F/A-18 vs F-16 Turn rate?

[Hammer1-1]

12 minutes ago, Xavven said:

 

I don't think you are going to convince a bunch of flight sim enthusiasts to not nitpick the flight model.

 

I think you're saying that the F-16 is competitive and you offered a dogfight video to show that it is. Well, I have to agree that the F-16 is competitive and its performance is pretty close to the F-18. When the matchup is that close, you're right, skill is more often the determining factor in who is going to win in guns only 1 vs 1. If the aircraft were more dissimilar, maybe the on-paper stats would be more important. It's fine to frame a question that way and answer it with your own observations which are perfectly valid.

 

There's another question to answer, however, and it's related to the title of this thread: did DCS model the F-18 and F-16 turn rates correctly to real life? In pursuing this question, I can't really accept a dogfight as evidence to prove the case one way or another. I'd have to isolate all the variables, for example holding a level turn, not varying G or airspeed, and have an accurate stopwatch. Repeat at different altitudes, speeds, and G, take multiple samples, and do the statistical analysis.

 

There are too many other variables going on in a dogfight to clearly conclude whether ONE aspect of an aircraft, specifically turn rate, is performing accurately to real life. There could be a skill difference, someone could have made a BFM error, one person may have dumped all his F-18's energy to try to force a 1-circle radius fight at slow speed and thus made it easier for the F-16 to outrate it because the F-16 maintained its energy instead, you have TWR differences that dictate which aircraft can recover to its best turn rate speed again after dumping energy, you have people exchanging altitude for speed and back, you have jinking, you have negative Ps usage to gain angles using high ITR, you have dumping the nose to regain airspeed, etc.

 

TLDR: posters here are attempting to answer different questions, and the evidence that helps answer one question doesn't actually translate to answering the other.

I totally agree with you. Again, my fallback statement is that the Viper is barely in Alpha state and was released very questionably too early. Im not saying nitpicking isnt a bad thing, but all things considering....I could see this discussion going somewhere and somewhere good in a year from now. But right now its not even nearly close to prime time as the hornet is, and even the hornet still has some flight dynamics that need to be modeled like ground effects. But right now? If the Viper is rating not nearly as fast as it should be, that is one thing; not out rating the Hornet entirely is another, and thats what I fail to see here.

Edited May 12, 2021 by Hammer1-1

[Ватрушка]

Instead of a thousand words.

 

Edited May 12, 2021 by Ватрушка

[dundun92]

10 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

not outrating the Hornet entirely is another,

It doesnt. Thats objectively demonstrable. Is it a difference skill can overcome? Sure, but thats not the point of the thread.

[wilbur81]

3 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

Well that goes even further to prove my point!  Everyone on here arguing over what ships supposed to do what on paper, the results vary slightly from real world paper, and MAYBE the rate fight is in ones head and not on graph paper. I am NOT saying the flight model is incorrect or correct as I am not an engineer nor a test pilot, and Im willing to venture that most of you arent either. The fact is that even though both aircraft are fairly matched, the Viper still rates the Hornet in everything Ive seen so far that isnt on paper. Im sorry, but I just dont see it. Maybe we'll see just how far off the flight model is when the Viper nears completion when parasitic drag is more realistically modeled, but for now from everything Ive seen in the sim its still favoring the Viper at rate fighting.

 

Indeed. 

[karasawa]

A quick check on the flight manual:

Condition: 22000lbs total weight (9990kg), clean, speed = 513km/h

Real world F-16C-50 sustains 19.5deg/sec at sea level, and 16.5deg/sec at 5000feet (1524m). By linear interpolation, it should sustain 17.53deg/sec at 1000m.

https://dcs.silver.ru/66-831

However the DCS F-16C sustains only 15.5deg/sec at 1000m.

