How to get at Mach 2.0?

[Shadoware]

F-16 can reach mach 2.0 right?

 

I can only get there in a dive and no other way, it doesn't matter altitude or lack of payload or pylons!

 

Is that occurring because flight model is not accurate yet?

[razo+r]

I've already reached Mach 2.02 in a straight line with it.

 

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/346332824191893504/629676385333411870/Screen_191004_153850.png

[Owl Dynamic]

What altitude did you test this on and which speed did you read? Remember IAS or CAS is not the same as EAS or TAS or Mach number. Aeordynamic speeds are quite a deep and confusing topic.

[Shadoware]

I set the hud to TAS.

 

I tried at 20000 feet, 30000, 35000. 40000

 

 

The aircraft seem to stabilize at 1.94 or around this number.

 

I tried in PG map.

[Wolfox1]

Yeah I've Tested the F-16 Engine, it's about 50% of the real engines... I fly the F-16s in realistic Simulators, and I've never seen such a bad-performance engine for an F-16... I think they made it on purpose.

[Quid]

Are you flying it clean? The instant you hang rails on it, it's going to increase the drag and you'll wind up with a lower top speed. I hit 2.01M at about 35,800 feet ASL and held it for over a minute before throttling back with clean wings (wingtip rails) and the fuel tank rail on the belly no problem.

[Shadoware]

Are you flying it clean? The instant you hang rails on it, it's going to increase the drag and you'll wind up with a lower top speed. I hit 2.01M at about 35,800 feet ASL and held it for over a minute before throttling back with clean wings (wingtip rails) and the fuel tank rail on the belly no problem.

 

 

Yeah I was completely clean! How long did you take to reach mach 2.0?

 

The problem I see is that close to mach 1.9 and above the speed increase rate becomes so slow that I'm gonna run out of fuel long before reaching mac 2.0.

Edited August 1, 2020 by Shadoware

[Shadoware]

Yeah I've Tested the F-16 Engine, it's about 50% of the real engines... I fly the F-16s in realistic Simulators, and I've never seen such a bad-performance engine for an F-16... I think they made it on purpose.

 

 

This module is early access so its not ready but why would they do that?

[silverdevil]

I've already reached Mach 2.02 in a straight line with it.

 

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/346332824191893504/629676385333411870/Screen_191004_153850.png

 

http://www.csgnetwork.com/tasinfocalc.html

 

according to the image 1085 which is in deed below mach 2

 

https://www.fighter-planes.com/jetmach1.htm

 

mach is affected by temperature which of course is lower at higher altitudes.

[Etirion]

Yeah I've Tested the F-16 Engine, it's about 50% of the real engines... I fly the F-16s in realistic Simulators, and I've never seen such a bad-performance engine for an F-16... I think they made it on purpose.

 

Wow! Only 50%! So that means that those realistic simulators and the real F16 have a T/W of over 2:1, incredible!

[Quid]

Yeah I was completely clean! How long did you take to reach mach 2.0?

 

The problem I see is that close to mach 1.9 and above the speed increase rate becomes so slow that I'm gonna run out of fuel long before reaching mac 2.0.

 

 

From the time I broke 1.0M to the time Tacview showed me reliably holding at 2.0M, it was 3 minutes 47 seconds. I dropped back below 2.0M at 5 minutes, 32 seconds after breaking 1.0M.

[falcon_120]

Wow! Only 50%! So that means that those realistic simulators and the real F16 have a T/W of over 2:1, incredible!

XD. He supercruise at Mach 1.6 full of weapons in that simulator

 

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Wolfox1]

You guys know nothing about avionics. Sorry to tell you.

 

Im a former test pilot in R.A.S.

 

But if you think United States Air Force is planning to defend its borders against the russians overseas at 2,000NM With Aim-120 for 18NM.. Than sorry to bust your dream... it wont happen. Missiles reach far beyond this simulator. Its a matter of life and death. Aim-120D goes beyond 160NM... The first Aim-120A in early 80s was at 18-30NM.. I dunno why you keep calling it C... its A.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Wolfox1

[deadpool]

This is really not what we needed.

[Quid]

You guys know nothing about avionics. Sorry to tell you.

 

Im a former test pilot in R.A.S.

 

But if you think United States Air Force is planning to defend its borders against the russians overseas at 2,000NM With Aim-120 for 18NM.. Than sorry to bust your dream... it wont happen. Missiles reach far beyond this simulator. Its a matter of life and death. Aim-120D goes beyond 160NM... The first Aim-120A in early 80s was at 18-30NM.. I dunno why you keep calling it C... its A.

 

 

Okay, trolling is one thing, but now you're moving towards Stolen Valor. I'd suggest stopping right there.

 

 

 

That said, this has gotten completely off topic. My hope is OP was able to figure out getting the jet above 2.0M. Any word?

[Thinder]

Wow! Only 50%! So that means that those realistic simulators and the real F16 have a T/W of over 2:1, incredible!

 

 

In your wildest dreams.

 

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions.html

 

Go there and try to find me a variant of the F-16 with a 2.1 TWR...

 

Max Mach is always computed in optimum conditions at best altitude and thrust settings, at combat weight a MLU have a TWR of 0.94.

 

Specifications

 

Engine: One Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220 turbofan, rated at 14,590 lb.s.t. dry and 23,770 lb.s.t. with afterburning.

Maximum speed: Mach 2.05 at 40,000 feet. Service ceiling 55,000 feet. Maximum range 2400 miles. Initial climb rate 62,000 feet per minute.

Dimensions: wingspan 32 feet 9 1/2 inches, length 49 feet 3 1/2 inches, height 16 feet 8 1/2 inches, wing area 300 square feet.

Weights: 16,285 pounds empty, 25,281 pounds combat, 37,500 pounds maximum takeoff.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Thinder

[GGTharos]

Yeah I've Tested the F-16 Engine,

 

No, you haven't.

 

it's about 50% of the real engines...

 

No, it isn't.

 

I fly the F-16s in realistic Simulators,

 

No, you don't.

 

and I've never seen such a bad-performance engine for an F-16... I think they made it on purpose.

 

You haven't seen any engine performance for anything.

 

The F-16 performance graphs are available publicly. Show us exactly where your tests differ from the real life performance graphs. (aka, this is how we know you're either a troll or a fake).

[GGTharos]

In which case, it is probably a good idea to check the mission's temperature settings. Higher temperature results in less performance.

[Frederf]

Aren't the F-16's "remove pylons" options simply cosmetic?

[Quid]

Aren't the F-16's "remove pylons" options simply cosmetic?

 

No, they actually have drag value.

[BIGNEWY]

Hi all

 

Please read the forum rules, and please treat each other with respect, if you can not, do not post.

 

Thread cleaned

 

Thank you