JRM Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 Hi F16 is underpowered this because cant reach the 2.05 match at 40000 feet according to the F16 C Wiki specs This is something that need to be corrected NOW, the current F16 reach only to 1860 km/h or less at 40,000, so please ED team fix this for us who buyed this module....it souldnt be complicated!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRM Posted June 19, 2020 Author Share Posted June 19, 2020 I only reached match 1.99 with no pylons on this one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkeye_UK Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 speed isn't everything lol. So by your reckoning, the model is 0.06 mach off or 3% and this needs to be fixed NOW. And you know the mach speed is accurate how, Wiki (you have got to be joking me right)? What about temperature and wind's aloft lol. How about you ask the dev's nicely to actually role out system's that matter within the sim and mission capability, you know something that has some relevance. Or even better fix and improve netcode. That said, if you have read the forums you will note that they are spending time on bug squashing and sorting out the episode that has been 2.5.6, oh and obviously Hornet will take priority to finish as per their brief so i think your demands are in vain, one given the utter immediate irrelevance and secondly bigger problems to deal with. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DCS & BMS F14B | AV-8B | F15E | F18C | F16C | F5 | F86 | A10C | JF17 | Viggen |Mirage 2000 | F1 | L-39 | C101 | Mig15 | Mig21 | Mig29 | SU27 | SU33 | F15C | AH64 | MI8 | Mi24 | Huey | KA50 | Gazelle | P47 | P51 | BF109 | FW190A/D | Spitfire | Mossie | CA | Persian Gulf | Nevada | Normandy | Channel | Syria | South Atlantic | Sinai Liquid Cooled ROG 690 13700K @ 5.9Ghz | RTX3090 FTW Ultra | 64GB DDR4 3600 MHz | 2x2TB SSD m2 Samsung 980/990 | Pimax Crystal/Reverb G2 | MFG Crosswinds | Virpil T50/CM3 | Winwing & Cougar MFD's | Buddyfox UFC | Winwing TOP & CP | Jetseat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikeck Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 You posted the same thing about the F-18. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger-II Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 I couldn't disagree with you more... https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4389677&postcount=22 Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port "When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover. The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts. "An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubbies2003 Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 Hi F16 is underpowered this because cant reach the 2.05 match at 40000 feet according to the F16 C Wiki specs This is something that need to be corrected NOW, the current F16 reach only to 1860 km/h or less at 40,000, so please ED team fix this for us who buyed this module....it souldnt be complicated!!! Seriously dude this is what you are going to do with multiple aircraft is just compare them to unofficial wiki specs then talk ish about ED? I let it go when I saw it in the 18 section but take your troll elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furiz Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 Hi F16 is underpowered this because cant reach the 2.05 match at 40000 feet according to the F16 C Wiki specs This is something that need to be corrected NOW, the current F16 reach only to 1860 km/h or less at 40,000, so please ED team fix this for us who buyed this module....it souldnt be complicated!!! Wiki spec... See why that is bad source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon Posted June 19, 2020 Share Posted June 19, 2020 Yea no Furiz. Wikipedia pages that are not obscure are one of the most reliable sources of information these days. If you're in doubt, just go to the sources section below. That being said, op, you're not getting anywhere with all your topics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobek Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 Yea no Furiz. Wikipedia pages that are not obscure are one of the most reliable sources of information these days. If you're in doubt, just go to the sources section below. Which definitely doesn't extend to the capabilities of military equipment. Good, fast, cheap. Choose any two. Come let's eat grandpa! Use punctuation, save lives! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimesake Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 Well just check HAF F-16 manual, that is Mach 2.04 with A/B and Mach 1.05 without A/B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pizzicato Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 It souldnt be complicated!!! 100% agree. They just need to make a call to MakePlaneGoFaster(2.05, 40000) in the code. Every fool knows that. :thumbup: i7-7700K @ 4.9Ghz | 16Gb DDR4 @ 3200Mhz | MSI Z270 Gaming M7 | MSI GeForce GTX 1080ti Gaming X | Win 10 Home | Thrustmaster Warthog | MFG Crosswind pedals | Oculus Rift S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exorcet Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 so please ED team fix this for us who buyed this module....it souldnt be complicated!!! The speed isn't hardcoded. It's the result of the sum total of forces on the jet as modeled. The forces arise from parameters that also have to predict how the jet performs in every other situation and do so accurately. It's not necessarily easy to just tweak the speed without causing other problems. M2 is pretty close, if we're taking M2.05 (without context like fuel load, etc) to be official. Awaiting: DCS F-15C Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drPhibes Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 Yea no Furiz. Wikipedia pages that are not obscure are one of the most reliable sources of information these days. If you're in doubt, just go to the sources section below. A good example of the opposite was the wiki page for the AV-8B, which until recently