heavy fighters. Practice these by getting back to the reverse course at the same altitude and speed as soon as possible. With some practice you can shave a lot of time off this maneuver. Doing so teaches a lot about maneuvering warbirds. Note that a Dora-9 would never do this though, he can turn around at cruising speed just fine. Now you can practice ending your zoom with a wingover to reengage. I bet anyone doing just a dozen wingovers in a practice session: Time your maneuver from cruising speed, climb to reduce speed, turn around, dive back down to the same altitude and speed. You won't think you're doing anything better but the times for the maneuver will get shorter and shorter. This isn't arbitrary; you are flying more and more efficiently. Even modern energy fighters require a lot of thinking to dogfight. Usually it is in the form of managing speed to sustain Gs. Warbird energy fighters must do every maneuver with the idea to sustain speed. These maneuvers in my post give advantages at the edge of the envelope. Unfortunately, if you execute a tactically perfect dogfight in a warbird but your technique is all wrong, you will come away thinking that the strategies are wrong. If you climb too fast in the zoom you won't sustain your advantage long enough and it will feel like you did nothing. If your wingovers are sloppy it will feel like you executed a perfect zoom for nothing. There is a lot of "flying" of warbirds that you don't have to do with modern aircraft.

You've read Shaw? You didn't even read the quote that I put right in front of you: "Sustained turn radius, however, is such a strong function of airspeed that the lowwing-loaded fighter nearly always has the advantage here, regardless of T/W." (Shaw 140) In other words, it doesn't matter how much advantage in thrust to weight ratio the F-16 has, you're not going to get a win against an angles fighter. That's why it's called an "angles fighter", as in angles off your tail. You're not going to win a vertical nose to tail with an angles fighter because he will use his instantaneous turn to skip the disadvantageous parts of the vertical loop and get to the parts he's good at (unless you're running him out of altitude). Also, for an F-16 to follow a MiG-15 into a vertical loop you would have to be so far to his cold side it wouldn't even make sense as a maneuver. As for the F-16's superior T/W, the engine has to have a high dynamic air pressure on the inlet to generate thrust, and when you're going under 250 indicated, it ain't there. The MiG-15 isn't a supersonic fighter and was designed to fly at lower speeds so it doesn't have that handicap. Also the F-16 has way more induced drag at lower speeds. At 15,000ft and 200kts, how long does it take for an F-16 to accelerate to 250, even at 0Gs (0 induced drag)? Do the same thing at 400kts and see how fast you get to 450. Don't blink. And how many Gs do you have to pull at 500kts to accelerate to 550 as slowly as you accelerated from 200 to 250? 4Gs at least? You think I'm saying the MiG-15 is more maneuverable? Go 500 and you can do what ever you want to a MiG. So when you go slow the MiG-15 DOES have a T/W advantage. And an induced drag advantage. He also has an instantaneous turn advantage, especially at low speeds. And a very small turn radius due to weight. In Chess, the pawn can only attack diagonally 1 square in front of him. The knight is a piece that can jump over other pieces and is very mobile. You're jumping your knight into the ONE SQUARE that a pawn can take you, and you're saying this is wrong because the knight is better than the pawn. Well, it is. And the F-16 is better than the MiG-15. Stop trying to fly his game. This last week I've spent maybe 3 or 4 hours flying the F-16 against the MiG-15 and reading Shaw (fly a round against a MiG, read Shaw, fly, read, fly, read, ...). That is a very small investment to practice a performing art. Yet I posted another video of me vs MiG-15s. I think anyone that watches both this video and the video I made from a week ago will realize that there has been a great improvement. This time I avoid giving the MiGs advantages and they just look like slow, maneuverable bugs ("gnats" or whatever they're called): BOOM! Roasted. Ok, then I'm deluding myself into improving against a broken UFO AI. Fine with me! But you're wrong. BOOM! Roasted.

