correct as-is Our W.I.P. Viper Too Fast?

[SCPanda]

So the Viper should out rate the hornet? Hmmmm...

 

 

Edited February 5, 2021 by SCPanda

[bies]

5 hours ago, SCPanda said:

So the Viper should out rate the hornet? Hmmmm...

 

 

 

 

According to C.W. Lemoine "Mover", yes, easily. He was flying both types one after another.

 

On the other hand he was flying F-16 Block 30 "fighter variant", which was half ton lighter, had higher T/W and lower wing loading than our Block 50 CCIP. His Block 30 was better in turn fight than our late multirole variant.

Edited February 5, 2021 by bies

[Spurts]

On 2/3/2021 at 11:51 AM, TobiasA said:

The HAF manual mentions an overspeed protection.

For which motor?  Which page?  Not doubting you, but I want to read what it says for myself.

[wilbur81]

Sorry, ED Moderators.

 

We've gotten off topic. For my part: In summary, I started this thread out of curiosity after having enjoyed Hasard Lee's video about the top speed of the Viper and trying to reconcile the video with my in-game findings (which don't match up). The thread has been marked "correct-as-is" and I think we have had some good discussion here about the reasons for this.

 

As to where the thread has gone, turn rates and FM stuff have their own well established threads elsewhere... so go there if you want to talk about things other than Hasard's video and the blk 50's top speed.

 

If ED gets the Viper and the Hornet as realistic as possible in the end (which of course they will :-)), the Viper will have more power and a higher sustained turn rate than the Hornet and the Hornet will have a higher instantaneous turn rate and better maneuverability at low speeds and high AoA than the Viper. Full stop. 

 

 

 

[TobiasA]

Am 5.2.2021 um 14:21 schrieb Spurts:

For which motor?  Which page?  Not doubting you, but I want to read what it says for myself.

https://info.publicintelligence.net/HAF-F16.pdf

 

Page 1-46. The 129 has a dedicated overspeed shutoff valve. However, this does not protect you from air exceeding the speed of sound in the intake afaik, so it could still be damaged by that (like in a fast dive).

[Mover]

23 hours ago, wilbur81 said:

the Viper will have more power and a higher sustained turn rate than the Hornet and the Hornet will have a higher instantaneous turn rate and better maneuverability at low speeds and high AoA than the Viper. Full stop. 

 

 

 

 

Ehhh, no.

 

I won't get into numbers from the Em Diagram, but the first part of this statement is mathematically incorrect.

 

To calculate turn rate:

(degrees per second) = (Gradial x 1092)/KTAS

 

 

[wilbur81]

17 minutes ago, Mover said:

 

Ehhh, no.

 

I won't get into numbers from the Em Diagram, but the first part of this statement is mathematically incorrect.

 

To calculate turn rate:

(degrees per second) = (Gradial x 1092)/KTAS

 

 

Is this THE Mover!? Mr. Lemoine, Sir?  If so, I'll shut up right now.  If you're an imposter-Mover, take your statement up with Major Boswell and The Fighter Pilot Podcast:  https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/musing/it-depends/

 

PS - Are you referring to the "Power" comment or the "Sustained Turn-rate" comment? The Hornet technically has more power than the Viper (35,400lbs of thrust vs. the Viper's 29,500), but there's that 'ol weight/drag thing. If not the power comment, are you suggesting that the Hornet has a higher sustained and instantaneous turn rate than the Viper? I'll let the 100,000 Viper lovers on this forum come after you now. 

Edited February 6, 2021 by wilbur81

[Mover]

Just now, wilbur81 said:

Is this THE Mover!? Mr. Lemoine, Sir?  If so, I'll shut up right now.  If you're an imposter-Mover, take your statement up with Major Boswell and The Fighter Pilot Podcast:  https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/musing/it-depends/

 

PS - Are you referring to the "Power" comment or the "Sustained Turn-rate" comment? The Hornet technically has more power than the Viper (35,400lbs of thrust vs. the Viper's 29,500), but there's that 'ol weight/drag thing.

 

If you read the article you posted, that's not what he says either.  

 

I'm referring to your instantaneous turn rate comment.  Do the math.

 

I think people get confused on what instantaneous AOA vs instantaneous turn rate vs sustained turn rate means.

