New weapon drag summary

I noticed in one of the recent updates the drag values changed for the F/A-18 weapons, so I did another speed test to see if any of the bugs had been worked out. I hope it will be useful to somebody.

The test conditions are level flight at 5000ft ASL, 29.92, Full AB, unlimited fuel. Speed is allowed to stabilize in time compression. Speeds are knots IAS. Latest stable 2.5.5.33184.

Edit: There are no wingtip or fuselage missiles for these tests, except the one stated to have them.

Clean: 735

Clean, wings folded: 735

Clean, wingtips broken off: 803 (https://i.imgur.com/tP01VOW.png)

Clean, canopy ejected: 735

Clean, canopy ejected and gear doors ripped off: 735

Fuselage AMRAAM and wingtip missiles: 690

Fuselage Sparrow and wingtip missiles: 693

Litening pod only: 727

8 Mk83 (4 BRU33): 575

4 Mk83 (4 BRU33 with one dropped from each): 581

0 Mk83 (4 BRU33): 590

0 Mk83 (2 BRU33): 631

4 Mk83 (on pylons): 678

2 MK83 (on pylons): 706

4 HARM: 633

2 HARM: 677

4 Mav: 636

2 Mav: 679

8 AMRAAMs (4 doubles): 591

0 AMRAAMs (4 double racks): 655

4 AMRAAMs (4 singles): 591 (! This is the same as 4 double racks and 8 AMRAAMs)

4 AMRAAMs (2 doubles): 635

2 AMRAAMs (2 doubles with one fired from each): 661

0 AMRAAMs (2 empty double racks): 693

4 Sparrows: (4 singles): 592

2 Sparrows: (4 singles): 599

8 Zunis (4 doubles): 532

4 Zunis (4 singles): 553

8 JSOW (4 doubles): 530

4 JSOW (4 doubles with one dropped from each): 553

4 JSOW (4 singles): 591

3 drop tanks: 627

Center drop tank: 692

Notes:

-BRU33 racks have drag now (used to be negative), and the rack drag is much more than the bombs themselves. Definitely get rid of the racks as soon as you can.

-AGMs still have high drag relative to bombs, but it's less pronounced with the bomb drag correction.

-The drag of an AMRAAM hardpoint now correctly changes depending of the number of missiles on it. The racks still have a lot of drag, so lose them.

-There is still a bug where a full AMRAAM double rack has the same drag as an AMRAAM single rack.

-AAMs still have a lot of drag compared to everything else. Not sure if this is accurate (I mean, an AMRAAM is just a skinny HARM, so you'd think it would have less drag).

-Rockets are still drag king.

Overall this is a huge improvement over previously, so thanks ED! Since the wonky bomb drag was fixed, I'm sure a solution for the AMRAAMs isn't far behind.

edit: Added wingtips broken off

Thanks for doing these tests, it's interesting to see how things compare.

Fuel pods would be good to add if you're not sick of testing yet :)

Appreciate this analysis. It looks pretty reasonable except for the 4 AMRAAM singles at 591. I think that is probably just a bug/error.

Didn't notice the change yet, but it's good to see something happen here.

Did you try comparing 4 BRU-33 after dropping different stores from them? There were huge differences which shouldn't be there at all. Oh, and the AIM-7 LAU-117s...

Thanks for doing these tests. I was always curious myself about drag effects, but I don't have half the patience you have.

Good job with the tests. Interesting results. Thanks.

Great test. Thank you very much.

Very interesting and thanks for updating this!

I'm also curious about the drag of:

- centerline TGP

- AMRAAMs on the cheek stations (+ Sidewinders on the wing tips).

New stuff (didn't recheck all, but AMRAAM is the same, anyway)

The sparrow has every so slightly more drag than AMRAAM on pylon and cheek.

Litening pod has very little drag. Guilt-free TGP.

A double AMRAAM and rack still has the same drag as a single AMRAAM on pylon.

Just saw the updated results. Thanks for taking the time to do this, man! I'm happy to see that most of the stuff is working better.

Do you have values from previous releases to compare ?

Yesterday I did a mission and was trying to keep up in my F-14 (2- sparrow, 2 phoenix, 2 fuel tank) with quite heavy loaded f18. And I was barely able to keep up without AB.

So did the drag on F18 overall reduce or increase since last release?

Sent from my VTR-L09 using Tapatalk

The values, except for AMRAAM, TGP and Sparrow are from 2.5.5.33184, mid-July.

I'm hoping their next change would be the AMRAAM bug, which hasn't changed yet, so I doubt any other values changed to date. When Walleye comes to public I might do a small cross section of weapons again.

Anyone can try, the tests are pretty fast if you use time compression.

3xfuel 6x120C 2x9X I can firewall to 40k angels now a tad easier I noticed, that's a plus.

