S77th-GOYA

You can say it was me, SK. It's from NASA Technical Paper 3414, December 1994

Anyone? There's an old LO manual that says KCAS is displayed on the airspeed/mach meter and the 1.1 manual says it's KIAS. Is the error even modeled? Bottom line: what airpeed indicators would a test pilot use to maintain the Dash-1 profile prior to the M0.9 intercept?

:smilewink:

My original LOMAC PC was exactly what silverliu has now. It ran the game just fine (but obviously still took FPS hits in certain situations). I think the problem may be vid card drivers and over-optimistic graphics settings. One can't expect much of the candy with that system. As far as multiplayer, LOMAC's network code needs to send and receive MUCH more information than IL2's. Plus it is not the best net code ever written. For example, I can host 2 clients in LOMAC with no problems, host 3 and pings start to grow. In IL2 I can host more than 10.

Here's maybe a silly question: Does the real F-15 HUD display KIAS or KCAS? If it is KIAS, why? Calibration/installation error should be known throught the envelope.

It plays in 1.12a.

MiG-23 unless it's at med or high altitude. They lure you in with the impression that they are easily killable and then vanish until you get an R-60 in your teeth. F-16 a close 2nd.

I could be wrong about this but it seems that ED may have taken the placard top speed limits of the F-15 airframe and used that as data for the modeling of the max thrust of the F-15 engines. Possible?

No, it is in F-15. Overmodeling of the MiG is a completely different issue and from real world data of the MiG it is not limited to AI. The whole thrust of this thread is the F-15 and I have not seen any mentions of comparisons to the MiG as a reason to doubt the F-15 modelling, although they exist.

It comes down to this: Either Rhen is a liar or LOMAC is completely ludicrous in F-15 velocity/drag modeling. Personally, I think Rhen has never presented anything that even begins to make himself less than 100% trustworthy. But Ed has seemed to base their modeling on data that they don't fully comprehend.

There is no conclusion here. Yo-Yo says the F-15 is modeled correctly and the real world F-15 pilot says it isn't. Although, you might make your own conclusions.

ED did exactly that. 1.12b adds Vista compatibility. That's all.

I'm pretty sure that 1.12a was the fix for the RWR ghosting in 1.12. Otherwise no need for a letter.

Wasn't that 1.12?

1.12b? 1.11a? Diff between 1.12a and 1.12b? (besides "a letter")

How old are you?

Database? Do you mean stats or how many pilots are regularly flying? I have no clue where you are but if you can find LOMAC Gold, it has the orig game and the FC add-on both included for a reasonable price. It's probably in cut out bins by now, if you can still find it.

Nice ninja edit, D-Scythe. :smilewink:

With gear down? I'm not sure what that does to Cd but its an error factor I'd want to eliminate.

Drag has a big role in using F=ma. Does anyone have good Vmax/alt charts for the r/l counterparts of the modelled 27 & 29?

Sometimes, when I am winchester, I find that running home like a little screaming schoolgirl is very useful. And if missile drag is reduced without adjusting thrust, a MiG might very well catch a clean, running 15 if the MiG is just carrying a heater or two.

Well that shut everybody up. :smilewink:

Ok, I said that Engine Sim was modelling a higher output F100. Probably the -229. So what thrust does the LOMAC F100 produce at 3400 feet and 219 knots? It is obviously lower than 18,210 lbs per engine. And what is LOMAC's modeling based upon?

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=320790&postcount=90

Addendum: To remove increased drag from AoA let's look at the point in my track where the plane is vertical and AoA is 0. That is 3400 feet @ 219 KTAS. EngineSim gives a net thrust of 25,747 lbs per engine and that speed/altitude. The plane has burned 404 lbs of fuel at that point and has a net weight of 34,522 lbs. compared to a net thrust of 51,494 lbs. Drag at that speed and altitude is less than it was in the earlier calculation which still leaves a LOT of excess thrust. (~15,000 lbs) Yo-Yo?