 

The first is not really relevant to your statement.

 

The second two refer to Ps on the E-M diagram.  The only way, mathematically, a Hornet is out rating a Viper is if the F-16 is in a two bag, TGP configuration and limited to 7.33Gs.  

[wilbur81]

5 minutes ago, Mover said:

 

If you read the article you posted, that's not what he says either.  

 

I'm referring to your instantaneous turn rate comment.  Do the math.

 

I think people get confused on what instantaneous AOA vs instantaneous turn rate vs sustained turn rate means.

 

The first is not really relevant to your statement.

 

The second two refer to Ps on the E-M diagram.  The only way, mathematically, a Hornet is out rating a Viper is if the F-16 is in a two bag, TGP configuration and limited to 7.33Gs.  

Hmm, I guess I'm just dense. When Maj. Boswell says, "a high instantaneous turn rate," I guess I just assume he means a high instantaneous turn rate.

[Mover]

1 minute ago, wilbur81 said:

Hmm, I guess I'm just dense. When Maj. Boswell says, "a high instantaneous turn rate," I guess I just assume he means a high instantaneous turn rate.

 

It does have a high instantaneous turn rate.  It does not have a higher instantaneous turn rate.  I'm not sure what he means by instantaneous AOA advantage, but that's what he said. I do agree the Hornet has an AOA advantage.  Whether the AOA rate is higher or not is valid for a one circle discussion, but less so when speaking of turn rates in a two circle fight.  

 

Do the math.  Believe me.  Or don't.  Either way, your statement was incorrect. 

[Diesel_Thunder]

On 2/1/2021 at 10:39 PM, TheBigTatanka said:

Here's the other thing..... Who is flying 800 knots on the deck?

 

That was one of the first things I did when I got the Viper.

 

At the time I only had the P-51 and A-10C, so when I bought the Viper, I had my first high performance plane. I went through the startup tutorials and then set myself up a clean wing Viper, started up, taxied to the runway and promptly went to full burner and had a blast doing things that the Hog could only dream of. Zoom climbs, Mach 1+, and then went treetop level to really feel the speed! Had an absolute blast and also emptied the tanks in roughly 9 minutes.

[wilbur81]

46 minutes ago, Mover said:

 

It does have a high instantaneous turn rate.  It does not have a higher instantaneous turn rate.  I'm not sure what he means by instantaneous AOA advantage, but that's what he said. 

Fair enough. Could you PM me the E-M charts for the F/A-18C Block 20 with the 402 EP's? Thanks. 

Edited February 6, 2021 by wilbur81

[Mover]

20 minutes ago, wilbur81 said:

Fair enough. Could you PM me the E-M charts for the F/A-18C Block 20 with the 402 EP's? Thanks. 

 

 

No.

[wilbur81]

3 minutes ago, Mover said:

 

No.

Is that because you don't have them, you don't want to share them or something else? If you haven't ever seen them...then that's something else. But please understand that Major Boswell is, to me (a non-credentialed jet hobby-est) a known entity, a Viper pilot, etc. Regardless of whether or not you "know what he means by...", you are just a forum member with 157 posts from my perspective, so be patient with me if I'm a little slow to just go with what you've said.  For all I know, you may be C.W. Lemoine, a Lockheed engineer or fighter pilot yourself. So my apologies if I'm too slow to just say, "I'm wrong, you're right" which may very well be true.   

[Mover]

Just now, wilbur81 said:

Is that because you don't have them, you don't want to share them or something else? If you haven't ever seen them...then that's something else. But please understand that Major Boswell is, to me (a non-credentialed jet hobby-est) a known entity, a Viper pilot, etc. Regardless of whether or not you "know what he means by...", you are just a forum member with 157 posts from my perspective, so be patient with me if I'm a little slow to just go with what you've said.  For all I know, you may be C.W. Lemoine, a Lockheed engineer or fighter pilot yourself. So my apologies if I'm too slow to just say, "I'm wrong, you're right" which may very well be true.   

 

I wonder if you guys realize how painful you make this sometimes.  

 

Jet performance numbers (E-M diagrams) are classified at worst and FOUO at best.  I have no desire to go to jail over a video game message board.  The fact that you even asked is a foul.

