If you want 2 circle in a F-16, stay above 10000 feet.

[oldtimesake]

We can conclude from your test that a DCS F-16 (weight = 22000lbs ) can only sustain 17.4deg / sec at air speed slightly higher than Mach 0.4, which is 2.1 deg/sec lower than the manual. Don't you find it ridiculous?

[Xavven]

I think I averaged more like 18.9 deg./sec., but even with my imperfect flying (my G varied a bit in the turn and I dropped 60 ft of altitude and gained 6 knots of speed over 19 seconds) I don't think I varied enough to materially change the results.   360 deg / 19 sec = 18.94 deg./sec.

 

 

 

Although, that should put me closer to Ps = +100 than the Ps = 0 line. I should have gained 1900 ft of altitude over that whole turn. That's only if Tacview's speed is to be trusted, though. Like I said, my HUD indicated IAS of more like 270 knots in that turn, not 280-285. At that 270 knots I'm closer to Ps = 0 than Ps = +100

Edited April 14, 2021 by Xavven

[oldtimesake]

4:01:45 to 4:02:04 is somewhere between 19s and 20s depending on the "sub-sec" accuracy, so the average turn rate should be 18-18.95 deg/sec. That is 0.5~1.5 deg/sec below manual (19.5deg/sec). Based on the speed gain and altitude loss that is almost balanced.

 

It is safe to assume it is still about 0.5~1.5 deg/sec lower than manual.

Edited April 14, 2021 by oldtimesake

[Xavven]

9 minutes ago, oldtimesake said:

4:01:45 to 4:02:04 is somewhere between 19s and 20s depending on the "sub-sec" accuracy, so the average turn rate should be 18-18.95 deg/sec. That is 0.5~1.5 deg/sec below manual. Based on the speed gain and altitude loss that is almost balanced.

 

I think it is safe to assume it is still about 1 deg/sec lower than manual.

 

 

Yeah, good point, it's at least 19 seconds. Being even a half second more changes the rate significantly. I'm willing to say my test shows 1 deg./sec. too slow compared to the chart, or 100 FPS too low on specific excess power. Somewhere in that ballpark.

[oldtimesake]

5 minutes ago, Xavven said:

 

Yeah, good point, it's at least 19 seconds. Being even a half second more changes the rate significantly. I'm willing to say my test shows 1 deg./sec. too slow compared to the chart, or 100 FPS too low on specific excess power. Somewhere in that ballpark.

Can you try deploy the trailing edge flap and check if that helps the turn rate?

[Comrade Doge]

@MoverGood day sir, sorry to bother, I have a question, how do you find the current F-16 flight model from your experience with it? Does it behave like it should? Does it need more tuning? Thanks in advance...

[Mover]

14 hours ago, oldtimesake said:

Can you try deploy the trailing edge flap and check if that helps the turn rate?

 

The TEFs and LEFs automatically schedule.  

[Mover]

1 hour ago, Comrade Doge said:

@MoverGood day sir, sorry to bother, I have a question, how do you find the current F-16 flight model from your experience with it? Does it behave like it should? Does it need more tuning? Thanks in advance...

 

I have not tried any max performance stuff since the new update.  It's hard to accurately assess because simulators/games never feel like the real thing - even the high fidelity sims we use for training.  There's a reason for the phrase "sim-isms."

 

This jet is based on a foreign Block 50.  I flew a SCU 7.1 F-16 Block 30 and MMC Block 42.  My last sortie in the Viper was in 2012.

 

I will say it feels like the g-onset rate is slow and energy bleed rates are high.  In some places it accelerates faster than I remember.  It seems to be much harder to hit and sustain 9Gs in the game than in real life.  

 

As far as I know, it's early access, so of course it'll get more fine tuning.  

[Comrade Doge]

1 hour ago, Mover said:

 

I have not tried any max performance stuff since the new update.  It's hard to accurately assess because simulators/games never feel like the real thing - even the high fidelity sims we use for training.  There's a reason for the phrase "sim-isms."

 

This jet is based on a foreign Block 50.  I flew a SCU 7.1 F-16 Block 30 and MMC Block 42.  My last sortie in the Viper was in 2012.

 

I will say it feels like the g-onset rate is slow and energy bleed rates are high.  In some places it accelerates faster than I remember.  It seems to be much harder to hit and sustain 9Gs in the game than in real life.  

