Jump to content

How much throttle are we supposed to use in the A10CII?


melchionda

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, ASAP said:

I'd suggest you stop holding over AAA and SAMs lol.  Find a safe hold where you can receive and think through a 9 line and plan out your attack. This is the part of the fight where you should have your throttles "stood up" and you should be saving gas. Being in max here is only decreasing the time you get to support the guys on the ground by burning more gas than necessary. Save max for ingressing and egressing the target.

Oh, I do have a safe hold, the problem is that the Hog spends more time ingressing and egressing than other jets spend at the hold. 🙂 Indeed, with the Hog in many cases you'll barely have time to reset at IP before having to set up for another pass, it's just that slow. Of course, it still manages to outlast the likes of Viper and Hornet when it comes to loiter time. I tend to run out of ordnance before I run out of gas, at least with sensible loadouts.

In fact, if things are seriously hot on the ground and the terrain is fairly open, you might be unable to get back to IP at all - just pass after pass, whatever it takes to take the heat off the troops. It's nice when you have the time to get out of flak and slowly crawl back to IP, but even then you'll be going buster just to avoid having it take all day. It's not even that inefficient, generally when you're doing altitude changes, you want to be done with them ASAP, so you go full throttle until you reach the desired altitude. Same with turns, you're more draggy when turning and the more power you put in, the better you turn, and the sooner you're done. Economical cruising only applies if you're flying level or loitering (in the latter case you're usually turning, but it doesn't really matter how fast you're coming around the circle, since that's not what decides when you stop). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ASAP said:

Also when talking about tactical formations being 2 miles away can still be in a formation. Its actually easier to look through your flight lead into the target area and provide mutual support from further away in a lot of circumstances.

All good points!

I'd just like to make a quick remark regarding this one: I was thinking of, but not actually describing, a situation where the wingman might be in wedge formation, but with no power reserves available, would fall into a kind of trail way behind lead instead of nicely offset to the side. Like you said, when that happens, the wingman has to ask lead to throttle back, but I think a good lead shouldn't put the wingman into that position in the first place. And since all leads started as wingmen, they all know how slow the Hog is when catching up with a fast lead. 😉

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

To avoid making mistakes as lead, it's a best way to fly wingmen a LOT, so you can experience (and later remember of course) all bad things a good lead shouldn't do.

If lead expects his wingman to keep formation, he NEVER should firewall the throttle (except for any emergency/tactical situation), because the wingman obviously has just as much max power as lead has, with no extra margin to catch up in case being sucked or stripped. So lead's firewalling conserves wingman's "misalignment" reg formation. And every change in flight path or speed should be pre-announced, if you want wingman to anticipate and follow your move as lead in a timely fashion. The closer, the more so. Sorry if being off-topic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Razor18 said:

To avoid making mistakes as lead, it's a best way to fly wingmen a LOT, so you can experience (and later remember of course) all bad things a good lead shouldn't do.

If lead expects his wingman to keep formation, he NEVER should firewall the throttle (except for any emergency/tactical situation), because the wingman obviously has just as much max power as lead has, with no extra margin to catch up in case being sucked or stripped. So lead's firewalling conserves wingman's "misalignment" reg formation. And every change in flight path or speed should be pre-announced, if you want wingman to anticipate and follow your move as lead in a timely fashion. The closer, the more so. Sorry if being off-topic.

While giving the wingman a little power is good form, there are ways to maintain and regain formation position without touching the throttle. Every turn or climb is an opportunity for the wingman to fix his position.

And an effective wing pair need to be able to maneuver in combat spread pre-engagement with minimal comms.

Tactical turns need to happen completely automatically so they need to be practiced constantly. 

Post engagement rejoins need to happen quickly and smoothly without the need to communicate more than the egress heading.

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Razor18 said:

To avoid making mistakes as lead, it's a best way to fly wingmen a LOT, so you can experience (and later remember of course) all bad things a good lead shouldn't do.

If lead expects his wingman to keep formation, he NEVER should firewall the throttle (except for any emergency/tactical situation), because the wingman obviously has just as much max power as lead has, with no extra margin to catch up in case being sucked or stripped. So lead's firewalling conserves wingman's "misalignment" reg formation. And every change in flight path or speed should be pre-announced, if you want wingman to anticipate and follow your move as lead in a timely fashion. The closer, the more so. Sorry if being off-topic.

In close or route formation, the standard is for no comms from lead for maneuvers--wingmen are expected to be observing and just following lead, AFAIK.  Obviously, you'd still want to talk if you're doing something crazy, though 🙂 And lead should be aware of what wingmen can and can't do.