 

The unclassified formula I gave you is how turn rates work.  It does not matter what aircraft.  If you could make a 747 pull 9Gs, its instantaneous turn rate would out rate a Hornet.  Rate and radius calculations are basic math problems, regardless of the aircraft (the formula is always the same).  Aircraft performance is what determines Ps, max G, g-onset rate, speed, and AOA.  Instantaneous turn rate is the highest rate an aircraft can generate at a given speed.  Sustained turn rate is a function of specific power, which largely depends on thrust to weight, wing loading, drag, etc.

 

Thus, do the math.  

 

 

[DD_fruitbat]

1 hour ago, Diesel_Thunder said:

 

That was one of the first things I did when I got the Viper.

 

At the time I only had the P-51 and A-10C, so when I bought the Viper, I had my first high performance plane. I went through the startup tutorials and then set myself up a clean wing Viper, started up, taxied to the runway and promptly went to full burner and had a blast doing things that the Hog could only dream of. Zoom climbs, Mach 1+, and then went treetop level to really feel the speed! Had an absolute blast and also emptied the tanks in roughly 9 minutes.

 

I mean, why wouldn't you 

 

 

What's not fun about doing this!

 

PS, @Mover love your channel

Edited February 6, 2021 by DD_fruitbat

[wilbur81]

21 minutes ago, Mover said:

 

I wonder if you guys realize how painful you make this sometimes.  

 

Jet performance numbers (E-M diagrams) are classified at worst and FOUO at best.  I have no desire to go to jail over a video game message board.  The fact that you even asked is a foul.

 

The unclassified formula I gave you is how turn rates work.  It does not matter what aircraft.  If you could make a 747 pull 9Gs, its instantaneous turn rate would out rate a Hornet.  Rate and radius calculations are basic math problems, regardless of the aircraft (the formula is always the same).  Aircraft performance is what determines Ps, max G, g-onset rate, speed, and AOA.  Instantaneous turn rate is the highest rate an aircraft can generate at a given speed.  Sustained turn rate is a function of specific power, which largely depends on thrust to weight, wing loading, drag, etc.

 

Thus, do the math.  

 

 

Nice. Thanks, Broski! 

[TobiasA]

vor 14 Minuten schrieb Mover:

....

 

Thus, do the math.  

 

 

 

I did a performance calculator in C++ with a lift / drag / force per AOA, speed and altitude once. Came across a couple of tables for the viper, some guy converted some NASA wind channel data into a kinda nice lookup table.
It is one hell of math. Nothing is linear, not even our atmosphere. While it was more of a practice for me, it showed me that there is a lot of "it depends".

But... It was fun.

One of the most interesting moments was when I realized that the sustained turn rate is the exact point on a specific AOA (caused by G and speed) when the P/S is 0. In other words, you need your whole energy for the turn. All this after spending weeks in formulas and tables. You can then move around that point- slower, and your AOA is the limit (the AOA that you can sustain without losing speed), faster and the G will be the limit (at least in the viper). The middle in between is the "corner speed", the sweet spot with the highest sustainable turn rate.

[Mover]

30 minutes ago, TobiasA said:

 

I did a performance calculator in C++ with a lift / drag / force per AOA, speed and altitude once. Came across a couple of tables for the viper, some guy converted some NASA wind channel data into a kinda nice lookup table.
It is one hell of math. Nothing is linear, not even our atmosphere. While it was more of a practice for me, it showed me that there is a lot of "it depends".

But... It was fun.

One of the most interesting moments was when I realized that the sustained turn rate is the exact point on a specific AOA (caused by G and speed) when the P/S is 0. In other words, you need your whole energy for the turn. All this after spending weeks in formulas and tables. You can then move around that point- slower, and your AOA is the limit (the AOA that you can sustain without losing speed), faster and the G will be the limit (at least in the viper). The middle in between is the "corner speed", the sweet spot with the highest sustainable turn rate.

 

Yes, the definition of sustained is P/S = 0 for a given airspeed/altitude.

 

Simple turn rate calculations, however, don't require any fancy calculators or tables.  The formula above works for any aircraft.  

[TobiasA]

vor 2 Minuten schrieb Mover:

 

Yes, the definition of sustained is P/S = 0 for a given airspeed/altitude.