Still the DCS 18C seems under powered when looking at the 'unofficial' performance numbers/graph (1999, F414-GE-400)

40,000ft

mach 1.438-1.490

gross weight 34-58,000 (WTH?)

never seen those numbers any where near,

f.i. heavy

48,000 LBS @ 40,000 FT

MACH 1.483 .. is what the graph says

?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bloody hell DCS, do something

Top speed, 40,000ft, fuel fuel (unlimited), full afterburner, level flight.

Clean: M1.75

Cheek and tip missiles: M1.65

3 fuel tanks and nothing else (44,500 lbs, mission editor): M1.51

8 MK83s, 2 Mavs, center tank, cheek and tip missiles (51,680 lbs / 44,736lbs [CKLST, mission editor]): M0.99

M1.4 with 58,000 seems like a misunderstanding. The "Max" weight in DCS mission editor is shown to be 51,899. That speed must be for a lower drag configuration.

edit: Mission editor shows different weight than DDI page.

f.i. heavy

48,000 LBS @ 40,000 FT

MACH 1.483 .. is what the graph says

Majapahit, 3 fuel tanks gives 44,5000 lb and M1.51. It's almost exactly what your chart says. Unless it says what exact stores there is no way to know.

Top speed, 40,000ft, fuel fuel (unlimited), full afterburner, level flight.

 

Clean: M1.75

Cheek and tip missiles: M1.65

3 fuel tanks and nothing else (44,500 lbs, mission editor): M1.51

8 MK83s, 2 Mavs, center tank, cheek and tip missiles (51,680 lbs / 44,736lbs [CKLST, mission editor]): M0.99

 

M1.4 with 58,000 seems like a misunderstanding. The "Max" weight in DCS mission editor is shown to be 51,899. That speed must be for a lower drag configuration.

 

edit: Mission editor shows different weight than DDI page.

 

 

 

Majapahit, 3 fuel tanks gives 44,5000 lb and M1.51. It's almost exactly what your chart says. Unless it says what exact stores there is no way to know.

nope

3xfuel 6x120C 2x9X

STARTING at 40000’ from mission editor weight 49614lbs from DDI

0 min in - M 1.72 /476 << try do this from the ground pffffffffffffffffffffff

1 min in - M 1.5 / 428

2 min in - M 1.39 / 396 and still dropping

Ctrl-Z xx min - M1.00 (!!) / 286 Alpha 4.2 (!)

and - somewhat - stabilizing / full burn Fuel Flow 9300/min / Weight 43066 and dropping

Mach 1.0 stable

40,000ft / 43066lbs / > 30min in (ctrl-z) / noise pointing up / level after starting from ME 40,000tf (worse from ground)

pfffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

AMRAAM has hella drag. Of course it will be slow.

Not saying it's right, but there is no chart for spamraam loadout. I want F-18 to be as OP as you do but only real data will be taken seriously.

I do suspect some items have too much drag compared to real life but we need proof.

AMRAAM has hella drag. Of course it will be slow.

 

Not saying it's right, but there is no chart for spamraam loadout.

MAXIMUM THRUST ACCELERATION

AIRCRAFT CONFIGURATION

(2) AIM-9 * (2) AM 120 + CL 480 TANK

F414-GE-400

40.000 FEET

REMARKS

ENGINE(S): (2) F4*4-GE-400

U.S. STANDARD DAY, 1962

STANDARD TEMPERATURE 40,000f -70F

DATE: 29 OCTOBER 1999

DATA BASIS: FLIGHT DERIVED

 

(2) AIM-9 * (2) AM 120 + CL 480 TANK

F414-GE-400

40.000 FEET

 

We don't get the 480 gallon tank but with a 330 gallon one I get M1.57 at 40k.

Add two MK83s (150gal of fuel = 2000lbs) to that and I still get M1.54.

And that's with infinite full fuel which isn't even possible IRL. It's not nerfed, dude.

wing-tank drag ---- is it modeled?

is the drag subtracted from the a/c once they're dropped?

i heard a while ago wing-tank drag wasn't modeled correctly

same for pylons

???

We don't get the 480 gallon tank but with a 330 gallon one I get M1.57 at 40k.

 

Add two MK83s (150gal of fuel = 2000lbs) to that and I still get M1.54.

 

And that's with infinite full fuel which isn't even possible IRL. It's not nerfed, dude.

You started @ 40000ft

You were not 48,000 LBS

DATA BASIS: FLIGHT DERIVED

You started @ 40000ft

You were not 48,000 LBS

 

 

DATA BASIS: FLIGHT DERIVED

Then do it. Stop spamming in this thread.

?

Just a heads up, the aircraft mass is displayed incorrectly on the DDI right now. Use the mass shown in the ME for calculations.

Thanks for doing this, clearly some time and work went into this, and the knowledge is very much appreciated!

Cheers,

Don

With beta version as of December, 2019, the arrival of the over-G wingbreak feature opens up a new and exciting low drag configuration.

M1.55 sustained at 5000ft. 1010 knots ground speed, or 520 m/s.

For a few seconds before running out of fuel.