Strange behavior in nevada

[Angel101]

Hi all, I discovered with a friend that we enjoy to do BFM´s against each other about a problem in performances on the tomcat side. We are very proficiency at BFM and we have the same skill level, so if we fly the same plane we end in a draw or the first that make a mistake get deleted from the sky in a matter of seconds. We enjoy also the dissimilar fight, and we also try to drag the opponent were the strength of our plane shines.

 

So, we tried F-14 vs F-18/F-15/F-5/etc... in Nevada and the Tomcat doesn't have any chance against none of them (disregard F-5 :D)

 

Talking only about F-14 vs F-18 the 18 out-turn, out-climb and out-putwhateveryouwanthere the Cat in Nevada, but if we jump to georgia it's a completely different beast, it transforms in a very letal opponent. From the Cat side, In nevada we need full throttle the whole fight and in georgia sometimes we need to go out of burner to not overspeed that beast.

 

Yeah, we know about the elevation in Nevada and both mission were flown with same Tº and pressure.

 

Others modules doesn't "feel" so different between maps than the Cat. (well, telemetry from tacview advanced it's different, so there aren't just feelings)

 

TL: DR; The Cat in nevada feels like flying in a derated thrust engine and in Georgia like a full power on steroids.

 

Anyone has noticed something similar?

[Nosferatuwhisky 1-1]

different altitudes, different air density due to both humidity, altitude, and temperature, all change how any engine performs, be it a piston or jet engine.

[Tom Kazansky]

Is it only the F-14 that shows this behaviour?

 

 

Makes altitude alone a difference at all? With altimeter set to standard 29.92, indicated 10.000ft are 10.000ft pressure wise, right?

Edited April 9, 2019 by Tom Kazansky

[Deano87]

Maybe try some acceleration and turn-time tests on both maps with the same temp and pressure altitude. See what differences show up.

[Angel101]

;3876219']different altitudes' date=' different air density due to both humidity, altitude, and temperature, all change how any engine performs, be it a piston or jet engine.[/quote']

 

I know, I know, I fly for living.

 

But I mean, the difference if we fly in nevada at 20º 5000 feet, and 29'92. VS georgia 20º 15.000 feet and 29,92. is very, very, very large.

 

Also same engine performance should apply to the opponent, isn't it? and not the case in the F-18.

[Deano87]

I know, I know, I fly for living.

 

But I mean, the difference if we fly in nevada at 20º 5000 feet, and 29'92. VS georgia 20º 15.000 feet and 29,92. is very, very, very large.

 

Also same engine performance should apply to the opponent, isn't it? and not the case in the F-18.

 

Er... 10,000ft difference between those altitudes...

[Donut]

Er... 10,000ft difference between those altitudes...

 

I think he should state whether these are MSL or AGL...

[Angel101]

Er... 10,000ft difference between those altitudes...

 

Exactly! And still behave worse the lower one in nevada. Did you read the whole post or just de TL,DR?

[Donut]

I see what your are saying...

 

Those altitudes must be AGL and engine performance at a lower altitude in Nevada seems worse than performance at a higher altitude in the Caucasus map.

[Deano87]

Exactly! And still behave worse the lower one in nevada. Did you read the whole post or just de TL,DR?

 

And where exactly in your post did you say that the Nevada jet performed worse at 5000ft than the Georgia jet did at 15000ft? Oh yeah, you didn't. You just stated that there was a difference in performance, as there should be. You didn't state WHAT the difference was in performance between those two altitudes. One needs to be specific.

 

Now show us your data on acceleration, sustained turn rate and energy bleed differences between the maps and then we can talk numbers. Not just "worse" or "better". All you require is a stopwatch and a notepad and some consistent flying ability and you can give some numbers to work with. I don't doubt your case, but if you want to convince people its a real issue you can easily supply some numbers to back up your claim.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Deano87

[Angel101]

And where exactly in your post did you say that the Nevada jet performed worse at 5000ft than the Georgia jet did at 15000ft? Oh yeah, you didn't. You just stated that there was a difference in performance, as there should be. You didn't state WHAT the difference was in performance between those two altitudes. One needs to be specific.

 

Now show us your data on acceleration, sustained turn rate and energy bleed differences between the maps and then we can talk numbers. Not just "worse" or "better". All you require is a stopwatch and a notepad and some consistent flying ability and you can give some numbers to work with. I don't doubt your case, but if you want to convince people its a real issue you can easily supply some numbers to back up your claim.

 

I have tacview advanced version, should be easy to provide some charts... this week I'm full of work, maybe the next week I can provide data.

 

I'm not talking about small difference, If you are used to the plane you will notice this in the first 2 minutes turning with another player.

 

Hornet and eagle doesn't seems to have such difference.

 

No idea if is an issue just on my end or more people experience this. (an to be more precise in Open Beta update 2.5.4.29167)

 

Regards.

[captain_dalan]

Can't say anything about the difference when fighting on different maps, but there is another issue (aside from engine performance) with the Tomcat and the altitude, and that is the wing sweep.

[nibbio]

I know nothing, but can consistently kill the Su27 in the instant action in Caucasus in less than 30 sec, whereas the Mig29 in the instant action in Nevada always gets me.

 

OP might be on to something here.

Edited April 9, 2019 by nibbio

[Deano87]

Ok..

 

I had a few mins tonight to run a couple of test.

