F-14B Fastest on the deck

[QuiGon]

So do we have any explanation yet to why the Viggen gets faster with increased ambient temperature?

[GGTharos]

Same reason certain other aircraft do so ... simple bug, someone inverted a sign somewhere.

[QuiGon]

Alright, because I'm not sure if the devs have this bug on their list. I'll make sure then.

[Delta59R]

Alright, because I'm not sure if the devs have this bug on their list. I'll make sure then.

 

I wonder if the rb24 glitch and the strange top speed wall are known issues too?

[QuiGon]

I wonder if the rb24 glitch and the strange top speed wall are known issues too?

Yeah, good point. Haven't seen the rb24 glitch being mentioned anywhere else indeed. The top speed wall is apparently true to real life and has been discussed pretty well in another thread (including real life charts that confirm this behaviour).

[Delta59R]

Yeah, good point. Haven't seen the rb24 glitch being mentioned anywhere else indeed. The top speed wall is apparently true to real life and has been discussed pretty well in another thread (including real life charts that confirm this behaviour).

 

Hmm, I was just looking at a few sources that show that the top speed should be around ~1150 knots ground speed at 36k feet, thats about 150kn off from what I tested. What charts are you seeing?

[QuiGon]

Hmm, I was just looking at a few sources that show that the top speed should be around ~1150 knots ground speed at 36k feet, thats about 150kn off from what I tested. What charts are you seeing?

Charts: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3567294#post3567294

 

The charts show pretty well that the Viggen slams into a wall at around M1.8 under normal conditions. The DCS Viggen currently hits the wall at M1.71 though, but the charts are for the fighter Viggen (JA-37), so maybe a wall speed of M1.71 for our ground attack Viggen is correct. The existence of a wall definitely is correct.

[Delta59R]

Charts: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3567294#post3567294

 

The charts show pretty well that the Viggen slams into a wall at around M1.8 under normal conditions. The DCS Viggen currently hits the wall at M1.71 though, but the charts are for the fighter Viggen (JA-37), so maybe a wall speed of M1.71 for our ground attack Viggen is correct. The existence of a wall definitely is correct.

 

Ahh very cool! Thanks

[draconus]

Charts: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3567294#post3567294

 

The charts show pretty well that the Viggen slams into a wall at around M1.8 under normal conditions. The DCS Viggen currently hits the wall at M1.71 though, but the charts are for the fighter Viggen (JA-37), so maybe a wall speed of M1.71 for our ground attack Viggen is correct. The existence of a wall definitely is correct.

In the HB manual Max speed is Mach 2.

http://media.heatblur.se/AJS37_Manual_RC1.pdf

One would think they have some info on the AJS version.

[Delta59R]

Looks like the fuel consumption on the F16 is fixed and also a small bump in top speed, its just behind the F14 at 893kn on the deck. However I did notice the F16 started to oscillate back and forth violently at 893kn, not sure if that's normal. And Also a bump up tp 1222kn at 36k feet.

Edited October 12, 2019 by Delta59R

[Delta59R]

After the last update the 16 has had its top speed dropped back down a bit at both sea level and 36kft. Back to the oscillation, its a factor of speed and weight, the lighter (less fuel)(for example) and the higher the IAS, the quicker the oscillation will start. I also found the sweet spot in temps for the 16 to be around 25c with a top speed at sea level around 881kn gs

[Donut]

I know this is about top end speed, but as far as initial acceleration compared to the F-16 and F/A-18, the F-14 is the slowest and F-16 is the quickest.

 

Easy way to test this is standard day, clean jets, full fuel...takeoff full AB, immediately raise gear and level off right above runway. Check your speed right as you hit the end of the runway.

 

I remember doing this test after initial release of the Tomcat and it was a bit faster back then, comparable to the Hornet's initial acceleration performance. It seems to be about 30kts slower by the end of the runway now.

Edited October 22, 2019 by =BJM=

[captain_dalan]

I know this is about top end speed, but as far as initial acceleration compared to the F-16 and F/A-18, the F-14 is the slowest and F-16 is the quickest.

 

Easy way to test this is standard day, clean jets, full fuel...takeoff full AB, immediately raise gear and level off right above runway. Check your speed right as you hit the end of the runway.

 

I remember doing this test after initial release of the Tomcat and it was a bit faster back then, comparable to the Hornet's initial acceleration performance. It seems to be about 30kts slower by the end of the runway now.

 

True. But this is also somewhat dependent on current loadout and part of the envelope. So it's best expressed as either time to speed, time to distance or time to altitude IMO

[Donut]

True. But this is also somewhat dependent on current loadout and part of the envelope. So it's best expressed as either time to speed, time to distance or time to altitude IMO

 

All aircraft and weather conditions were equal. How the results are measured would not change the results. The F-16 and F/A-18 are capable of initially reaching speeds much more quickly than the F-14 right now. The Tomcat is about 50kts slower in acceleration by the end of the runway on a clean, full internal fuel, full AB takeoff when compared to release.

 

Here is a link to my initial test close after release...