 

As far as I know, it's early access, so of course it'll get more fine tuning.  

I understand, many thanks for the information, have a nice day sir. 

[Ватрушка]

1 hour ago, Mover said:

 

I have not tried any max performance stuff since the new update.  It's hard to accurately assess because simulators/games never feel like the real thing - even the high fidelity sims we use for training.  There's a reason for the phrase "sim-isms."

 

This jet is based on a foreign Block 50.  I flew a SCU 7.1 F-16 Block 30 and MMC Block 42.  My last sortie in the Viper was in 2012.

 

I will say it feels like the g-onset rate is slow and energy bleed rates are high.  In some places it accelerates faster than I remember.  It seems to be much harder to hit and sustain 9Gs in the game than in real life.  

 

As far as I know, it's early access, so of course it'll get more fine tuning.  

Are there any problems with the FM F-18? Does he lose energy in ITR as slowly as in DCS?

Edited April 15, 2021 by Ватрушка

[karasawa]

I posted an instruction on how to measure the ps loss in tacview:

 

Hope it helps.

Edited April 23, 2021 by karasawa

[feipan]

Considering this:

 

https://hushkit.net/2019/03/16/2019-analysis-how-good-is-the-block-ii-pakistan-jf-17-fighter-aircraft-today-compared-to-its-peers-and-potential-threats/

 

Quote

How does the latest JF-17 compare with the following:

A. MiG-21 Bison 

Performance is very similar – at least insofar as there is little of note to choose between the two on kinematics. The JF-17 has a slight edge in sustained turn rate especially at lower speeds but this is of marginal importance given the Bison’s Helmet Mounted Sight and R-73 combination which currently gives the latter a superior chance during a merge over the Block 1 and 2 JF-17. Both have small visual and relatively small radar cross sections.
In terms of weapons, again the picture is similar, with the R-73 and R-77 on one hand being mature and fully integrated into the Indian Bison fleet, whilst the PL-12 when fully integrated should give the JF-17 a significantly more capable long range ‘stick’.
Sensors are also comparable – both will rely heavily on information received from other assets such as ground stations, fighters with larger radar apertures and AWACS.


B. PAF F-16s

The F-16 Block 52+ is a far superior aircraft in almost all respects besides visual signature and cost. However, with the addition of the PL-12 and ASELPOD, the JF-17 Block 2 is relatively comparable in most respects to the older F-16 Block 15 and MLU models which form the majority of Pakistan’s fleet. However, the F-16 remains a superb dogfighting aircraft, has a larger radar aperture with more power, and has more ‘grunt’ at higher altitudes above 35,000ft than the JF-17.

 

That would put the Thunder's performance slightly over the MiG-21s. We don't have the Bison so that's hard to compare with the DCS 21bis. But on the same hand it says the F-16 Blk 52 has the upper hand in the dogfight, which would put our Blk50 even higher over the JF-17. Currently, the inverse is the case.

[Snappy]

22 hours ago, feipan said:

Considering this:

 

https://hushkit.net/2019/03/16/2019-analysis-how-good-is-the-block-ii-pakistan-jf-17-fighter-aircraft-today-compared-to-its-peers-and-potential-threats/

 

 

That would put the Thunder's performance slightly over the MiG-21s. We don't have the Bison so that's hard to compare with the DCS 21bis. But on the same hand it says the F-16 Blk 52 has the upper hand in the dogfight, which would put our Blk50 even higher over the JF-17. Currently, the inverse is the case.

This may  be so, but it doesn't really help, because it could also be JF-17 overperforming in DCS.  Best approach really is to check/flight test  modules against the available data for them. Granted though this becomes a problem, when the data is not publicly available like for the F-18,JF-17 and other aircraft.

 

 

 

[karasawa]

From Pakistan pilot interview:

https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=2554&sid=4bbe983d8b47e275d5111b5115afc12d&start=60

Check his comments on WVR fight in an JF17 against a F-16.

JF-17 with PL-10 mod (currently in pipeline) will trump F-16 with AIM-9M any day of the week, but currently on brute performance F-16 has the edge.

Which aircraft have you flown DACT against- which was the most challenging and why?

“DACT : F-16 Block-52+ , Mirage, F:7P.