 

THAT IS RIDICULOUS 

 

 

Edited May 12, 2021 by karasawa

[Xavven]

Wow, so I looked at https://dcs.silver.ru/66-831 and what struck me as particularly amazing is the way he's gathering data. There's a link on his site that shows an example:

 

I think he's using a mod to do the flying so that he can hit exact turn parameters better than any human can. This improves my confidence in the data posted on the site. Hell, if I knew this existed it would have saved me a ton of time a few weeks ago when I was comparing the DCS F-16 sustained turn rate performance to some EM charts we found on the internet. Trying my darnedest to hold a perfect turn but it's hard to do that.

 

To me, this is a pretty scientific way of testing turn performance. Currently the DCS F-18 has both a faster sustained turn rate and a smaller turn radius at all speeds according to this. I'd be curious, if anyone still doubts this, what is your reasoning? Is there something about this study that you think is invalid?

[SCPanda]

4 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

And then he follows through and gets shot down AND out rated by a Viper. Kind of a moot point IMO.

 

Dude I don't think you actually know what was actually going on in that video, or you just lack BFM experience in DCS. 

 

GS was not flying the Hornet properly to RATE FIGHT the Viper in that video. In the 1st and 3rd round that he lost to the Viper (in the 2nd round the Viper went for 1 circle so I'm not going to talk about that round), he was not trying to rate with the Viper but instead he was trying to lure the Viper into a 1 circle fight, but the Viper pilot did not take the bait. From a 2 circle perspective, GS in his Hornet was either over speeding above 500 knots or pulling too much and cashed all his energy. i.e. He was not flying the proper rate speed in the Hornet. That is why he got out rated by the Viper and got shot down. 

 

I'm not saying GS is a bad pilot and doesn't know how to rate fight in a Hornet. I watch his videos and I know he is capable. BUT GS clearly stated in that video that he was trying to demonstrate what will likely happen IRL, which a Hornet will not attempt to go 2 circle with a Viper (I'm literally paraphrasing his words). That's why GS did not try to properly rate with the Viper, despite the Hornet can out rate the Viper in almost every scenarios in DCS (paraphrasing GS again). So you stating that the Viper can out rate the Hornet in DCS based on a video where the Hornet is not flying properly to rate fight the Viper is clearly wrong. 

 

I suggest you re-watch GS's video and pay attention to how he flew the Hornet and what he said. 

 

The Hornet can our rate the Viper in all speed ranges with or without the paddle in DCS. That is a fact. It's not someone's opinion based on paper stats. I have had numerous dogfights (in 3 digits I believe) in DCS Just Dogfight severs. I have never been able to out rate the Hornet in a Viper. In a Hornet however (which I don't really fly nearly often), I can out rate almost anything, and the Viper is one of the easiest jets to out rate in DCS. 

 

[SCPanda]

1 hour ago, wilbur81 said:

Indeed. 

Wrong. I know you are a Hornet driver have seen your posts in the Hornet and Viper sub-forum. You like the Hornet's current FM and you just don't want it to be "nerfed".

[Hammer1-1]

7 minutes ago, SCPanda said:

Dude I don't think you actually know what was actually going on in that video, or you just lack BFM experience in DCS. 

 

GS was not flying the Hornet properly to RATE FIGHT the Viper in that video. In the 1st and 3rd round that he lost to the Viper (in the 2nd round the Viper went for 1 circle so I'm not going to talk about that round), he was not trying to rate with the Viper but instead he was trying to lure the Viper into a 1 circle fight, but the Viper pilot did not take the bait. From a 2 circle perspective, GS in his Hornet was either over speeding above 500 knots or pulling too much and cashed all his energy. i.e. He was not flying the proper rate speed in the Hornet. That is why he got out rated by the Viper and got shot down. 

 

I'm not saying GS is a bad pilot and doesn't know how to rate fight in a Hornet. I watch his videos and I know he is capable. BUT GS clearly stated in that video that he was trying to demonstrate what will likely happen IRL, which a Hornet will not attempt to go 2 circle with a Viper (I'm literally paraphrasing his words). That's why GS did not try to properly rate with the Viper, despite the Hornet can out rate the Viper in almost every scenarios in DCS (paraphrasing GS again). So you stating that the Viper can out rate the Hornet in DCS based on a video where the Hornet is not flying properly to rate fight the Viper is clearly wrong. 

