corner speed

[dave76]

guys who knows tomcat corner speed?:book::book: tks:):)

[turkeydriver]

this sim will not match any EM chart of a currently used military aircraft as stated by Wags in an interview- it will be as close as they can but not match. That being said, 330kts depending on altitude and weight.

[ClearDark]

Who needs numbers, full burner, AoA at 15 sharp, combat flaps = win.

[Banzaiib]

Best sustained turn speed is roughly 360 kts at sea level with 4x AIM-7 and 2x AIM-9 and full fuel... the more you weigh, the more this goes up.

 

Your mileage may vary. There's a chart floating around, but I can't be bothered to search if you dont (I literally asked the same question). :)

[Hummingbird]

this sim will not match any EM chart of a currently used military aircraft as stated by Wags in an interview- it will be as close as they can but not match. That being said, 330kts depending on altitude and weight.

 

That's new to me. Why wouldn't they be able to match it?

[Cobra847]

That's new to me. Why wouldn't they be able to match it?

 

I think the poster misunderstood Wags? We don't intentionally change numbers in any case in the -14.

[Jabbers_]

That's new to me. Why wouldn't they be able to match it?

 

Wags recently said in a podcast with Alert 5 that the FM and Charts wouldnt match exactly ... but i think he was more refering to the F-18 and possible future aircraft like the F-16, not aircraft no longer in service. The F-14 matches pretty well currently and will only get better over time as they tweak the FM.

[Blinde]

Combat flaps?

[Jabbers_]

Combat flaps?

 

He might mean Maneuvering flaps, or plays with full flaps out in most planes because damage isnt modelled properly. Maneuver flaps in combat is a real thing in the F-14, actual full flaps is not.

[Hummingbird]

I think the poster misunderstood Wags? We don't intentionally change numbers in any case in the -14.

 

Yeah I'm thinking he must have understood, because matching real life as closely as possible is what this sim is supposed to be all about, atleast in terms of flight models.

 

In terms of weapons systems I can ofcourse understand if sometimes liberties or precautions have to be taken.

Edited March 22, 2019 by Hummingbird

[turkeydriver]

I think the poster misunderstood Wags? We don't intentionally change numbers in any case in the -14.

 

I may have- Wags stated in a podcast interview that modules are checked whenever possible against EM charts and other material to ensure it can't be used as a training device for military application. That's a paraphrase. If I'm off please correct.

[SonofEil]

Wags only briefly mentioned it in the Alert 5 interview, but on The Fighter Pilot Podcast he and Jell-O discussed it at some length.

ED deliberately does not match certain performance characteristics of the real aircraft specifically to prevent the simulation from being used as a training or tactical aid.

https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/episodes/028-air-combat-simulation-gaming/

The whole episode is worth a listen but the parts where Jell-O (former F-18C pilot) tries the sim are kind of cringy. The sound is pretty terrible and Jell-O had obviously never interacted with a consumer flight sim before and kept confusing ED and Thrustmaster. He was overall impressed with ED's F-18 though.

Edited March 23, 2019 by SonofEil