Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
I broke my F4 disk and my SP4 cd the other day on accident. Finding these are gonna be a big pain in the chopstick I just know it.

 

The Falcon 4.0 CD (even Allied Force) has no type of copy protection so be sure to make a backup of your next one. :)

__

 

 

Mark

  • Replies 325
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • ED Team
Posted

 

I've always wondered how you were using the time to climb charts to determine your flight envelope regarding the Eagle.

 

 

I never said that these charts were used to DETERMINE. But they can be used as a benchmark when you perform the takeoff and climb with the directed profile. There are many another charts to DETERMINE.

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Posted

Yo-Yo, it seems I misintrepreted what I was told about F-15 thrust:

 

The max-power climb stuff seems to be ok. The real problem appears to be with military thrust - a 39000lbs F-15 should be able to reach 47000' in 6 minutes (it should weight about 39000lbs when it reaches this altitude) on military power.

 

Follow Rhen's take-off and flight procedure, ie. take off in AB, accelerate to 350KCAS and then go to MIL power and hold 350KCAS or M0.9 at altitude as you climb to 47000' ... not only does it take longer, it isn't even possible in LO.

 

Can you look into that then? I think that should be the only problem :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted

I'm talking about a clean F-15C in LOMAC. And yes, the weapon drag is the other problem, you're right.

 

I believe Su-27 experiences both problems as well (or maybe only thrust?) while the MiG-29 Raptorski experiences the same problems but in the opposite direction ;)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted

While that is posisble, I kinda doubt it; the Cd for the F-15C probably already has these factored in as is.

 

As fara s thrust in the F-15 goes, MIL thrust needs a lot of fixing.

AB thrust seems to be underpowered, but not as grossly as MIL thrust - in general it is ok until you get to high altitudes. It is possible that, if thrust is modelled as some form of combination of MIL and AB thrust (ie. the two are modelled separately somehow, for some reason) then adding to the MIL thrust alone will fix everything.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
Now I wonder how on earth do they achieve this kind of vertical turn with sustained 2.5G and starting speed of 495Mph and are able to complete the turn and get level within 56sec???? :huh: From my tests I don't see how this is possible... they would have to be pulling more then 3G to be able to complete the turn within 56sec.

 

To me, it's apparent that they are flying an aircraft with MUCH more thrust.

 

From this diagram I think they start timing from when the aircraft has accelerated to 0.65Mach and the point of 56sec is where the aircraft has completed the turn and flying level...

Anyway, If my assumption is right and they time from 0.65Mach (not standstill) then 29,000ft in 69sec is not so bad for LockOn "stock" F-15C and most definitely NOT 1/2 as people complain and way over claimed 18,000ft.

 

No, they are qute specifically measuring all the record times from the moment of brake release, as you can see in some of the labels:

 

http://www.ecf.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/lomac/f15climb07.jpg

 

Another one of my favourites:

http://www.ecf.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/lomac/f15climb06.jpg

 

Out-climbs an Apollo moon rocket to 60,000 feet :)

 

-SK

  • Like 1
Posted
F = m * a

 

If anyone wants to know how much thrust Lock On's F-15 is really producing, simply measure its acceleration on the runway, and divide by its weight.

 

Hey, that's a great idea SwingKid, why didn't I think of that?

 

Lock On F-15C: ~34,000 lbf thrust

real F-15C: 46,900 lbf thrust

Streak Eagle: ~52,700 lbf thrust

Lock On F-15C underpowered by: 27.5%

Streak Eagle more powerful than real F-15C by: 12.4%

Well look at that, the Streak Eagle is a much better approximation of the real thing than the Lock On F-15C! Who would have known. D-Scythe, apparently.

 

For comparison:

 

Lock On Su-27: ~18,600 kgf thrust

real Su-27: 25,000 kgf thrust

Lock On Su-27 underpowered by: 25.6%

 

Lock On MiG-29: ~14,000 kgf thrust

real MiG-29: 16,600 kgf thrust

Lock On MiG-29 underpowered by: 15.7%

 

No wonder, we have little problem accelerating vertically in Lock On's MiG-29...

 

-SK

  • Like 2
Posted

Method SK, method!

 

Gah ... I also can't rep you :P

 

BTW, where'd you get the Streak's thrust? :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
Method SK, method!

 

What do you mean? I quoted myself describing the method.

 

BTW, where'd you get the Streak's thrust? :)

 

I added 2,500 lbf VMAX bonus per engine (cited from ref. 1) to the 23,830 lbf F100-PW-100 thrust (cited from ref. 2).

 

1. J.P. Stevenson, "McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle", Aero Series #28, 1978.

2. D.R. Jenkins, "McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle", Aerofax, 1998.

Posted

^^^ That's what I meant :)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted
How did you measure the acceleration accurately?

 

You mean how I pause the game, and then press Ctrl-Enter to advance one frame at a time while paused?

 

What the devil - that's not listed in the keycommands?! Where did I learn about it..?

 

Tester's tricks. :)

 

-SK

Posted
To me, it's apparent that they are flying an aircraft with MUCH more thrust.

 

No, they are qute specifically measuring all the record times from the moment of brake release, as you can see in some of the labels:

 

http://www.ecf.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/lomac/f15climb07.jpg

 

Another one of my favourites:

http://www.ecf.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/lomac/f15climb06.jpg

 

Out-climbs an Apollo moon rocket to 60,000 feet :)

 

Hmm, seems I have to spread more rep around...

sigzk5.jpg
Posted
Only at high speeds.

 

For acceleration from a standing start on the runway, you can pretty much ignore it.

 

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

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

 

Sure, it makes Cd much worse.

 

 

However, at low speeds it really doesn't make a difference. Will throw some numbers around later on, but at a rough guess you could probably hit a hundred knots purely on F=ma.

 

Certainly gear drag wouldn't hit 10,000lbs at speeds you'd reach on the runway . . .

Posted
Mind if I take a quick look at your numbers, might serve to convince me even more :)

 

What, you trust an Eagle pilot and his "Dash-1" nonsense over me??

 

You'll live to regret that. :)

 

Check PM

 

-SK

Posted
maybe we aren't getting the right climb performance because we are flying a 30 year old fighter:megalol:

 

Or maybe you're some 14 year old kid who's crying for attention because daddy doesn't hug you enough.

 

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought we were having a "state-the-obvious" contest - I'm competitive by nature.

sigzk5.jpg
Posted
Or maybe you're some 14 year old kid who's crying for attention because daddy doesn't hug you enough.

 

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought we were having a "state-the-obvious" contest - I'm competitive by nature.

 

some people can't take a joke :no_sad:

  • Like 1
Posted
some people can't take a joke :no_sad:

 

Kay, relax, it was a line taken straight out of the TV show House M.D. I didn't actually mean it (House did though, when he said it) - I just thought it fit perfectly. The guy's hilarious.

 

house.jpg

 

Anyway, back on topic.

sigzk5.jpg
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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