 

I suggest you re-watch GS's video and pay attention to how he flew the Hornet and what he said. 

 

The Hornet can our rate the Viper in all speed ranges with or without the paddle in DCS. That is a fact. It's not someone's opinion based on paper stats. I have had numerous dogfights (in 3 digits I believe) in DCS Just Dogfight severs. I have never been able to out rate the Hornet in a Viper. In a Hornet however (which I don't really fly nearly often), I can out rate almost anything, and the Viper is one of the easiest jets to out rate in DCS. 

 

1. I just used his latest video as an example of an 18 v 16 rate fight. The 16 won.

2. Ive plenty of BFM practice in both airframes. My experience is similar. Ive yet to win a rate fight with an 18 against a 16 and vice versa.

 

As Ive been saying this whole time, Ive yet to see any concrete proof that this isnt the case. And again, if I am wrong, then I am wrong. I am not even claiming to be an expert in this field, but as Ive kept stating over and over again, Ive yet to see anything that this is the case without the use of paddles. You want the -18 to be nerfed? Ill suggest waiting until the Viper is finished before jumping to conclusions AND THEN lets talk nerf.

Edited May 12, 2021 by Hammer1-1

[SCPanda]

4 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

1. I just used his latest video as an example of an 18 v 16 rate fight. The 16 won.

2. Ive plenty of BFM practice in both airframes. My experience is similar. Ive yet to win a rate fight with an 18 against a 16 and vice versa.

 

As Ive been saying this whole time, Ive yet to see any concrete proof that this isnt the case. And again, if I am wrong, then I am wrong. I am not even claiming to be an expert in this field, but as Ive kept stating over and over again, Ive yet to see anything that this is the case without the use of paddles.

Then you are flying the Hornet wrong. Maybe you just don't know what you are doing.... 

 

The concrete proofs are in the topic and basically all over the place in the forum. I can't convince you if you are just ignoring and denying the facts bro. 

[wilbur81]

3 minutes ago, SCPanda said:

Wrong. I know you are a Hornet driver have seen your posts in the Hornet and Viper sub-forum. You like the Hornet's current FM and you just don't want it to be "nerfed".

Getting our Hornets and Vipers closer to real world performance would not be "nerfing." I for one as a DCS Viper and Hornet owner am looking forward to both jets being as realistic as possible.  But no carrier ops for the Viper makes me turn to the Hornet again and again...

[Hammer1-1]

1 minute ago, SCPanda said:

Then you are flying the Hornet wrong. Maybe you just don't know what you are doing.... 

 

The concrete proofs are in the topic and basically all over the place in the forum. I can't convince you if you are just ignoring and denying the facts bro. 

How about this, Ive suggested it earlier.

Calculate the minimum turn radius of both aircraft in dcs and the time it takes to compete the turn at its maximum sustained G. Put it on tacview. Compare the diameter with real world figures. If the -16s turn radius is 1500' at 3 seconds, and thats what its supposed to look like IRL, then compare it with the Hornets information and go from there. Those are the numbers I would love to see.

[Xavven]

1 minute ago, Hammer1-1 said:

How about this, Ive suggested it earlier.

Calculate the minimum turn radius of both aircraft in dcs and the time it takes to compete the turn at its maximum sustained G. Put it on tacview. Compare the diameter with real world figures. If the -16s turn radius is 1500' at 3 seconds, and thats what its supposed to look like IRL, then compare it with the Hornets information and go from there. Those are the numbers I would love to see.

 

Have you looked at https://dcs.silver.ru/66,67 and what do you think of it? You keep asking for numbers and they're right there.

Edited May 12, 2021 by Xavven

[Hammer1-1]

Just now, Xavven said:

 

Have you looked at https://dcs.silver.ru/66-831 and what do you think of it? You keep asking for numbers and they're right there.