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3887809&postcount=18

 

I wonder if performance is closer to reality now or back at release?

Edited October 24, 2019 by =BJM=

[Delta59R]

Wow... looking at these old numbers from 2019 the 14 really got castrated.

 

[Mopeyranger0681]

6 hours ago, Delta59R said:

Wow... looking at these old numbers from 2019 the 14 really got castrated.

 

Agree, now the B with any kind of loadout struggles to reach 30k altitude and maintain speed unless you hold mil power and drain your gas for a short flight. The hornet out performs it at angels 30+ with fully loaded pylons. Maybe that’s realistic, but I noticed the A does better up high than the B with six phoenix and two bags. Again I don’t know if that is realistic or not. Maybe there is some tweaking that still needs to be done? 

[Callsign JoNay]

1 hour ago, Mopeyranger0681 said:

Agree, now the B with any kind of loadout struggles to reach 30k altitude and maintain speed unless you hold mil power and drain your gas for a short flight. The hornet out performs it at angels 30+ with fully loaded pylons. Maybe that’s realistic, but I noticed the A does better up high than the B with six phoenix and two bags. Again I don’t know if that is realistic or not. Maybe there is some tweaking that still needs to be done? 

I don't have those problems in the B. I can climb from 1000 feet to 35,000 under mil power, only burning a little over 1200 lbs of gas. I was just under 19,000 lbs when I leveled out at 35k. And I could hold a cruise speed of 0.85 Mach at ~55% throttle, 93% RPM, and about 3,500 PPH burn on each engine. That gives me 2.7 hours of cruise time, and more if you consider the fact that the jet gets lighter as it burns fuel. This was with a 3x2x2 loadout.

Tacview-20230625-203706-DCS.zip.acmi

[Mopeyranger0681]

1 hour ago, Callsign JoNay said:

I don't have those problems in the B. I can climb from 1000 feet to 35,000 under mil power, only burning a little over 1200 lbs of gas. I was just under 19,000 lbs when I leveled out at 35k. And I could hold a cruise speed of 0.85 Mach at ~55% throttle, 93% RPM, and about 3,500 PPH burn on each engine. That gives me 2.7 hours of cruise time, and more if you consider the fact that the jet gets lighter as it burns fuel. This was with a 3x2x2 loadout.

Tacview-20230625-203706-DCS.zip.acmi 122.23 kB · 0 downloads

Correct, but not what I was going for. A 3 x 2 x 2 loadout is probably more of a thing in real life and pretty easy to climb out and patrol with no worries. I was mostly noting the A model with much less power simply out performs the B with a heavy loadout up high. Above 28k specifically. Load up a dooms day loadout and go for bear in the B and you can’t climb above 28k or you will need to use AB to keep from stalling. Think it’s more of a drag numbers thing, same if you carry bombs allot which I like to do it reacts the same. However when you put the same loadout on the A, it will do just fine hanging out up at 35k feet with lots of weight. 

[Callsign JoNay]

10 hours ago, Mopeyranger0681 said:

Load up a dooms day loadout and go for bear in the B and you can’t climb above 28k or you will need to use AB to keep from stalling.

Something is either wrong with your throttle or your game. This is with a doomsday loadout, 0x2x6. It took me 300lbs more to climb to angels-35, and I have to burn about 3,800 PPH per engine instead of 3,500 PPH. My throttle is barely any higher than with the 3x2x2 load to hold 0.85 mach at 35,000 feet. Not even close to stalling here.

Edited: I originally wrote 0x2x4 loadout, but this climb and cruise was with a 0x2x6 loadout.

Edited June 26, 2023 by Callsign JoNay

[Mopeyranger0681]

13 minutes ago, Callsign JoNay said:

Something is either wrong with your throttle or your game. This is with a doomsday loadout, 0x2x4. It took me 300lbs more to climb to angels-35, and I have to burn about 3,800 PPH per engine instead of 3,500 PPH. My throttle is barely any higher than with the 3x2x2 load to hold 0.85 mach at 35,000 feet. Not even close to stalling here.

Actually I thought the same thing, I just bought a new winwing hotas and it is the same as my warthog was. Everyone in our group noticed similar performance that fly the tomcat. Maybe a weather thing? To hot? I will try to get on later and upload some tacviews. 

[Tweety777]

I've had similar issues with the B, I noticed that going up with over 15 degrees nose up right after takeoff I'll need flaps and a little AB to get there. If I level out more just after takeoff the jet gets that much faster and then easily climbs over 35k without any problems whatsoever.

[Bremspropeller]

What's your climb schedule then?

You're climbing using the region of max specific excess power, which is not pulling the nose up and waiting, but accelerating to speed x, maintain that speed in the climb with pitch and then cross over into a set Mach for the rest of the climb (sowewhere in the low-mid 20s), maintaining it with pitch  as well.

[Tweety777]

Actually I'm just doing something. I found out that waiting to pull the nose up further because I didn't manage to get the AP do what I wanted it to do. I'm not skilled enough to fly to be able to have my attention at doing the exact same thing over and over again.