Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Spurts

  • Birthday August 1

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. 12 dps is with the -406 motor in CBT thrust, which is listed as 99% RPM. The -408 motor in CBT rating is 111%, higher than the -406 short lift wet by a large margin. We don't have turn charts for a -408 powered harrier, so AFAIK the closest you could get to running the test is dropping RPM to 99%.
  2. I tested acceleration in the 0/4/4 55.6k 5,000ft configuration for the B and there was nowhere that it over performed. .7-1.1 it definitely underperformed. Used the EM plot Ps values. And as far as I am aware there is a transonic drag bug for weapons, which is why you see the dismal performance around M1.
  3. On the deck STR peaks around .45M at 20 units AoA based on my own testing. Maneuver flaps are out already, so no point in trying to drop them further.
  4. Correct, and when that happens you are killing yourself with excess drag. Again, if your BFM plan is to hit a rate speed and try to out-rate your opponent then what you need is a broader BFM toolbox (practice), not an extra degree per second of rate. At low speeds the Tomcat already holds a turn rate advantage, and thus also a radius advantage, both in sustained turn capability and transient turn capability. Trying to use flaps at 0.7M+ is the wrong plan.
  5. At certain speeds, not all speeds. Plus not long after you are too fast for maneuver flaps you are also getting fast enough the wings will start sweeping. I've used them for better control under 180kts and to help go over the top. My rule of thumb is if I am nose up under 200 I'll consider putting them out, if I'm nose down over 180 I pull them up no questions asked.
  6. L/D is the Lift to Drag ratio. If the L/D gets worse than for a given G load at a given speed you will have worse acceleration/deceleration performance, i.e. a worse sustained turn rate. There is so much more to BFM than just hitting a turn rate speed.
  7. at higher speeds having flaps deployed is going to make L/D worse, not better.
  8. I fail to see any purpose to that when Maneuver flaps are in play, but that's just me I guess.
  9. I just want that extra Sidewinder rail. Why oh why did the USMC not use that?
  10. Not sure what you are asking. Maneuver flaps are automatically scheduled so adjusting them manually is not going to provide real benefit. Landing flaps are currently, afaik, realistically set up currently. Just don't use them over 200kts, just don't.
  11. Agree, the Harrier is my go to plane for ground attack.
  12. Spurts


  13. oooh, +100 for spawn position.
  14. Sorry for the minor thread necro, but a lot of what it has to do with is the architecture of the Sim. I have an AESA radar modeling tool at home and it was great at giving detection ranges against targets. I could even use public source info to simulate less advanced radars (PESA and MSA) fairly easily. And I could even kludge in noise jamming ECM. But once I wanted to measure relative LPI, RWR detection ranges, ECM technique effects and such I not only had to "go back to school" to learn how these things work from a modeling standpoint but I had to change the structure of the tool. There is still a lot of estimations and guesswork for modern systems but the more info you have the better your guesses can be. In the end, I could tell you what ESM systems can detect transmissions from an F-22 vs Su-35S, which ECM systems can jam them, and at what range the radar MAWS of a Typhoon can detect an Su-35S vs an R-77. Are these 100% "take it to the bank?" No. Is it DCS FFSM level accuracy? No, that would require more details and FFSM simulate more hardware component and actual programing involved in reading the signals. AFAIK HBs AWG-9 is the most advanced in this. Could DCS use this framework to increase the realism of their RF spectrum simulation? Possibly, I don't know what their FFSM takes into account. Could it be used to easily bring FC3/mod SSM aircraft up in realism? Vastly. It is still simplified, theory driven, equations. Default values for unknowns can get you "close enough". LPI techniques and ECCM have been around since at least the F-106. These are a sliding scale, not binary toggles.
  • Create New...