 

Both scenarios tested at 5000ft msl, 20c, 29.92. Empty aircraft, full internal fuel before each test.

 

First Test: Acceleration from stable 250 knots to Mach 1.2.

 

Nevada = 53.9 secs

Georgia = 53.7 secs

 

Second Test: Sustained turn airspeed and G at 15 units AoA, Full Burner. As close to 0 vertical speed as possible to hold. Speed and G checked after 3 initial turns for things to stabilise.

 

Nevada = ~380kn at ~6.5G

Georgia = ~380kn at ~6.5G

 

Both Jets feel the same to me. I'm really interested to see what differences you notice and what differences you can show with data.

 

There certainly didn't seem to be any massive differences in the tests I did. But I'd be happy to be proved wrong.

 

Tomorrow I may set up to fight the same AI aircraft in both places and see if the fights go differently.

[Tom Kazansky]

I like when it gets scientific. Ty Deano87.

 

 

@Angel101:

 

 

Do you have this feeling only in MP or SP too?

 

 

If it is only in MP then you might find this thread interesting:

 

 

Wing breakage vs ping

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=238411

 

 

It is not about engine-performance in MP but strange differences coming with higher pings in MP.

 

 

I don't know if you and your mate can sort things out by changing the F-14 vs FA-18 planes after each MP dogfight and see if one plane has issiues for both of you guys?

[Deano87]

Thats a very good point Tom!

[Angel101]

Ok..

 

I had a few mins tonight to run a couple of test.

 

Both scenarios tested at 5000ft msl, 20c, 29.92. Empty aircraft, full internal fuel before each test.

 

First Test: Acceleration from stable 250 knots to Mach 1.2.

 

Nevada = 53.9 secs

Georgia = 53.7 secs

 

Second Test: Sustained turn airspeed and G at 15 units AoA, Full Burner. As close to 0 vertical speed as possible to hold. Speed and G checked after 3 initial turns for things to stabilise.

 

Nevada = ~380kn at ~6.5G

Georgia = ~380kn at ~6.5G

 

Both Jets feel the same to me. I'm really interested to see what differences you notice and what differences you can show with data.

 

There certainly didn't seem to be any massive differences in the tests I did. But I'd be happy to be proved wrong.

 

Tomorrow I may set up to fight the same AI aircraft in both places and see if the fights go differently.

 

Thanks for your time.

 

I've been doing some flight today, and test are very close in both maps... I'm start thinking that isn't related to the power plant...

[Angel101]

I like when it gets scientific. Ty Deano87.

 

 

@Angel101:

 

 

Do you have this feeling only in MP or SP too?

 

 

If it is only in MP then you might find this thread interesting:

 

 

Wing breakage vs ping

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=238411

 

 

It is not about engine-performance in MP but strange differences coming with higher pings in MP.

 

 

I don't know if you and your mate can sort things out by changing the F-14 vs FA-18 planes after each MP dogfight and see if one plane has issues for both of you guys?

 

Yes, we changed planes between sessions and maps. (happened online but both with good ping 40-60) The one flying the F-14 in Nevada was being killed every time, things changed for the one flying the cat in Caucasus... if it was happened only to me, maybe I haven't oppened that thread.

 

That's the telemetry from differents dogfight... I just checked T/R (take with a grain of salt)

 

 

But is funny that in Nevada we weren't unable to obtain a similar T/R

 

I don't know where to look now...

 

It's a lift problem? wingsweep related?

 

I'm running out of ideas.

[Tom Kazansky]

Those graphs show what you described in OP.

 

 

Interesting problem.

 

 

Does today's OB update change anything?

 

 

Having those nice graphs it should be enough to test the max turn rate of a single F-14 and compare the results to what you have posted here.

[bonesvf103]

I know nothing, but can consistently kill the Su27 in the instant action in Caucasus in less than 30 sec, whereas the Mig29 in the instant action in Nevada always gets me.

 

OP might be on to something here.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, I'm the same way. Although lately I've also found the Flanker in the Caucasus mission, if you give him enough pressure, eventually he goes belly up and doesn't really fight anymore. Talk about taking the fight of a guy!

 

 

v6,

boNes

[Hummingbird]

I don't recall noticing any difference in results when switching between Nevada and Caucasus, our results in player F-14 vs player F-15 fights were the same.

 

Are you guys remembering to do the fights over land ? I'm saying this as fighting over the water can be very disorienting, as when you point your nose down and the entire view is a blue blanket of water you can be left with little to no visual reference of movement, which can seriously mess up your maneuvers and performance there'in. I personally struggle to be effective over water for this reason, hence I prefer to do my DACT runs over solid ground.

Edited April 10, 2019 by Hummingbird

[Nodak]

Maybe it's a visibility issue instead of performance? For me its easier to fight on Nevada turf, simply because I can see further and judge angles better over the deserts. Very hard to do over the green. Being as your fighting another manned jet, he may be having an easier time judging angles and tracking your big mover.

[draconus]

I know nothing, but can consistently kill the Su27 in the instant action in Caucasus in less than 30 sec, whereas the Mig29 in the instant action in Nevada always gets me.

This is totally different stuff and has nothing to do with the map itself. The AI uses unrealistic SFM, has no G and structural limits and is poor material for any comparison. Having that said also these two aircraft are much different. You can always switch to fight against 29 in Caucasus just for testing.