 

Simple turn rate calculations, however, don't require any fancy calculators or tables.  The formula above works for any aircraft.  

 

Yes. It's simple once you understand how physics work

Actually I was surprised how many rules-of-thumb exist, outperforming any complex math.  Back then, I talked to real life pilots and they just went like "there is a rule of thumb we use and it's pretty close", one including putting a hand on the map and each open hand equals 1000lbs of fuel for that specific distance...

[Bunny Clark]

15 hours ago, wilbur81 said:

Is this THE Mover!? Mr. Lemoine, Sir? 

Yes. Yes, it is. 

 

14 hours ago, wilbur81 said:

Could you PM me the E-M charts for the F/A-18C Block 20 with the 402 EP's? Thanks. 

 

There's a reason these charts can't be found on-line. You're asking someone to violate their security clearance. 

[Katj]

 
The only way, mathematically, a Hornet is out rating a Viper is if the F-16 is in a two bag, TGP configuration and limited to 7.33Gs.  

I find it weird to throw a "mathematically" in there. Under what constraints?

Are you only considering the maximum G of the airframes when calculating the instantaneous turn rate? If so, that is incorrect. The available G vs airspeed must be considered as well.

If a Hornet can pull 7.5 G at less than sqrt((7.5^2-1) / (9^2-1)) ≈ 83 % of the airspeed that a Viper needs to pull 9 G, the Hornet will outrate the Viper.

I'm not particularly familiar with the performance of either aircraft, if you say one will outrate the other I'm sure you are correct. I can't arrive at that conclusion with the data I have available, though.

[wilbur81]

8 hours ago, Bunny Clark said:

There's a reason these charts can't be found on-line. You're asking someone to violate their security clearance. 

Yeah, my request was sarcasm...which doesn't play well online. I'm very aware you cannot find such charts (partly because I've looked many times ). I did do a little past-forum research and I'm convinced "Mover" is our favorite "Mover," Lemoine. So...

 

Mover: I LOVE your channel, Sir! I just watched your "fini-flight" yesterday (Ironically, while I was "arguing" with you on this forum ). I really appreciate your content and do not doubt your expertise one bit, my friend! Gentlemen like yourself, "Jello", "Hasard," "Gonky," Markus at OmegaTau, and our man over the pond at "Aircrew Interview" have made this truly an incredible era to be an arm-chair fan of military Aviation! Thanks for that and your service, sir! Side-note, I once ran into Dan Rooney when I was a college student at a coffee shop here in KC when I was home over Christmas break. I didn't know who he was, but noticed his leather jacket with the Viper on it with the 138th FW patch when he was flying ANG in Tulsa. I chatted him up and he was extremely friendly and willing to talk Vipers/fighter aviation for a few minutes while we waited for coffee. Later on I started noticing his face on brochures, saw him on TV when PGA was in Tulsa, etc. and now on your channel. Folds is so cool and I'm glad you can give it some airtime on your channel. Cheers, brother and thanks for your service!

Edited February 7, 2021 by wilbur81

[Mover]

1 minute ago, Katj said:

I find it weird to throw a "mathematically" in there. Under what constraints?

Are you only considering the maximum G of the airframes when calculating the instantaneous turn rate? If so, that is incorrect. The available G vs airspeed must be considered as well.

If a Hornet can pull 7.5 G at less than sqrt((7.5^2-1) / (9^2-1)) ≈ 83 % of the airspeed that a Viper needs to pull 9 G, the Hornet will outrate the Viper.

I'm not particularly familiar with the performance of either aircraft, if you say one will outrate the other I'm sure you are correct. I can't arrive at that conclusion with the data I have available, though.

 

I posted the formula above.  It is correct.  Turn rate is independent of aircraft type.  

 

If the F-16 can pull 9Gs at a given airspeed and the Hornet can only pull 7.5 at the same speed, the Viper's turn rate will be higher.  

 

 

[Katj]

 
I posted the formula above.  It is correct.  Turn rate is independent of aircraft type.  
 
If the F-16 can pull 9Gs at a given airspeed and the Hornet can only pull 7.5 at the same speed, the Viper's turn rate will be higher.  
 
 

Yes, but as I said, that doesn't prevent the Hornet from _potentially_ having a faster turn rate at a lower speed.