PSA: F-14 Performance/FM Development Status + Guided Discussion

[maxsin72]

19 minutes ago, Karon said:

Unless, as I image, you have imaginary boundaries to limit the area

Exactly, the playground, in tournaments, has boundaries to limit the area, if you go beyond you lose.

[Karon]

1 hour ago, maxsin72 said:

Exactly, the playground, in tournaments, has boundaries to limit the area, if you go beyond you lose.

Then I have the feeling that the Tomcat may simply not be the best fit in this scenario, and no negligible improvement will suddenly make it the top dogfighter: power and endurance are pointless if the arena is as big as a napkin. The huge and heavy radar and sturdy construction meant for naval operations are counterproductive. It is also much older than the competitors, which come with the pro of leaving a bit more edge to the pilot, and the cons of requiring much more effort and skill. This does not mean that a good pilot can't thrive flying the F-14.
The Tomcat is a magnificent aircraft, and one of the best fighters until the end of the Cold War, but no aircraft is the best in everything.

(and before someone says F-15, they tried to make a naval version, but they had to tinker it so much that it became a brick, compared to the standard version, and de facto a different aircraft. AG-wise, they made a separated version altogether.)

[Callsign JoNay]

Pressure needs to be put on the tournament organizers. Loadouts should work backwards from whatever each aircraft would typically carry in a sweep/CAP flight. The BFM setup should be an extension to whatever fuel/pylons/stores they'd have remaining if BVR devolved into a WVR merge. That's how we run our DACT arenas in my virtual wing. Hornets and Vipers have pylons, and often TGPs and jammers too. If you carry those things in BVR, you'll still have them if it turns into WVR, and not all aircraft can jettison those things, so pilots should get used to it. It's sad that the DCS tournament standards use idealized and unrealistic loadouts.

[captain_dalan]

15 hours ago, Karon said:

Another question, out of curiosity, how come that the F-14 manages to lose in your "BFM tournament"? It has more endurance and power than anyone else (I take for granted that you don't use FC3-level planes). It can build separation and simply force the opponent to RTB due to low fuel, and at that point, it can strike.

Not in DCS it doesn't. In full burner, in DCS, at around 350-360 knots constant turning, the Hornet lasts about 33% longer for the same fuel fraction (say 50%). 

[captain_dalan]

On 11/8/2022 at 8:45 AM, maxsin72 said:

I can host on my little private server, fuel is setted for equal times in burner, F18 without pilons and F14B clean config.

I don't know exactly which parameters to test, my wish is to reproduce a situation in which F18 outurns F14B while turning and climbing at the same time: in my experience it's the most dangerous situation in an F14B against an F18.

Then i would propose 2 configurations:

1 - heavy: 
F-18C at 50% fuel
F-14A at 67% fuel
F-14B at 70% fuel

2 - light:
F-18C at 35% fuel
F-14A at 47% fuel
F-14B at 50% fuel

Alternatively, each variation can include a Hornet with and without pylons. On top of climbing turns, i would also test acceleration under g as well and if possible max lift turns in both directions of the vertical and flat ones.  

[maxsin72]

7 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

Then i would propose 2 configurations:

1 - heavy: 
F-18C at 50% fuel
F-14A at 67% fuel
F-14B at 70% fuel

2 - light:
F-18C at 35% fuel
F-14A at 47% fuel
F-14B at 50% fuel

Alternatively, each variation can include a Hornet with and without pylons. On top of climbing turns, i would also test acceleration under g as well and if possible max lift turns in both directions of the vertical and flat ones.  

If you agree, i would like to test with fuel for similar time in burner.

I have a mission with the same settings used in tournaments:

- no pylons

- fuel for similar time in burner (F14B about 12000lbs- F18 about 5600 lbs)

- boundaries to limit the area

I'll be available tomorrow starting about from 2100Z

If for you could be ok, i'll send you a message with server name and password.

Thank you

 

[Karon]

9 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

Not in DCS it doesn't. In full burner, in DCS, at around 350-360 knots constant turning, the Hornet lasts about 33% longer for the same fuel fraction (say 50%). 

I said "Increase separation". Bugout, if you will

If it wasn't clear by now, the rules of this bfm thing make little sense when it comes to the Tomcat.
Ergo, the problem is not the FM, but monolithic rules that don't aim to provide the intrinsic balance that is fundamental in any fair competitive game. Or, using a different perspective, how the vigens rules simply don't care about flattening the differences between aircraft. In this case, just pick another aircraft and have fun.

The concerns and discussion about the FM sounds exhausted to me.

[Alicatt]

What balance? Overwhelming firepower and tactics is what is desired against your foe, there is no intrinsic balance in combat/warfare.

Is it unfair that the Spitfire is not balanced with the F-16, they should be on the same level playing field? 

If you want balance, then use the same aircraft with the same loadout. 

[Skarp]

If I have x4 aim54s x2 aim7 and x2 aim9, is the f14 really that draggy I can barely scratch m1.2 ? The question is the 54s on the belly creating too much drag?