First time Ive even seen this. Ill give it a glance.

[Xavven]

Just now, Hammer1-1 said:

First time Ive even seen this. Ill give it a glance.

ok. I just edited the link so it compares the F-16 and the F-18, instead of just showing the former.

[Hulkbust44]

 
Have you looked at https://dcs.silver.ru/66,67 and what do you think of it? You keep asking for numbers and they're right there.

Has anyone tested this in 2.7 yet? Like Hammer said before, the Hornet may be better on paper, and I've yet to see it perform as such in game. I've had the Hornet almost since release and of course it's a great fighter, just haven't seen it outrate a Viper in practice.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Hammer1-1]

Im not seeing a whole lot of variables in this, and Im also seeing all 3 versions of the 16 all over the place on that graph. Quite frankly this tells me everything I just tried to point out-  the flight model is still in development, and hasnt been updated since 2.7 was released. If Im looking at this correctly, its time to turn is getting lower and lower, while the Hornets graph lines are parallel to each other. Now my next question would be how they compared to real life values.

Edited May 12, 2021 by Hammer1-1

[SCPanda]

5 minutes ago, Hulkbust44 said:

Has anyone tested this in 2.7 yet? Like Hammer said before, the Hornet may be better on paper, and I've yet to see it perform as such in game. I've had the Hornet almost since release and of course it's a great fighter, just haven't seen it outrate a Viper in practice.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

No FM change on the Viper or Hornet in 2.7

[karasawa]

A quick check on the flight manual:

Condition: 22000lbs total weight (9990kg), clean, speed = 513km/h

Real world F-16C-50 sustains 19.5deg/sec at sea level, and 16.5deg/sec at 5000feet (1524m). By linear interpolation, it should sustain 17.53deg/sec at 1000m.

https://dcs.silver.ru/66-831

However the DCS F-16C sustains only 15.5deg/sec at 1000m.

 

THAT IS RIDICULOUS 

[Hulkbust44]

No FM change on the Viper or Hornet in 2.7

That we know of, ED doesn't exactly announce everything in the change log.

Such as Viper VRP, PUP etc I learned this was implimented a few patches ago and don't remember any mention in the notes. I just saw a video in it today.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[dundun92]

I think illustrates whats trying to be conveyed:

Edited May 12, 2021 by dundun92

[karasawa]

Please stop crying and complaining. Shouldn't we check the flight manual and point out the difference?

 

I checked the turn rate at 513km/h and it is noticeably lower than the flight manual. Shouldn't we start from here?

[Hammer1-1]

3 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

I think illustrates whats trying to be conveyed:

 

Just now, karasawa said:

A quick check on the flight manual:

Condition: 22000lbs total weight (9990kg), clean, speed = 513km/h

Real world F-16C-50 sustains 19.5deg/sec at sea level, and 16.5deg/sec at 5000feet (1524m). By linear interpolation, it should sustain 17.53deg/sec at 1000m.

https://dcs.silver.ru/66-831

However the DCS F-16C sustains only 15.5deg/sec at 1000m.

 

THAT IS RIDICULOUS 

Hows about you give this a shot next time you fly: fill your viper up to where its mass = 14231kg total, which is the weight the Hornet was tested at. I honestly dont know why people benchmark with 50% payload, when you want weight to be similar.

[karasawa]

The F-16 manual gives turn rate at sea level and at 5000 feet (1524m). With interpolation we can easily get the turn rate at 1000m and compare it with DCS.

[dundun92]

Just now, Hammer1-1 said:

Hows about you give this a shot next time you fly: fill your viper up to where its mass = 14231kg total, which is the weight the Hornet was tested at. I honestly dont know why people benchmark with 50% payload, when you want weight to be similar.

By that logic, youd load an F-14 with negative fuel to compare. Though id agree that same fuel % isnt perfect, but its not terribly bad either. In some BFM competitions, they use a constant time to empty to judge fuel weights, which is probably better than same %.