Wrong, play vs them in a Sabre and see how OP the feel. Keep in mind in that match up the MiG-15 is the energy fighter. If you're flying against a MiG-15 AI in an F-16 and feel like you're losing, then you're doing it wrong. Wrong also, but I appreciate the theory. Read: Fighter Combat TACTICS AND MANEUVERING by Robert L. Shaw (c)1985 by the United States Naval Institute Annapolis, Maryland Chapter 4: One-versus-One Maneuvering, Dissimilar Aircraft p.139 "...the term low wing loaded is assumed to denote superior instantaneous turn performance and slower minimum speed." This is the Tomcat or the MiG-15 in a fight with the F-16. Verses the Sabre, the MiG-15 is the energy fighter, or T/W fighter (it's all relative) Basically everything I've been trying to articulate is in that quote. The confusing bit is that the MiG-15's advantages are everything the F-16s are, just at a much slower speed. Try outclimbing a MiG-15 at 250kts, energy being equal. See what happens. If you can even get your nose up, the F-16's massive AoA is going to create massive induced drag and that T/W ratio ain't useful for anything because you're flying into a massive wall of air. The MiG-15 has almost no induced drag from AoA at 250kts and is in it's natural environment as a high altitude interceptor. This is why everyone thinks the MiG-15 is a UFO and the AI is broken. because you're driving a race car around a go-cart track and you're surprised the go-cart is winning. Totally wrong, I wasn't going fast enough because at my apex I was going ridiculously slow, had trouble bringing it around causing me to go slower (speed AND turn rate wise), and had excessive AoA (induced drag) that the MiG wasn't experiencing all in the dive after, so I lost a dive in an F-16 vs a MiG-15 for real (not UFO territory). If I had pulled into the dive much sooner after going vertical it would have been better, but the MiG would have just reversed his dive into a climb and won a slow speed climb (under 250 kts.) The correct thing to do would have been gain more speed, not follow his vertical maneuver, position myself to get on his tail when he is low on energy after going vertical. And to WIN from that it has to be done as quickly as possible, because the MiG will just get up to his happy corner speed, which is relatively slow compared to the F-16, and rip a massive "instantaneous turn" (UFO style) out of my canopy. There are 25 pages of dissimilar aircraft BFM commentary in Shaw, and pretty much all my posts can be summed up in that one quote of his. But I'll do this all day because I'm getting something out of it

This appears to be a contradiction. I think you are saying the MiG-15 is designed to climb as fast as possible, so you shouldn't go vertical. That implies the MiG-15 has a TWR advantage over the F-16. I think you are also trying to say the F-16 gains speed much more quickly, so you should go to 440 knots, then trade speed down to 330 because your superior TWR would let you regain more quickly, resulting in an advantage. I don't think both of those statements can be true at the same time. An aircraft with superior TWR will generally win a vertical energy fight. This is precisely why the F-15 Eagle prefers vertical against most opponents. As for the TWR for the MiG and Viper, you know what, the MiG might even have the advantage when both aircraft have 15 minutes of fuel left. You are doing many academic tests and deductions. This is both admirable and valuable. Much more valuable than most people give credit for. But when you go to apply this knowledge, the wrong things happen (things you didn't deduce) and there is a tendency to chalk this up to the AI being broken or a UFO. Compounded by the fact that the AI WAS broken in this way FOR A DECADE but it has been resolved as of last year. Not perfect, but there are no UFOs in DCS anymore. In reality every maneuver is in context of the other fighter's energy state (as everyone knows) and the other fighter's capabilities at that energy state relative to your own. This is the point of flying an F-16 vs a MiG-15 as a "final boss." Use what you know, lose. UNDERSTAND what you know, win. I misspoke when I said going vertical against a MiG isn't helpful. The simplistic vertical maneuver meme that is associated with the F-16 is what I was referring to. Obviously MOST of the maneuvering in an F-16 should be done vertically. In my video the first maneuver we enter into is the vertical, I get above him, I get on his tail. Vicotry!!! Yet what happens next? We are at equal energy states and the MiG goes vertical. Not a problem! I just WON a vertical fight with him so I'm not afraid to go vertical. But what happens next is that I follow him into the vertical, the MiG uses his small turn radius at the apex to come back down fast and easy. I'm in an F-16, vertical, under corner speed, I can't bring my nose through the apex fast enough, so I'm getting slower and slower.... when I finally bring the nose down I can't accelerate because my AoA is so high. I didn't unload because I was trying to stay with him, probably a mistake. You can literally watch me lose the vertical starting at 1:05. I can FEEL my F-16 turn to slush, my speed is under 250kts, and I'm watching a MiG-15 own me because we started even on energy but he can out accelerate me easily when we're going so slowly. 1. The MiG accelerates FASTER than the Viper up to his corner speed 2. The Viper accelerates faster through corner speed and MUCH faster above corner speed! So in my video when I lose the vertical fight I was going less than corner speed and the MiG was going less as well. This means the MiG out accelerates the F-16 in this situation. Not a UFO. Just the reality of the matchup. Anyone interested in the differences can watch my video right at the beginning. The very first move is vertical and I win it and get on his tail. The very next move the MiG goes vertical, I follow him, and I lose on that maneuver. Watch my speed and guess about how even the MiG's energy is to me. Then evaluate the situation with those previous 2 rules. You're starting to understand !

I do this in my video at 5:45 but at the merge I got on his tail and he went into a climb at 250kts and defeated my F-16. If only I had been going a little faster at the merge..... Late last year ED fixed the AI logic to not be broken af. I jumped in the Sabre when I saw this thread to fly against the MiG-15 and check that it wasn't still broken. It flew against me in a manor that reflected what pilots reported so any imperfections in the AI's FM are moot to a modern jet fighter. The first video I posted to this thread was to show that the MiG-15 is relatively even to its contemporary, the Sabre. What is this looking like exactly...? Don't reverse on the MiG-15 during lead pursuit as that is an extending maneuver and you don't need to run away from a MiG-15. ED added the Ace AI losing sight of players so that's probably what's happening when you reverse on a MiG during lead pursuit. Likely a bug if he doesn't reengage, so if you see it again save a track and report it! What was the MiG's AOT (Angle Off Tail) to you after this maneuver? If you're pulling 9Gs while he's in a pursuit lead this should break it and put his AOT about 90 degrees due to the large amount of lead the MiG has to fly. Then go into a climb. If you blew all your speed the MiG will try to get into a rolling scissors with you, otherwise he will have to turn away and then YOU will be 90 AOT to HIM! Of course then he will just turn toward you and neutralize the position, which is better than him being behind you or you running away, which is where we started. What is the AI doing during this turn, is it holding a constant speed the whole time? I bet at the merge it has a lot less energy than you do, cuz he blew it all to neutralize your position. If you climb at the merge here, the MiG will just dive and get his energy back up to corner speed, and then you gained nothing. In a dogfight be more concerned with how many Gs you're pulling, can pull, and for how long. If you can get your AOT to 0 but will be going slow, DO IT, and then accelerate (in an F-16). Understanding what is good/bad for you and good/bad for your opponent is how you win. (and is what my previous post was about) Ya good question. The AI doesn't utilize the pitch override (Cobra Maneuver) AT ALL, whereas every human player on the planet utilizes it AS OFTEN AS POSSIBLE. Also, I feel like the modern jets are playing assuming the player has IR missiles. If you get into a dogfight with IR missiles the AI feels WAY smarter! They fly proper BFM now. I busted out Shaw and had a real learning experience against the MiG-15. For the modern fighters not so much, I just skim through the BFM chapter, review the figures of the maneuvers, and maybe look over some text concerning a situation I came across. Since I first flew against those MiG-15s I have been READING Shaw, deep, parts of it over and over again. The MiG busted out a freaking barrel roll attack on my . WTF, I've never seen a HUMAN player execute it so well (if at all). Oh, and in the rolling scissors? While I'm maneuvering at 270kts thinking I'm bleeding off his energy or something, I notice in the replay what he is doing: turn-> (unload) accelerate, accelerate, accelerate ->turn-> (unload) accelerate accelerate accelerate.... Which makes perfect sense because the MiG-15 has a relatively lower AOA at lower speeds. And the F-16 doesn't accelerate AT ALL while AOA is so high. He was probably sitting in his MiG flying with his knees and eating Commie-Os. It might be an obvious maneuver if I fly the Sabre against an F-16, but when I noticed the MiG doing that to me, I was surprised to say the least. btw, that isn't a variation of scissors discussed in Shaw. How did it even get programed into the AI? How did it know to do it to me in an F-16 and not in a Sabre? Oh well who cares. I've learned it now so HA HA Lastly: You should be able to get behind and kill a MiG-15 in an F-16 without the MiG ever standing a chance. The MiG pilot would welcome a head to head shot because that's a 50%-50% chance to win vs an aircraft 60 years newer. My previous post describes how to do that but to boil it down: Going vertical against a MiG-15 isn't helpful because it is a high altitude interceptor, DESIGNED to climb as fast as possible, and at a relatively low speed Use 8Gs and acceleration to win Don't let the MiG maneuver against you when he can pull more Gs than you can (probably under around 270-300kts) Blow through your corner speed (from 440 to 330kts) pulling Gs to get an advantage. Flying to a sustained turn rate isn't helpful, but flying to a sustained G is.

The F-16 might have a better turn rate than the MiG in most situations.... maybe. 1. BUT, as you say, it is a "TWO-circle"... with two radii... and the MiG-15's radius is MUCH smaller. It's even smaller than its contemporary, the Sabre. 2. Also the F-16 turns to slush under 300kts... and especially under 250. The MiG can be WELL under his corner speed and still pull his nose around on you if he really wants to. When you merge with a MiG-15 be going RIGHT at the bottom of corner speed, 330kts. Keep that 330 all the way through. This keeps your turn radius as small as possible. The MiG will do the same thing, but when he sees your guns bearing down on him, he will stop caring about corner speed and just pull through to neutralize the position. 3. Due to the MiG's relative lack of punishment while maneuvering slowly, flying a perfect corner speed turn in an F-16 vs a MiG-15 ain't gonna get ya no obvious advantages. He can, and will, just pull his MiG around on you whenever you are flying against him like he is a giant modern fighter with 2 engines and afterburners glowing. THEREFORE, to beat the MiG, you have to follow up this maneuver with a plan to exploit your advantages against the fact that you just made him blow all his energy. The MiG-15 can get on your tail as well. Even though the F-16 turns faster, it has to go faster. So the F-16's turn radius is much larger than the MiG's. But the MiG can just do some lead pursuit and stay with you. By pulling lead the MiG-15 is keeping up with your greater speed with a smaller radius- taking the shorter way around the circle. 1. When the MiG starts pulling lead on you (to stay on your tail he MUST lead a LOT), be going 440kts+. 2. 8Gs is the solution! Don't worry about turn rates or radii, think ONLY about pulling 8Gs to get on/away from him. Pull 8Gs from 440kts down to whatever speed the FLCS stops giving you 8Gs (probably around 330kts). Lose speed at a rate that disappears the MiG behind you at 330kts. The geometry of this maneuver is as follows (and how to exploit the MiG-15's tiny turn radius in general is as follows): 4. The MiG-15 can't pull 8Gs. When you pull 8Gs you are gaining an advantage. As you lose speed you are decreasing your turn radius, further negating his advantage. 8Gs + shrinking turn radius = MiG-15 loss. You should come out of this maneuver at corner speed or above, and with the MiG falling well behind you in the turn. He will be close and slow and this is the time to exploit the F-16's massive acceleration to gain an advantage. THEREFORE, it is all about the Gs. Whoever can pull more Gs wins. How many Gs can an F-16 pull at 250kts? I dunno, but the MiG-15 can pull more. That's fundamentally what the turn radius advantage / disadvantage boils down to. If you are pulling 8Gs with this understanding then you are negating his turn radius advantage. How sharp is this turn in the Sabre that isn't losing speed? I can lose speed turning in a Sabre! If there are several tight turns on this course then the Korea Era fighters will do great. They: 1. Weigh almost nothing 2. Have a relatively small % of weight dedicated to fuel 3. don't have any radar or afterburner weight 4. Have no design considerations for supersonic flight (so they're more efficient at subsonic speeds) Pretty much as maneuverable as the F-16 is ABOVE corner speeds, the Korea Era fighters do that well BELOW corner speeds. Both by design! Yeah I've noticed the modern fighters are much easier as well. As long as you keep the energy even it feels like you can do any stupid thing and end up all right. I wonder if this is because they're assuming an IR missile dogfight? As for the vertical memes, both Razor's video and mine at 4:30 depict Fighter Combat TACTICS AND MANEUVERING by Robert L. Shaw p.88 Figure 2-19 "Vertical versus Horizontal Maneuvering" Hilariously, at 5:45 in my video, RIGHT AFTER I mocked the audience for getting memed on by fighter pilots, I did the same vertical maneuver and merged in the vertical head to head and IMMEDIATLY got on his tail! I couldn't believe it, if I had been going 50 kts faster it would have been a kill. That's the exception to the rule I guess

Yes but for that you would have to use a human player, as Razor said, since the ace AI won't get into losing engagements. In any strategic fight between dissimilar opponents (dogfights, MOBAs, even chess) victory is dependent on the exploitation of imbalances. I say, do any dumb thing in the Viper as long as you can undo it (like blow all your speed in an 8G turn and then get it back with acceleration). When I flew against them in the Sabre they seemed comparable but I dunno for sure. It looks to me like he could have shot you just as easily as you shot him. Of course, you shot him and he didn't shoot you, which is what matters

Are you sure you're thinking about the F-16 and not... every other fighter? Because the F-16 is famous for this behavior.

Whaaa?? You must just be deflecting too slowly. Try setting your saturation to 10% and see how that feels.

Yes here you go. Ace AI MiG-15 vs F-16 I had to study my BFM to get this because the Korea Era fighters are so maneuverable. You MUST fly proper BFM to defeat them, but if you do, then you will be rewarded. And never are my mistakes more obvious than when flying against a MiG-15. This makes studying BFM fast and easy! I almost wonder if the AI for later eras are assuming it is an IR dogfight? Or if there is something different about later era fighters that makes them less punishing in BFM. In short, this is the most fun I've had fighting an AI, ever, in any game. I've been posting videos of me dogfighting 2 or 4 hostile AIs because I was looking for a challenge. But this is the best Edit: Okay I should give some commentary on what to do: 1. You have to stay at the low end of corner speed, 330kts, to keep with him. Otherwise his turn radius is too small. Also this is the only way to run him out of energy. If you do normal F-16 things he will always be at corner speed and always be able to get inside of whatever normal F-16 things you're doing. 2. Use advantages: 8Gs and acceleration. Staying at 330kts is fine and all but it isn't going to get you an advantage. Fortunately the F-16 can accelerate from 330kts to 450kts in a few seconds. Doing this at the right time can give an advantage. Pulling 8Gs when he is on your tail will get him off your tail. Also, if you manage to be going 450kts in the right place, you can pull 8G+ down to 330kts and get an advantage. And look really cool while doing it. 3. The vertical is useless. The F-16 is a race car going around the Indy 500 and the MiG-15 is a go-cart going around a go-cart track. There needs to be a follow up maneuver after whatever you do in the vertical. As I said earlier, when you get a bunch of energy on the MiG-15 but the MiG is at corner speed.... He is just going to whip his light little low-turn-radius fighter around on you. In my experience the AI didn't mess with the vertical unless he could use it to get an advantage on me (while I was doing something stupid). If you're better than me maybe to can figure something out. Anyway, this MiG-15 AI has taught me more about BFM than any other, and I STILL haven't beaten it. (Although I have had opportunities that I was unable to execute on.) Don't feel like you're doing something wrong if you can't get this guy. If you're playing against something less than ACE AI then you should be able to get a few opportunities doing what I've listed above. But as for the Ace AI, you really have to know what you're doing much more than you do against any modern jet fighter. Crazy fun though.