Edited November 10, 2022 by Skarp

[IronMike]

9 minutes ago, Skarp said:

If I have x4 aim54s x2 aim7 and x2 aim9, is the f14 really that draggy I can barely scratch m1.2 ? The question is the 54s on the belly creating too much drag?

 

The issue is that we cannot assign individual drag to stores. The windtunnel stations should produce practically no drag at all.

[Spurts]

6 minutes ago, Skarp said:

If I have x4 aim54s x2 aim7 and x2 aim9, is the f14 really that draggy I can barely scratch m1.2 ? The question is the 54s on the belly creating too much drag?

 

Yes.  The AIM-54 has a fixed drag index value in the sim so shoulder mount and belly mount have the same drag.  This is an ED thing, not a HB thing.  Also, I can get that loadout to 1.6M at 50,000+ft in the F-14A so you need to be aware of the profiles used by real pilots to pass the transsonic.  Hint- it's not in the NATOPS for intercept profile.

[Skarp]

Just now, IronMike said:

The issue is that we cannot assign individual drag to stores. The windtunnel stations should produce practically no drag at all.

Is ED aware and looking at fixing?

[WarthogOsl]

3 hours ago, IronMike said:

The issue is that we cannot assign individual drag to stores. The windtunnel stations should produce practically no drag at all.

I've definitely heard pilots say similar things!

[cheezit]

3 hours ago, Spurts said:

Yes.  The AIM-54 has a fixed drag index value in the sim so shoulder mount and belly mount have the same drag.  This is an ED thing, not a HB thing.  Also, I can get that loadout to 1.6M at 50,000+ft in the F-14A so you need to be aware of the profiles used by real pilots to pass the transsonic.  Hint- it's not in the NATOPS for intercept profile.

I'm guessing it involves continuing the ~0.9M climb past 30k feet to 40k or so, unloading, accelerating in a dive until you're somewhere between 1.2M and 1.4M, then climbing at constant speed to your desired altitude.  Am I warm or am I cold?

[Callsign JoNay]

4 hours ago, IronMike said:

The issue is that we cannot assign individual drag to stores.

Are you sure about that? I'm seeing different top speeds for 2x phoenix in the tunnel vs 2x phoenix on the gloves. Tested in the B, at angels-15, with 10k fuel set to unlimited, caucasus, no wind, pegged at full AB. I'm seeing a 24 knot difference, granted my common sense tells me it would be a bigger difference in the real world. Never the less, there does seem to be a difference.

 

I wondered if it was the 1A/1B pylon extensions, but they only create a 6 knot difference with vs without.

 

[Spurts]

2 hours ago, cheezit said:

I'm guessing it involves continuing the ~0.9M climb past 30k feet to 40k or so, unloading, accelerating in a dive until you're somewhere between 1.2M and 1.4M, then climbing at constant speed to your desired altitude.  Am I warm or am I cold?

Winner winner chicken dinner. 

[captain_dalan]

16 hours ago, maxsin72 said:

If you agree, i would like to test with fuel for similar time in burner.

I have a mission with the same settings used in tournaments:

- no pylons

- fuel for similar time in burner (F14B about 12000lbs- F18 about 5600 lbs)

- boundaries to limit the area

I'll be available tomorrow starting about from 2100Z

If for you could be ok, i'll send you a message with server name and password.

Thank you

 

Yeah, that's very similar to the "heavy" configuration, so it should suffice.

Unfortunately i get even less fly time then i used to, and i'm usually available only a couple of days in the month, and generally those days are on a weekend. I'll make sure to notify you at least 4-5 days ahead on when i'll be free, so we can have enough time to coordinate. 

[captain_dalan]

15 hours ago, Karon said:

I said "Increase separation". Bugout, if you will

If it wasn't clear by now, the rules of this bfm thing make little sense when it comes to the Tomcat.
Ergo, the problem is not the FM, but monolithic rules that don't aim to provide the intrinsic balance that is fundamental in any fair competitive game. Or, using a different perspective, how the vigens rules simply don't care about flattening the differences between aircraft. In this case, just pick another aircraft and have fun.

The concerns and discussion about the FM sounds exhausted to me.

Ah, i see. Though i don't favor the rigid tournament format, and it's one of the reasons why stopped watching them, i still must admit, it won't be much of a dogfight nor fun to watch if people just zipped around the maps chasing each other. How would i go about it? Probably introduce few more categories, like authentic and historical, which would reflect more ..... let's say believable configurations. And have the slick as well, and call it exhibition or something. Add to that all aspect and rear aspect categories and now you have a half descent tournament. I might even watch that. 

[maxsin72]

11 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

Yeah, that's very similar to the "heavy" configuration, so it should suffice.

Unfortunately i get even less fly time then i used to, and i'm usually available only a couple of days in the month, and generally those days are on a weekend. I'll make sure to notify you at least 4-5 days ahead on when i'll be free, so we can have enough time to coordinate. 

Thank you! 

