Jump to content

help with sabre vs mig 15

USARStarkey

By USARStarkey
in DCS: F-86F Sabre

 Share

Recommended Posts

Exorcet

Exorcet

Posted
Posted
the Mig-15 is damn near immune to F-15 cannon burst and missile strikes....F-15 vs 4 Mig-15 results in 8-10 hits on the migs with them only losing 1 plane...she's a bit to strong in my opinion..

 

I actually got curious and tried this too. It survived at least 10 cannon shots. I then killed it with a burst of an additional 22 cannon hits (but I don't know if it was killed by the 11th hit or the 32nd, or something inbetween).

 

I do think that SgtPappy is right about wing vs fuselage. Any kill I've made in the 86 has been with the wing on fire.

 

 

....F-86 breaking the sound barrier regularly????....Im not sure it should be able to do this...it lacks the fundamental design needed to safely push through the pressure build up when reaching the speed of sound...the thinning of the fuselage at the wing roots...matter of fact, it does the opposite.....now I'm not arguing whether it ever did it....I'm simply saying that it did not have the design to do it safely....

 

... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_rule ...

 

 

.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-102_Delta_Dagger ... read the "Major Redesign" part...

Not adhering to the area doesn't mean you can't break Mach 1. Bullets do this. It just makes it require more thrust.

 

According to the Mach meter, the DCS F-86 can currently super cruise. It can even go supersonic in a climb. Beta Alpha

That's just an issue with the Mach meter though right? Your IAS doesn't look like it's at M 1.3 for that altitude.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fgffgfgg

fgffgfgg

Posted
Posted (edited)
That's just an issue with the Mach meter though right? Your IAS doesn't look like it's at M 1.3 for that altitude.

 

No, its not an issue with his mach meter. The IAS is actually mach 1.3 because hes at 52,700 feet! That is really high up. The calculator I use for mach doesn't go that high, but even if he was at 50,000 going the same speed he would still be breaking mach. Just look at the redline on the airpspeed indicator. After fiddling with some numbers it's showing that he should be going mach 1.1 instead of mach 1.3. I might be incorrectly using the calculator though.


Edited by Schweehog
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Davis0079

Davis0079

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

Not adhering to the area doesn't mean you can't break Mach 1. Bullets do this. It just makes it require more thrust.

 

 

bullets actually follow the "area rule"...they have good shape (widest part is last 3rd, cone shaped) and lack wings and cockpit bubbles....the F-86's wings and canopy are in the first 1/3rd of the fuselage...the widest part of the fuselage is the first 1/3rd...this is a triple negative for trans sonic flight (wings not far back on fuselage, no "waisting effect" for canopy or wings)....and we learned with the F-100 and original F-102 that adding more thrust just built up more pressure, still preventing breaking through the "barrier of sound".....yes its possible in an extreme dive in some late 40's aircraft...but once again, they lack the fundamental design requirements that were later put into standard practice....


Edited by Davis0079

It only takes two things to fly, Airspeed and Money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SgtPappy

SgtPappy

Posted
Posted
bullets actually follow the "area rule"...they have good shape (widest part is last 3rd, cone shaped) and lack wings and cockpit bubbles....the F-86's wings and canopy are in the first 1/3rd of the fuselage...the widest part of the fuselage is the first 1/3rd...this is a triple negative for trans sonic flight (wings not far back on fuselage, no "waisting effect" for canopy or wings)....and we learned with the F-100 and original F-102 that adding more thrust just built up more pressure, still preventing breaking through the "barrier of sound".....yes its possible in an extreme dive in some late 40's aircraft...but once again, they lack the fundamental design requirements that where later put into standard practice....

 

Quite correct. The F-86 was not meant to do so, but believe it or not, they did dive the thing to Mach 1 at airshows on a regular basis, on often "shallow dives". There are also pilots who state that they regularly broke Mach 1 at least in combat training, though they weren't supposed to tell anyone, probably to avoid letting the Soviets know about the airplane capabilities. Later, the Soviets could do the same thing in the MiG-17.

 

As you said though, their design limitations meant they could not/were not meant to sustain these speeds, and they did not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scrim

Scrim

Posted
Posted
I think this is correct. The SFM plus the smart AI means perfect trim, no overheat, no over-G and probably less realistic maneuvering.

 

This. It's like flying a flight sim against an AI that is flying an arcade game because no one's ever bothered implementing even semi-realistic limitations on the AI.

 

Just how they think the WW2 project will look unless something is done is something that scares me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Random

Random

Posted
Posted

roughly 3/4 of the mig15's I hit with a missile carry on with ZERO damage. pretty sure its a bug! Guns work pretty much as expected though, a good burst into the top of the fuselage where the engine sits and its flaming torch time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scrim

Scrim

Posted
Posted

Just noticed another problem with the MiG-15. It's rather, shall we say economical fuel consumption? The Sabre had a larger internal fuel load and longer range than the MiG-15, but when I recently tried taking on a MiG-15 I ran out of fuel. We were far out to sea, and IIRC, the AI will always disengage no matter what when they reach bingo fuel, but the -15 chased me until I ejected, and then it flew around randomly until I ended the mission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Milli

Milli

Posted
Posted
Well, he should check his spelling then. It's au revoir. ;)

 

:smartass:

 

Azrayen, you're an official DCS French translator living in France, now thats cool. I am learning french but as a 43 year old Englishman, I am finding all those verb conjugations are taxing my brain to its limit. One day I will be a capable french speaker. Perhaps I should browse the French forum sometime.

 

Anyway, I am enjoying the Sabre. Learning the systems and how to fly it, while, hopefully, DCS sorts out the AI aircraft so we can have a fair fight.

 

Regards,

Milli

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sceptre

Sceptre

Posted
Posted
Azrayen, you're an official DCS French translator living in France, now thats cool. I am learning french but as a 43 year old Englishman, I am finding all those verb conjugations are taxing my brain to its limit. One day I will be a capable french speaker. Perhaps I should browse the French forum sometime.

 

Anyway, I am enjoying the Sabre. Learning the systems and how to fly it, while, hopefully, DCS sorts out the AI aircraft so we can have a fair fight.

 

Regards,

Milli

 

Lol I feel ya, I'm trying to do the same with Russian.

RTX 2070 8GB | 32GB DDR4 2666 RAM | AMD Ryzen 5 3600 4.2Ghz | Asrock X570 | CH Fighterstick/Pro Throttle | TM MFDs | TrackIR 5

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...