A10C engine model

[AstroEma]

Hello all,

 

just wondering, but why are the A10C engines under-performing in DCS, compared to the real aircraft?

Can we get updated models for it? A bit more trust at all regimes would do it.

 

:music_whistling:

 

E.

[mvsgas]

How are they under performing?

[mvsgas]

Do you have a copy?

[Deadman]

You could all so use the old A-10 A -1 the TF34-100A has not change.

Edited August 1, 2016 by Deadman

[mvsgas]

thank you

[StandingCow]

I know during the AMA with a real A-10 pilot he said the real aircraft is more forgiving with the stalls..

[mvsgas]

They don't produce rated ITT (per T.O 1A-10C-1), and Level Flight Maximum Speed (per T.O. 1A-10C-1-1) is unattainable.

 

Looking at section 5 and 6 I fail to see any specific ITT nor do I see a speed to weight in the T.O. provided. Noodle, do you have any documentation?

[mvsgas]

In Section 7, Cold Weather Operations, it's stated that that below 0°F, the engine will not reach rated ITT of 865°, with maximum ITT reducing to 750° at -40°F.

 

There are also numerous passages is Section 3 directing the pilot to REDUCE throttle to remain below 865° ITT when the Fuel Flow switches in OVERRIDE. Which is another thing that DCS doesn't give us.

 

There are other references, but nothing that anyone could verify in open-source.

 

At temperature below 0°F, engine will not

reach maximum ITT on engine runup. At

-40°F, engine ITT will be approximately

750°C and will increase linearly to approximately 865°C.

AFAIK, this applies to take off only, in DCS when I tried, at -17C ITT did not reach maximum. At -40C only reach 700C, is this what you mean?

 

Do you have anything that specifies ITT at different engine regimes that would indicate under performance?

 

You mention maximum level speed before, where do I find that?

[mvsgas]

The link in your post takes the user to a controlled document, the dissemination of which is restricted by US federal law.

 

Just because some knucklehead accidentally forgot to password protect the download link on a US Government computer system, doesn't mean its okay to possess or distribute the document in violation of the distribution statement which is clearly visible on the front cover.

 

 

:smartass:http://www.osi.af.mil/

Edited August 1, 2016 by mvsgas

[bkthunder]

Good info! I also noticed that I couldn't reach 800 ITT when following ITD procedures, for some reason I just thought it was a typo on my squadron's document, and never bothered to check on the actual A-10 papers...

 

Sadly I think the A-10C is very much out of ED's priorities now, I don't think they'll ever fix it.

[Enduro14]

Well maybe we should post a ticket about it and draw attention of testers and developers. Doesnt hurt to try right?

[bkthunder]

Well maybe we should post a ticket about it and draw attention of testers and developers. Doesnt hurt to try right?

 

 

I guess not. Considering the A-10C is still the flagship module produced by ED (nothing else they have released is as complex o capable), I would hope they really care if engine performance is not up to par.

[majapahit]

I like to fly 25T because it lands like a brick and ha all kind of quirks,

 

I dont like flying the A10c (after a while) because it's egress after an attack is like a tractor or a snail, its horribly under-powered RL or not

[bkthunder]

So how under-performing is it really, compared to RL? I mean, are we talking a 5% difference or a 20% difference?

 

-What can we do to have ED fix the problem? (Honest question here, maybe a petition, opening support tickets etc.)

 

- Is there an alternative way to modify it by ourselves and provide a mod/fix to the community, or is it hardcoded?

[Aginor]

So how under-performing is it really, compared to RL? I mean, are we talking a 5% difference or a 20% difference?

 

-What can we do to have ED fix the problem? (Honest question here, maybe a petition, opening support tickets etc.)

 

- Is there an alternative way to modify it by ourselves and provide a mod/fix to the community, or is it hardcoded?

 

- More like 5% as far as I can tell from what I see.

 

- ED is most likely not interested in fixing that. I don't see how we could have any influence on that. ED is a company, they work to create revenues. Fixing the A-10C (most people don't even know or care something is wrong with it, they only will get angry if the fix makes something else worse, see below) does not create revenues.

 

- None that we would know of, these are parameters coded into the AFM, and touching them would mean that other things in the flight behaviour might get worse, which causes more fixes to be made and it takes weeks or months of developer time to get it working as intended. That's a lot of work for a module that has sold most of its copies.

[mvsgas]

Thanks to the T.O. mention by noodle (thank by the way) which engine do we have in DCS?

I ask because I saw this;

On aircraft modified by T. O.

lA-10-1154, the TF34-GE-I00A

engine increased ITT operating

limits are only intended to allow

trim adjustments as necessary

to maintain predicted normal

rated thrust.

All performance data in this

manual for TF34-GE-IOO engines is also applicable to

TF34-GE-IOOA engines.

 

I also saw this;

On aircraft modified by T.O.lA-10-105, add a drag- index of 0.38

to the aircraft drag.

 

Does any of this two apply to DCS?

[NineLine]

Well maybe we should post a ticket about it and draw attention of testers and developers. Doesnt hurt to try right?

 

Best just to post a proper bug thread, see my sig for information how to do that.

[bkthunder]

Sithspawn, how about you help us with this and bring it up with ED themselves?

I see you are deleting some posts, there is a need to keep some opinions under control, which means ED at least cares about what is being discussed here ;)

 

 

EDIT: Bug report created here > http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2863212#post2863212

Edited August 2, 2016 by bkthunder
added link to bug report

[cichlidfan]

According to Snoopy, this was reported years ago, which means it should already be in the internal bug list.

[NineLine]

Sithspawn, how about you help us with this and bring it up with ED themselves?

I see you are deleting some posts, there is a need to keep some opinions under control, which means ED at least cares about what is being discussed here ;)

 

 

EDIT: Bug report created here > http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2863212#post2863212

 

Thanks for the report, I was only cleaning the thread to more useful post related to the bug, I will see if I can find Snoopy's report if it exists, and discuss with Yo-Yo and get his thoughts on it. Old modules might not get as much love as we want, but they are not forgotten.

[Vitormouraa]

So, is there any chance of fixing it? Thanks for helping. :)

[NineLine]

So, is there any chance of fixing it?

 

If ED agrees there is an issue, of course they will want to fix it, what the timeline would be I do not know.

[Snoopy]

Thanks for the report, I was only cleaning the thread to more useful post related to the bug, I will see if I can find Snoopy's report if it exists, and discuss with Yo-Yo and get his thoughts on it. Old modules might not get as much love as we want, but they are not forgotten.

 

To be clear I didn't say I reported it but it was reported.

Edited August 2, 2016 by Snoopy

[NineLine]

I found no report on it, but I am discussing with Yo-Yo.

[Aginor]

Thanks for looking into it! :)