[72westy]

I can provide some real world experience with the Tomcat an it's ability. Worked on them from 1986-1996 while in the Navy as an AD-2 (Jet engine mechanic).

The highest one has been is roughly 61,XXX ft in altitude (that I know of). It's service ceiling call for roughly 55K any higher an you could easily lose both engines (A variants). At which point you'd have 15 min or so to reignite them. This was with the TF-30 engines. The early T-30 engine Tcats were prone to compressor stall at several regimes (high alpha, high yaw rates, high altitude). Pilots flying the T-30 cats had to continually factor engine limitations into your decision-making tactically and around the boat.

Above 28K and into low 30K the T-30 engines just did not perform well. Once the 110s came anything above 30K there were no limitations. Endurance with 20Klb of fuel was what made the aircraft likeable. Max the load and you had quite an aircraft. Hydraulics were another issue with the aircraft. As I gained experience with working on them I could spot issues by running my hand/s across various surfaces and nail down where and what issue existed within the hydraulic system.

The GE-110 engines brought an entirely new aircraft to flight. No altitude was too high and moved the flight envelope up into the ionosphere and crews were able to dominate.  In slow flight a crew could quite literally fight uphill because the pilot could add energy quite easily. The aircraft was a true stick & rudder aircraft and required time in the seat for a crew to master it.

At the end of it's life maintenance become quite extensive and costly. On a rough day it could take an hour or more before the aircraft was even out of chocks. Crews learned what to do with and what to do without prior to flight. The old AWG-9 radar was unparalleled and at other times not so much. Had a RIO once tell me he was able to make contacts at over 100 miles while on deck. The aircraft design was built around the Phoenix missile system and is why the fuselage was designed with it's engines separated by 9ft.

[illegal1984]

On 11/10/2022 at 8:17 PM, captain_dalan said:

Ah, i see. Though i don't favor the rigid tournament format, and it's one of the reasons why stopped watching them, i still must admit, it won't be much of a dogfight nor fun to watch if people just zipped around the maps chasing each other. How would i go about it? Probably introduce few more categories, like authentic and historical, which would reflect more ..... let's say believable configurations. And have the slick as well, and call it exhibition or something. Add to that all aspect and rear aspect categories and now you have a half descent tournament. I might even watch that. 

To be honest, I only believe in dogfights with 2 heaters starting out 5 miles from the merge. Anything goes, and if both players don't make any mistakes it will end in a gunzo anyway. Everything else is stupid to me, including trying to gun each other until you run out of gas.

[Sandman1330]

Potentially opening Pandoras box here…. But regarding flaps. Is the flight model “finished” regarding flaps down usage above the limits?

I’m not referring to the flap jamming logic (which I support). More asking if the aircraft’s performance with flaps down (and jammed) is an area yet to be addressed.

I ask because it has become extremely common on BFM servers for Tomcats to simply drop the flaps, let them jam, and just fly that way the whole fight. This gives the aircraft a massive rate and radius advantage, and doesn’t seem to impair it except in ability to get above 400kts. It gets much much more stable at high AoA, even kind of starts to feel like it’s on rails, and can sustain high AoA for long periods of time.

I’ve tried it myself for testing purposes, and the general impression I’m left with is it feels a bit too “easy,” almost like it suddenly acquired fly by wire. The FM doesn’t feel like it’s up to the same (awesome) detail and complexity as it does in the normal envelope. If this is the case it’s entirely understandable, as I’m sure you guys want to focus on detailing the normal envelope first, but it makes me wonder if it’s planned to tighten up this regime or not. Thx!

Edited December 18, 2022 by Sandman1330

[IronMike]

26 minutes ago, Бойовий Сокіл said:

I would say yes since there is no real world data on performance with full flaps.

No. Why would it be? The drag and lift the flaps add is known by the FM and was there since release. What we added is the ability to jam them (aka to bend or break the torques that drive the flaps). Performance has nothing to do with it. It would be quite a bad FM, if you would have to adjust engine performance to deal with a drag that was induced by flight surfaces. Rather you would want to make sure that the drag and lift they add is set correctly. Which it is.

[Sandman1330]

22 hours ago, IronMike said:

No. Why would it be? The drag and lift the flaps add is known by the FM and was there since release. What we added is the ability to jam them (aka to bend or break the torques that drive the flaps). Performance has nothing to do with it. It would be quite a bad FM, if you would have to adjust engine performance to deal with a drag that was induced by flight surfaces. Rather you would want to make sure that the drag and lift they add is set correctly. Which it is.

Thx for your reply. I’m not sure I fully follow as I don’t understand where engine performance comes into it, but if I am following correctly, you consider the flap down flight performance to be correct and finished?

[Spurts]

I would say so, not only is speed limited to under 400, but 400 feels like riding down a mountainside in a wheelbarrow during an avalanche.  Just start using energy tactics against them (that does NOT mean strict 2-Circle rate fighting).  Anyone dropping the big boys down above 200 is missing the point of the Tomcat, it gives you so many tools you can use in BFM but a certain YouTuber has convinced people that big flaps = wins.