There are a lot of things that require hand and head signals and control inputs to signal formation changes and such, but the hand signals are obviously a no-go.  I don't think moving your head with trackIR or VR moves the in-game pilot head other people see, either.

Tactical and more spread out formations may require radio comms, but IRL they prefer to use visual signals like wing flashes.  In DCS, these are absolutely impossible--at 6000', a buddy and I tried to use wing flashes and we just burst out laughing, because we had no idea which way the other was banking at that distance, so we'll probably use radio comms there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

In close or route formation, the standard is for no comms from lead for maneuvers--wingmen are expected to be observing and just following lead, AFAIK.  Obviously, you'd still want to talk if you're doing something crazy, though 🙂 And lead should be aware of what wingmen can and can't do.

There are a lot of things that require hand and head signals and control inputs to signal formation changes and such, but the hand signals are obviously a no-go.  I don't think moving your head with trackIR or VR moves the in-game pilot head other people see, either.

Tactical and more spread out formations may require radio comms, but IRL they prefer to use visual signals like wing flashes.  In DCS, these are absolutely impossible--at 6000', a buddy and I tried to use wing flashes and we just burst out laughing, because we had no idea which way the other was banking at that distance, so we'll probably use radio comms there

Actually, head movements are visible in VR but we still use discord. No hand movements... yet.

In a fight we (my wingman and I) don't need to talk much pre merge and post fight, but we have been flying together a very long time and know what to expect. Makes it hard work to fly with someone without that shared experience unless they have had some serious training.

 

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Razor18 said:

...with lead firewalling the throttle?

Yes, our standard procedure in the F-5 is 450 knot afterburner climb to our chosen ingress altitude (usually above 20 for fuel)

Its pretty simple to stay in combat spread if you understand the geometry of joining and staying in formation.

BTW, one of the major reasons air forces teach formation flying is because it is the learning laboratory for BFM.

If you cannot close, join and maintain formation on someone who WANTS you too, you will be hopeless trying to do it on someone actively trying to prevent it.

The quickest way to evaluate someone's basic skill level at BFM is a very short formation flying hop.

 

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Actually, head movements are visible in VR but we still use discord. No hand movements... yet.

In a fight we (my wingman and I) don't need to talk much pre merge and post fight, but we have been flying together a very long time and know what to expect. Makes it hard work to fly with someone without that shared experience unless they have had some serious training.

 

Wait, it does??

I've tried looking from the F2 external view, but it doesn't affect the pilot's head there, and people in MP have said they can't see my head movements.  I must have missed something, then...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

Wait, it does??

The left/right direction that other players look in MP has been synced for many years. Other types of head motion (up, down, forward, aft, translating left and right) are not synced as far as I know (most of them are in the Tomcat, but I'm not aware of any other module that does it).

7 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

Tactical and more spread out formations may require radio comms, but IRL they prefer to use visual signals like wing flashes.  In DCS, these are absolutely impossible--at 6000', a buddy and I tried to use wing flashes and we just burst out laughing, because we had no idea which way the other was banking at that distance, so we'll probably use radio comms there

If it depends whether the other guy dips left wing down or right wing down, that's very hard to tell in DCS at a mile or more.

However, when the signal is to dip any wing, it's quite possible to signal the wingman to initiate a maneuver and do comms-out-turns. When both participants are sufficiently observant, you can do check turns, nav turns, 60 to 120 degree delayed tac turns, shackle turns, cross turns, hook turns (away from wingman), all without saying a single word.

6 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Makes it hard work to fly with someone without that shared experience unless they have had some serious training.

That's the beauty of standardization. 😉

When you find players of a similar experience-level, it's not necessary to train with them for several months just to be able to fly a sortie together. I'm sure most virtual squadrons have their own ways and their own understanding of doing things, but those that strive for realism should be pretty compatible.

I haven't flown formation with people outside of my squad in ages, but I've done some CAS with other squads and found it surprising how compatible everyone was.

6 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Yes, our standard procedure in the F-5 is 450 knot afterburner climb to our chosen ingress altitude (usually above 20 for fuel)

Maybe I should train more with lead pilots that do go full throttle in the A-10. So far my experience has been that when I fall behind, there's just no way to catch up in that case.

I mean, sure, if lead is turning left or right, I can use the same kind of maneuvers that would otherwise be classified as BFM, pull lead pursuit, do a low yoyo or whatever else comes to mind to get into the desired position. But a lead that flies more or less straight, well, if I fall out of formation just once, then the best case scenario is that I keep lagging behind lead, and if I make any kind of additional mistake, I'll fall so far behind that lead may have to fly a full orbit to allow me to catch up again.

Maybe that's the kind of realism that some players strive for. I think it's mostly a waste of everyone's time and intentional sabotage of formation integrity.