Always be moving it. If you get SUPER good at DCS you can get it to stick without moving it for maybe 10 or 15 seconds at a time but irl this is impossible. You should always be adjusting the throttle by as tiny an amount as you can perceive the thrust being outputted.... if that makes sense.. lol

The green in the temperature gauges is for non combat missions only. This is to increase the life of the engine. You don't have to START to worry about temps until they're in the red. When people blow their engines using WEP they are overheating the AFTERCOOLER which does not have a temperature gauge.

First of all there is some talk about the handling of the Viper in landing configuration so the "boat" aspect during landing may still be a WIP. F-16 is different than everything else. You don't need to trim it for landing or AAR. The aircraft will auto-trim to 1G always. Try landing the F-16 exactly how you do the Hornet but don't touch the trim. What it should feel like is that the F-16 is kind of "laggy" or slow to respond to pitch inputs. This is because the auto-trim is putting you back to 1G after every speed change. In the Hornet, if you do a Split-S at 6Gs and come out of it, you will notice the nose will immediately pitch back down to the horizon in the AoA that you trimmed her. When you come out of a Split S in an F-16, the gun cross will stay in pretty much the same place and the Flight Path Marker (Velocity Vector on the Hornet) will move up to the gun cross. After you let go of the control stick you can watch the G indicator go from probably 3Gs (or more) to 1G over the course of several seconds. It might even float between 1.5G to 1G for ANOTHER few seconds. This is to decrease the workload of the pilot which is why you don't notice that the F-16 is doing it until it starts interfering with your Hornet flying techniques. Air Force does their AAR at 300kts so slow speed handling shouldn't be an issue. The auto-trim makes AAR a little different, but you should be able to get the feel of it with a little practice now that you know what's going on... BUT if you REALLY want to read what's going on in the most VERBOSE way possible, I will indulge: (nobody needs this level of understanding to AAR a Viper; this is just for fun) The F-16 auto-trims to 1G but this takes an amount of time. Therefore you have to anticipate what the trim is going to do. Try this exercise: Fly straight and level and at a constant speed of 200-300kts: the aircraft has trimmed itself for 1G. Increase the throttle ONLY. As the engine spools up the FPM will start moving up off the horizon. As speed increases the AoA decreases. A few seconds later the F-16 has auto-trimmed to 1G. When your speed becomes stable the AoA is stable. The pitch has been stable since the start of the maneuver, but now you are in a climb. Therefore, to ACCELLERATE straight and level, you're going to have to pitch forward to keep the FPM on the horizon. Now fly straight and level again. This time leave the throttle alone and pitch up a few degrees. The pitch will stay stuck and the FPM will slowly find its way up as the Viper auto-trims to 1G. This is all normal and expected. EXCEPT you didn't add any power... so now your aircraft is slowing down. The pitch will stay stuck to where you put it but the FPM will meander back down toward the horizon as you lose speed. THEREFORE, to AAR in the Viper, you have to know: 1 Increase power and pitch forward to move up and move forward 2 Decrease power and pitch back to move down and move backward This is very easy calculus for the human brain to intuit, but since you're used to consciously flying and trimming to a tanker in a Hornet, it takes some time to get used to. If you fly the F-16 a lot and then go back to the Hornet you'll find these F-16 quirks become F-16 perks.

