maxsin72

I just said the same thing, the reason i wrote that SME could give us more info is just because, thanks to their knowledge, we are able to know what is not on charts. And it would be really interesting what they know about the tomcat's capability shown i the video. In the video it is also possibile to see Snort using glove vanes.

Perhaps SMEs could give us some more info.

Thanks for your opinion. But i think there is another strange thing: i always thought that F14 has max inst turn rate with wings swept forward but Snort is doing that with wings completely swept back.

i know perfectly what you said and i have put it between "", so don't misunderstand me

The point is, as you said, " that the F-14 is capable of some impressive maneuvres" and also that some of this performance are not on NATOPS charts.So, basing the FM only on NATOPS charts, is not completely realistic and could be limiting.

I've done an experiment merging the normal clip with reversed clip and, in 10 sec, i can see an almost 360 deg turn, maybe 340 deg: 340/10= 34 deg/sec, please see the attachment. But i have also to say that the highest instant turn rate is in the first 2 sec and i think it is more than 34 deg/sec. 1ok_mkinn09x_h4XO.mp4

Looking at the video at 0,25 x speed, between sec. 6,5 and sec. 7,5 i think he turns more than 40 deg., maybe i'm wrong but i see that.

Am i wrong or in the attached video Snort is performing an instant turn rate of 40 deg/sec or more? Please look in slow motion starting from 0:00:06 to 0:00:09, i think it's really incredible and there is no NATOPS chart who report this performance.

Clean configuration of course, we need only to understand which could be the drag of pylons. Anyway the fact is that now F14 hit a wall at mach 2.2, also diving at full afterburner does not helps. And anyway both of us could be right. Only SME could have the knowledge, the best option would be for HB to contact the test pilot, if possible of course.

As i thought, you completely miss the point. It's obvious the F14 reached such that speed in favourable conditions as it's also obvious that at that speed, for example, heat on the canopy could be a big problem. But "shouldn't" does not means it's impossible. The aircraft shouldn't pull more then 7.5 G, more recently 6.5G, but it does not means nobody pulled much more. It's not a question of "love", it's a question of realism.

What don't you understand exactly? If all about F14 would been on the charts, SME's knowledge wouldn't be necessary, but the truth is we need them very much.

As many know very well, NATOPS charts don't say all about F14, and the witness from a Grumman test pilot is no anecdotal at all.

Not only F14 was mach 2.34 capable , it was able to reach mach 2.5. The source is a Grumman test pilot https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a27350643/f-14-tomcat/ I hope it would be possible to fix max speed too.

I'm talking about turn rate, not radius. Do you think 28 deg/sec at 1000ft is sustained or instantaneus?

I've found this chart, F14B, considered the fact the chart is at 5000ft, seems able to produce a really high turn rate at sea level, more than 25 deg/sec, perhaps more then 30 deg/sec. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

Thank you for your answer

I have the same question to ask, thx

Anyway thx for the answer

What about flight model?

Hmmmmm.... I asked my question last thursday at 10.27 AM and they answered to others questions asked after mine.... hmmm......

I think asking politely is allowed and answering is courtesy. But no one is responding, so do I have to deduce that courtesy is no longer part of HB?

I would really appreciate an answer, thx

Are there news about work progress on the flight model? Will still take a long time due to its complexity or are you close to the solution? Thx

I wish an option that make Jester gives continuously (more frequently then now)information during dogfight, especially about opponent position, thx