Edited by Yurgon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Yurgon said:

The left/right direction that other players look in MP has been synced for many years. Other types of head motion (up, down, forward, aft, translating left and right) are not synced as far as I know (most of them are in the Tomcat, but I'm not aware of any other module that does it).

Ooooooooh.  Thanks! 🙂 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

Sure, if lead's making a turn or climbing

You can gain in turn by cutting corner (not too much in a check turn tough, especially if lead is turning away from wingman), but please explain, how could you gain on lead who is on full throttle and climbing??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Razor18 said:

...with lead firewalling the throttle?

Absolutely. The use of lead lag and pure pursuit are all ways to adjust formation position. The wingman should aggressively use geometry to fix position. Flight lead will have throttles parked in max during ingress and egressing target area it’s 2s job to use geometry. Once 1 is back in a safe hold he’ll pull the throttles back and the wingman can refine his position still primarily relying on geometry. Wedge formation gives wingmen a lot maneuvering  room to do that.  

Granted in a real flying squadron there are standards for what airspeeds are being used in the hold, and flight leads brief their wingmen before the flight on tactics they use. This would include things like attack formation position on ingress/egress and how they plan on transitioning too and from the hold for an attack.  the wingman knows what 1 will do and can plan accordingly  

 

2 hours ago, Razor18 said:

You can gain in turn by cutting corner (not too much in a check turn tough, especially if lead is turning away from wingman), but please explain, how could you gain on lead who is on full throttle and climbing??

Climb less steeply. A flight lead who’s climbing 10 degrees nose high will have a slower GS than 2 who’s climbing at 3 degrees. That will let 2 move forward on the line once 2 has fixed the line or gotten in front of the line he can match leads climb or even climb steeper to move back on the line and slide up into position.  Once lead levels off he should pull the throttles so he doesn’t leave 2 in the dust. 

using the vertical also can be used when lead is flying level. You can descend and gain airspeed to slide back forward on the line. 

This is all very basic tactical formation stuff that USAF pilots learn flying he T-38 at UPT, so it’s expected they will be good at it. If a pilot can’t maintain formation with power or geometry they owe FL a stripped call and then it’s the flight leads job to fix the formation, could be a power modulation or a check turn/shackle  that’s up to the FL  

all of this is assuming a tactical formation. If you are in close or route outside of a landing pattern 1) you have questionable tactics 2) you shouldn’t be in max because 2 can’t maintain formation. 


Edited by ASAP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, if both are to the firewall, only larger changes in heading help wingman to catch up. And if you have a long straight leg, then without lead reducing throttle, wingman will NEVER catch up. BEcause he has just as much thrust as lead. Simple.

What you say about wingman climbing less steeply to catch up with lead totally defies basic physical principles. Sum of energy is kinetic (speed) + positional (altitude). If you gain on one of them, you will loose on another (if in full, or at least the same throttle setting for both the whole time of course).

If both are in full throttle, but lead climbs more steep, then yes, lead will have slower ground speed for the time of steeper climbing, but will gain altitude obviously quicker, than wingman. So wingman will momentarily gain on him regarding forward position, but will never catch up with his altitude. And if wingman will start to climb after gaining some distance on lead to catch up with altitude, then wingman will slow down just as much as lead slowed down due to climbing, so in best case scenario, he will arrive to the very same (sucked) position relative to lead, where wingman started attempting to gain up on lead. I would rather try it in multiplayer with 2 A-10C same parameters, wingmen being "sucked", full throttle, and try gain on him in climbing. How would you gain in climb any more, if you couldn't even gain in level flight, as described above? Track would say more than thousand words could.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Razor18 said:

Again, if both are to the firewall, only larger changes in heading help wingman to catch up. And if you have a long straight leg, then without lead reducing throttle, wingman will NEVER catch up. BEcause he has just as much thrust as lead. Simple.

What you say about wingman climbing less steeply to catch up with lead totally defies basic physical principles. Sum of energy is kinetic (speed) + positional (altitude). If you gain on one of them, you will loose on another (if in full, or at least the same throttle setting for both the whole time of course).

If both are in full throttle, but lead climbs more steep, then yes, lead will have slower ground speed for the time of steeper climbing, but will gain altitude obviously quicker, than wingman. So wingman will momentarily gain on him regarding forward position, but will never catch up with his altitude. And if wingman will start to climb after gaining some distance on lead to catch up with altitude, then wingman will slow down just as much as lead slowed down due to climbing, so in best case scenario, he will arrive to the very same (sucked) position relative to lead, where wingman started attempting to gain up on lead. I would rather try it in multiplayer with 2 A-10C same parameters, wingmen being "sucked", full throttle, and try gain on him in climbing. How would you gain in climb any more, if you couldn't even gain in level flight, as described above? Track would say more than thousand words could.