Yes I am from Texas. In fact, just today I chased a herd of sheep in a 4-wheeler. DNA 6023F is the unclassified Defense Nuclear Agency report on Operation Buster-Jangle, a well known Atomic test project. The report is bigger than the file size limit so I can't upload it here BUT just find it online to read all kinds of IRL stuff about special operations. p.18 List of Abbreviations and Acronyms includes: SWC - Special Weapons Command p.23, 24 A map of the Nevada Proving Ground Showing Ground Zeros for Operation Buster-Jangle. I used this to give myself a tour in DCS! p.31 Test Organization/Exercises Desert Rock I, II, and III Structure Within Federal Government: POTUS -> Defense Sec -> Joint Chiefs -> Commanding General, Special Weapons Command -> SWC Special Projects Officer p.35 Test Director's Organization chain of command shows which units were provided by SWC, including Weather Unit, Special Phenomena Unit (IRL Fox Mulder stuff obviously), Strike Plane Unit, Military Support Plane Unit. p.104 Operation Jangle Project 7.2 "Seismic Waves from A-Bombs Detonated Over a Land Mass" included participation from the 1009th Special Weapons Squadron. p.107 SWC Mission Support at Operation Buster-Jangle is a chart of all 7 shots and which missions SWC participated in (pretty much all of them) p.124 SWC responsibilities for radiological safety at Indian Springs AFB and Kirtland AFB. I was researching this because I was trying to think of how to create a campaign in DCS for something like Special Weapons Command. Maybe make it a little more like a story with an operative handling you and the challenges would be more technical instead of combat in nature. I moved over to more of a Joint Intelligence Operations theme and came up with things like: expedited startup (You must leave very abruptly); Out of limit Crosswind / short field / IMC landings; Following vehicles / troops without triggering them noticing; following multiple targets to try to logically figure out which is the agent and which are the assets / civilians; set up a backstop for a friendly spy / test a backstop for a possible enemy spy; take a picture of the right thing / right place / right time for TECHINT; BUT anything too creative with the loadout would require modding which I really can't do. I got busy, but I might be able to work on it now, but if anyone wants to use any of these ideas, just let me know when I can buy the campaign So to end on topic, ya, I'm in favor of having the option to do weird things to airplanes in DCS. ED has set DCS up as quite the sand box. The more ED fills in the eras of the aircraft and theaters of war, the there will be one aircraft with different capabilities in 2 eras. People that want 1 era are going to want one set of regulations for their loadout and the people that want to fly the aircraft in a different era are going to want another. Currently ED is dealing with this by allowing multiple variants of the same aircraft (ex P-51 and F-14). And the Warthog gets re-winged every 30 years so it can use new equipment and ED just released the A-10C II But we still have many different air forces that use different rules in their loadouts. Wouldn't being able to select loadout regulations solve the HARM problem as well? Seems like you should be able to do anything that's been done with an aircraft as long as its clear which the weird regulations are and which are the "default" regulations. And I want to make a campaign where you are attached to Special Weapons Command and have to do weird testing at the Nevada Proving Grounds. On the other hand, I'm annoyed when I see F-35 mods for DCS in my youtube feed. I wonder how I would feel seeing an F-16 flying with 13 CBUs...

Sunlight or a reflection is going to seem like the camera is skipping around. I've had my clip loose and it made the screen bounce, is that kinda what you're saying? Also if you have the "smoothness" turned up a lot there will be a delay between your motions and the movement inputs in game which will feel really laggy. (I think my smoothness is at 4) It might also just take a while to get used to using it. At first I often found my head facing once side of the screen but my eyeballs looking at the other side. Gotta break the habit of looking with your eyeballs and only move your head.

ED updated the AI late last year and imo it's exactly correct as far as energy and maneuverability. The AI flying modern jets seems to be too efficiency minded (not aggressive enough) and too willing to accept a stalemate (that "infinite" vertical loop they'll take you in when you get on their tail). After reading your post I decided to jump in a sabre and see how a couple of the MiG-15 "Ace" AI was. And it is terrifying LOL AFTER flying against the MiG15 in a Sabre I DEFINATLY understand the issues you were likely having against a MiG 15 in an F-16. But at no point did I feel the AI wasn't representing the capabilities of the MiG-15: when I thought I should have energy on them I did; when I didn't, I didn't. What is the solution? The biggest and probably only advantage the MiG 15 has over the F-16 is weight. Yes, the F-16 has the best thrust to weight ratio in the universe. Yes it is the lightest of all the modern jet fighters. Yet it still weighs 20,000 lbs empty! The MiG-15 is 8,000 lbs empty. Briefly imagine making a tiny airframe out of aluminum foil. When you toss it, it does a loop. Then, if you were to make another airframe that weighed twice as much as the first, even if you put in improvements that you learned while making the first, the heavier airframe is going to be less maneuverable when you toss it into a loop; it just is. What this means is that all things being equal, the MiG-15 is more maneuverable. Of course, all things are not equal and that extra 10,000lbs in an F-16 gets a lot of advantages. IMO I wouldn't try to use the F-16's thrust to weight ratio to win: The MiG's powerplant can keep him at 300kts indicated and at that speed a MiG in front of your canopy will have no problem maneuvering behind your canopy. I think the trick would be to use the F-16's speed and acceleration. Use your greater speed to circle at a distance and see if you can sac your speed to trap him into a lower energy state. Once you do that you should be able to use your acceleration to maneuver for a kill faster than he can regain his speed to exploit his light airframe. I also think tactically you might be able to get advantages deploying speed brakes. That's my theory anyway. I'm gonna try it this weekend and I'll post if I find anything insightful.