claimed that it could carry the AGM-88 and AGM-84, neither of which is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 A good example of the opposite was the wiki page for the AV-8B, which until recently claimed that it could carry the AGM-88 and AGM-84, neither of which is true. Was that info with a citation? Like in the F16 page about the top speed, the citation is a reference to an af.mil document about the F16. What I quoted just seems to an old myth that refuses to die. Sure, when Wikipedia was young, using info from it would probably not go over well with your teachers etc, but the way it is now, it's a fine starting point to find what you need. If you're writing something you will get a grade on, using the actual cited sources is probably better, but for just finding info it's a nice source in itself. https://www.livescience.com/7946-wikipedia-accurate.html Just try to edit the page about Lions, and see how long that sticks. edit: btw in no way am I defending OP's crusade against "wrong" top speeds, nor do I see a need to change anything ingame... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Focha Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 Is it sometimes hard to achieve those manual values in RL. Sometimes you have to descend to get those, and you have other effects. But what is the point? Is saying that because the F16 does not reach a certain Mach number its engine is underpowered? ... Useless use of internet space OP. ASUS N552VX | i7-6700HQ @ 2.59GHz | 16 GB DDR3 | NVIDIA GF GTX 950M 4 Gb | 250 Gb SSD | 1 Tb HD SATA II Backup | TIR4 | Microsoft S. FF 2+X52 Throttle+Saitek Pedals | Win 10 64 bits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mars Exulte Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 Was that info with a citation? Like in the F16 page about the top speed, the citation is a reference to an af.mil document about the F16. What I quoted just seems to an old myth that refuses to die. Sure, when Wikipedia was young, using info from it would probably not go over well with your teachers etc, but the way it is now, it's a fine starting point to find what you need. If you're writing something you will get a grade on, using the actual cited sources is probably better, but for just finding info it's a nice source in itself. https://www.livescience.com/7946-wikipedia-accurate.html Just try to edit the page about Lions, and see how long that sticks. edit: btw in no way am I defending OP's crusade against "wrong" top speeds, nor do I see a need to change anything ingame... Fact : Wikipedia selects a single arbitrary variant for their specs. Ergo IT IS NOT RELIABLE. There are many variants of every aircraft, you can't just say ''Blah blah''. Example, the differences between a P-51A and P-51D are EXTREME. Like ''opposite characteristics''. So no, wikipedia is not ''reliable'' for technical specifications. General history? Yeah, pretty reliable. But NOT for really indepth specifics of something itself highly specific. As you said ''starting point''. You don't end your investigation there. You know what IS a good source? The actual aircraft manuals, often freely available on the internet. Seriously, why in the hell would you reference wikipedia when there are ACTUAL 100% reliable sources available, except for laziness and ignorance? Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти. 5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thechaps16 Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 Changing topic to "Is wiki reliable for tech specs?"... ^^ Aim high! Win10-64 / MAG Z-790 Tomahawk Wifi / Intel i7-13700 KF / MSI MAG Coreliquid 360R V2 / MSI RTX-4080 SuprimX / Kingston SK Hynix 64Go DDR5-6400-C32 / 1*Nvme Crucial CT2000P3 2.0Tb / 5*SSD Samsung 860QVO 1Tb / 3*Samsung S27E330 Monitors / HP-Reverb G2 / Track-Ir 5 / Thrustmaster: Warthog Throttle + Warthog Stick + F/A-18 Stick + T.Flight Rudders / Home Cinema LG HT503TH / Home-Cockpit F/A-18C (currently only right console, others being build) / Samsung Galaxy Tab S7+ as a Flypad and Sim control Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odey Posted June 23, 2020 Share Posted June 23, 2020 (edited) The people that actually fly these jets have difficulty even getting close to the "advertised specs". I listened to podcasts where they mention being in a dive with a slick jet and struggle to obtain these speeds. I would have to wonder if the speed limit specs refer to airframe limitations. Hit afterburner in anything in a steep dive and you'll go fast but when does the airframe start losing pieces ? An example is Mitsubishi Zeros in dives over stressing the weak elevators. When ED makes the Blackbird then complaining about speed is ok. :smilewink: Edited June 24, 2020 by Odey i5-10600KF, 16Gb DDR4, GTX1660 Super, HP Reverb G2, TM Cougar, TM Warthog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee-Jay Posted June 25, 2020 Share Posted June 25, 2020 Hi! I would have to wonder if the speed limit specs refer to airframe limitations. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4304759#post4304759 F-16 do not have variable air inlet. Could be the reason ... ASUSTeK ROG MAXIMUS X HERO / Intel Core i5-8600K (4.6 GHz) / NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti FE 12GB / 32GB DDR4 Ballistix Elite 3200 MHz / Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB / Be Quiet! Straight Power 11 1000W Platinum / Windows 10 Home 64-bit / HOTAS Cougar FSSB R1 (Warthog grip) / SIMPED / MFD Cougar / ViperGear ICP / SimShaker JetPad / Track IR 5 / Curved LED 27'' Monitor 1080p Samsung C27F396 / HP Reverb G2 VR Headset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regards Posted June 27, 2020 Share Posted June 27, 2020 I only reached match 1.99 with no pylons on this one Mach 1.99 or 2.05 is irrelevant on a fighterjet without some packages of democracy. Personally, I wouldn't enter hostile airspace without loads of clear messages V-max is only useful after you delivered the payload and get the hell back home for a cup of tea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts