Spurts

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.

https://youtu.be/2cWQrQhKcoE Come see what I hated about the P-47, and why it is so much better than the Fw-190A8. Should be up within the hour

alright, that would have been my guess

Are the sparrows set to PD mode?

quick admission, I was referring to KEAS not KCAS, since KEAS is representative of the speed needed at sea level to have the same pressure. So many aircraft I have had to deal with professionally used a CAS/Mach limit that it was stuck in my head. But it is KEAS that is relevant to our discussion of pressure on an airframe. Also, we are vastly off topic..

Thanks for the correction

okay, first question is "Are you using AIM-54C?" those are the only ones with a bugged loft profile AFAIK.

and your typical calculator sites such as Hochwarth don't account for super sonic flow and corrections need to be made.

My Aerospace Engineering degree. The fact of the matter is that you can find sources that cite directional stability with a single engine operating as the reason for a lower Mach limit. As you pointed out, when Mach is the limiter (not CAS) you are not dealing with maximum dynamic pressure. So if raw dynamic pressure isn't the issue, then what is and how is it related to Mach number? Deductive reasoning leads me to either shockwave interactions and/or aeroelastic twist (exacerbated by the pressure differentials from the supersonic flow). FWIW, the SR-71 cruised at ~300KCAS, didn't stop one from disintegrating at Mach 3. Q (dynamic pressure) isn't everything. Mach matters.

You aren't thinking about Shockwave interactions with yaw angles then. The low altitude high pressure regimes have comparatively blunt or non existent Shockwave that are less likely to impact the airframe at a given yaw angle

Mach limits exist separate from CAS limits for a reason. Shockwave interactions around the bodies passing through the air behave very differently and have pressure gradients that you can't account for with a simple CAS number.

https://youtu.be/kkkgGy2h9sg "Professor Spurts" answers a question on the Tomcat FM

there is also a problem with aeroelastic twist (I am an aero engineer). The force the rudder would be required to impart would twist the vertical stabilizer which would reduce the effectiveness of the rudder even if it didn't rip the plane apart. This same thing happened with the ailerons of early Hornets (possibly the prototypes, don't recall) and it was so bad it led to roll reversal at higher speeds. This led to the development and testing of a Hornet with an Aero-Elastic wing.

VIPER FM VIDEO CORRECTION! **UPDATE** Math error! After getting the acceleration in Gs I need to multiply by the speed to get Ps. I multiplied by Knots instead of ft/s when calculating acceleration. Deceleration calculations are fine, I double checked. Sorry I didn't catch it before posting, I was in a self-imposed rush. The acceleration is fine! A similar video for the Tomcat is coming soon

VIPER FM VIDEO CORRECTION! **UPDATE** Math error! After getting the acceleration in Gs I need to multiply by the speed to get Ps. I multiplied by Knots instead of ft/s when calculating acceleration. Deceleration calculations are fine, I double checked. Sorry I didn't catch it before posting, I was in a self-imposed rush. The acceleration is fine! A similar video for the Tomcat is coming soon

@Dragon1-1 it was much more nuanced than that. The lower G limits imposed by the Navy (6.5G wartime and 5.5G peacetime) was indeed due to Mx issues, but the cause of the Mx issues is that Congress never funded the F-14 properly. Spare parts were never ordered in the quantities needed. The people holding the purse strings hated the program so their goal was to kill it through lack of funding. This is why half of all Bs and Ds were refurbished As, and even in the early 2000s most Tomcat squadrons were still flying As, because as much as the Navy requested upgrades Congress wouldn't fund them. This behaviour even pre-dates the Hornet Mafia, which did nothing to help the Tomcats case. Now the lower speed limit of the D (and the B) is, AFAIK, because the intake ramp scheduling was never optimized for the F110. In effect, the F110 was being fed TF30 airflow, and this led to sub-optimal performance. The TF30 made more thrust above 1.5M than the F110.

Because the IRIAF models had equipment missing compared to USN ones, and we are getting the IRIAF model

Tried this for the first time today and it worked great! My pilot had to avoid an incoming missile and it didn't trash the in-flight Hellfire shot.

A quick Apache Vid before I move back to warbirds

This one? https://youtu.be/HrdP7nZcNrE

Correct. I beat up the UFO Ace AI MiG-29 staying under with a max G pulled of 6.7G at the break.

I've had him try to hold a hover only to drift into a tree. He also has no ability to deal with rising terrain or trees.

The Tomcat was immensely capable but very difficult. A great pilot could well be unbeatable to other teen series they faced, while a pilot who is pretty good might get their butts kicked every time. It 100% come down to how well the pilot knows his plane and the enemy plane.

Single location won't work is you want a high fidelity module

https://youtu.be/HrdP7nZcNrE My review of the Viper FM. If you want entertainment, go watch Growling Sidewinder. If you want an education, watch this one.