Tankers will orbit or do a track pattern during refueling and they enter into a slight bank to do change direction. You should be able to keep your wings level with the tanker and just add a little throttle to keep connected. If you're trying to learn without the tanker moving around on you, then just edit the tanker's waypoints to fly in a straight line across the map. But the hardest part about staying with a tanker when it turns like that is to convince yourself it's as easy as it is

Yes. This is what you would be going for in DCS: The F-16 can't produce enough lift with its rudder alone to perform a perfectly level Knife-Edge Pass. To overcome this, the pilot must pass the 90 degree mark and then pitch forward to maintain level flight. Also note that the FPM is not visible in the HUD during the maneuver. The pilot must maintain level flight with the Vertical Velocity Indicator, or VVI tape (to the right of the artificial horizon on the instrument panel). In other words, the pilot must memorize the correct inputs and then use The Force . Although the manual says to do the knife edge at 90 degrees: 5.20.1. Maneuver Description: Enter the 1,500’ show line at 500 feet AGL and 425 knots. At 4,000 feet prior to show center, raise the nose to five to seven degrees, establish a climb, and apply stick pressure to roll 90 degrees toward the crowd. Hold this attitude until 4,000 feet past show center. Use top rudder to hold the nose above the horizon and forward stick pressure to keep the aircraft on the show line. To complete the maneuver, unload, roll wingslevel, and perform a repositioning maneuver.

Nah, I mean way back in the early 2000s was when I was a teenager and this was an OP on the forums of the first serious study sim of an F-16. Just funny to see this topic come up again. For the record, DCS F-16 is much better :) BTW I had a lot of fun following the descriptions of the maneuvers in the manual. To experience the same effects described in an actual demo manual :thumbup:

Since this thread seems to have been combined and most people are talking about NWS: NWS too sensitive. ED BAAAAAD. Fix, ED! Continuing: Of course 2 engines is better at dealing with induced drag. The doubling in engines doubles the thrust but doesn't double the drag (although it increases it). Also weight is a factor at all times regardless of speed. If the F-16 is light enough that it doesn't need a high AoA at high speeds to generate lift, then that is its advantage. But that wouldn't come into play at low (high AOA) speeds. But that is why an F-16 can pull 8Gs at 450kts and then be going 500kts and then 550kts, all at 8Gs in about 5 seconds. Can't do that in an F-15. Because the F-16 has very low induced drag at higher speeds (partly due to its weight as you mentioned) so it is less affected by the amount of AoA required to generate lift and can accelerate faster. But an F-15 can fly circles around an F-16 at low speeds, even adhering to a 28 degree limit and even considering the DCS F-15 is about 20 years older than the DCS F-16.

This is an old post. I remember reading this OP when I was a teenager... in a certain old Falcon game... Hey I did a pretty accurate video of a solo AF Demo: Knife edge is at about 10:35 but you're not gonna get perfectly lvl flight. Demo pilots usually either do it with the wings perfectly vertically or sometimes with an angle (110 degrees bank angle) to get the aircraft perfectly lvl. In my demo I kind of combined the 2 techniques. But the idea is that you go past 90 degrees to use forward pitch to undo the loss in attitude. (you can see my inputs on this matter) But I had no problems doing all the maneauvers as described in the USAF AFI 11-246 ...Maybe I had some problems doing them right, but....

More engines means the drag an F-15 experiences at high AOA is going to much more manageable than an aircraft with only 1 engine in a high AOA situation. That would be the reason for the difference in FLCS you mentioned earlier.