I agree in a straight away, and in general, the flight lead needs to not suck at being a flight lead and lead his formation appropriately to not make it impossible for the wingman to get in position. (Reference stripped/saddled comm from one of my earlier posts). Flight lead doesn’t always need to be in max, but a smart wingman and a good flight lead can make it work when necessary. It’s the wingman’s job to stay in formation and tell flight lead when he is unable to do so  

The brevity term is stripped not sucked ( in the USAF at least

You’re obviously not going to gain an energy advantage. You’re going to fix the line in your formation which takes priority over the stack in tactical formations. There are obviously limits to how much you can catch up. But If your at 1.8 nm in wedge behind flight lead and he starts climbing you can delay your climb and preserve airspeed to close the gap to get back closer to 1-1.5nm pretty easy. It works and I do it all the time. You just have to be smart about how and when to swap airspeed for altitude. You will be lower than your flight lead, but tactical formations  allow for the wingmen to have a stack. If FL continues to hold max power once he levels off then you will probably get stripped. Again, Flight leads should know better than to do that. 


Edited by ASAP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Razor18 said:

Again, if both are to the firewall, only larger changes in heading help wingman to catch up. And if you have a long straight leg, then without lead reducing throttle, wingman will NEVER catch up. BEcause he has just as much thrust as lead. Simple.

What you say about wingman climbing less steeply to catch up with lead totally defies basic physical principles. Sum of energy is kinetic (speed) + positional (altitude). If you gain on one of them, you will loose on another (if in full, or at least the same throttle setting for both the whole time of course).

If both are in full throttle, but lead climbs more steep, then yes, lead will have slower ground speed for the time of steeper climbing, but will gain altitude obviously quicker, than wingman. So wingman will momentarily gain on him regarding forward position, but will never catch up with his altitude. And if wingman will start to climb after gaining some distance on lead to catch up with altitude, then wingman will slow down just as much as lead slowed down due to climbing, so in best case scenario, he will arrive to the very same (sucked) position relative to lead, where wingman started attempting to gain up on lead. I would rather try it in multiplayer with 2 A-10C same parameters, wingmen being "sucked", full throttle, and try gain on him in climbing. How would you gain in climb any more, if you couldn't even gain in level flight, as described above? Track would say more than thousand words could.

I think what @ASAP was trying to depict was climbing LATER than lead.  At the end, wingman has to climb more steep to spend less time at slower speed.

Think using a low yo-yo to catch up, and a high yo-yo to prevent an overshoot.

Aside from geometry, the engines make more power at lower altitudes, so if you stay lower, you also get an additional small speed advantage.


Edited by jaylw314
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Razor18 said:

You can gain in turn by cutting corner (not too much in a check turn tough, especially if lead is turning away from wingman), but please explain, how could you gain on lead who is on full throttle and climbing??

Fix the lateral before the vertical.

The most common mistake for the wingman is to use pure pursuit (pointing at lead).

If you point at lead in a full throttle climb, you will never catch him or be able to get into formation.

Instead, you fix the lateral before the vertical.

Go level or climb at a lower deck angle than lead, generating more speed than he has. Do that until you are AHEAD of lead's 3-9 line, then start climbing or climb harder than previous and you will be able to slip into your proper formation position.

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gents, I dunno how much anyone ever went just a bit deeper into physics, but once again, if both aircraft with the same load, fuel, same drag and mass, and both has the same throttle setting (let is be full throttle for simplicity's sake, because 100% can not be increased any more, and this was the starting point in my OP yesterday at 3 p.m.), you can. not. gain. on lead. in straight climb. ever. No matter how steep or shallow wingman or lead climbs initially or later on. It's physics. I rather leave it at that, before someone answers a completely different question again. Of course I warmly welcome any honest track proving otherwise.

Maybe a TacView file would be even more telling with all the parameters displayable.


Edited by Razor18
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Razor18 said:

Gents, I dunno how much anyone ever went just a bit deeper into physics, but once again, if both aircraft with the same load, fuel, same drag and mass, and both has the same throttle setting (let is be full throttle for simplicity's sake, because 100% can not be increased any more, and this was the starting point in my OP yesterday at 3 p.m.), you can. not. gain. on lead. in straight climb. ever. No matter how steep or shallow wingman or lead climbs initially or later on. It's physics. I rather leave it at that, before someone answers a completely different question again. Of course I warmly welcome any honest track proving otherwise.

Maybe a TacView file would be even more telling with all the parameters displayable.

 

There are aircraft the world over defying your understanding of physics on a daily basis.

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...