Is it normal for the F14A to not be able to break Mach 1.0 with a 2/2/2 load out?

[Hawkeye91]

Seems like the F14A really struggles to get past Mach 1.0 at all altitudes with, with a 2 Phoenix, 2 sparrow, 2 sidewinder load out. I understand that the A’s engines are less powerful, but even I unload the aircraft at 0.5s to accelerate to Mach 1.2 I eventually slow back down to Mach 1.0. To me this doesn’t make sense because what I understand of aerodynamics is that when you are near Mach 1, you are in the transonic region which should have an extreme amount of drag, but once you punch through the the transonic region, drag is actually reduced, plus you’ll have increased ram air for the engines giving you higher thrust. So to

me it seems like once you

punch through the transonic wall you should at least be able to maintain speed instead of slowing back down. My knowledge is rather basic, so I’d like to know why what I know doesn’t match up with what’s happening in the aircraft. 
 

This article explains what I mean.

 

https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Transonic_Flight

Edited September 7, 2021 by Hawkeye91

[TLTeo]

The region of added drag is not exactly at Mach 1, it's more between Mach ~0.9 and ~1.2 ish (depending on the aircraft), and as a rule of thumb the drag increases with speed very steeply near Mach 1, and then decreases more gently past Mach 1. You don't just go from "lots of transonic drag" to "no drag" when you get past Mach 1.

Having said that, the FM is due for some re-work in the next patch, which will include adjustments to the TF-30 performance. In general I suspect that you are right and the engines are underperforming in some way, but I can't say just how much. We will see once the next round of FM tuning is in.

Edited September 7, 2021 by TLTeo

[Hawkeye91]

3 minutes ago, TLTeo said:

The region of added drag is not exactly at Mach 1, it's more between Mach ~0.9 and ~1.2 ish (depending on the aircraft), and as a rule of thumb the drag increases with speed very steeply near Mach 1, and then decreases more gently past Mach 1. You don't just go from "lots of transonic drag" to "no drag" when you get past Mach 1.

Having said that, the FM is due for some re-work in the next patch, which will include adjustments to the TF-30 performance. In general I suspect that you are right and the engines are underperforming in some way, but I can't say just how much. We will see once the next round of FM tuning is in.

 

Well yes, I understand it’s more nuanced than a wall of all or nothing, it’s just a figure of speech. 
 

Glad to hear it’s not just me being crazy.

[Jayhawk1971]

The patch which is supposed to fix this problem is scheduled to be released on October 14. Incidentally, on October 14, 1947,  Gen. Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier. Coincidence? I think not! 

 

 

[captain_dalan]

2 hours ago, Jayhawk1971 said:

The patch which is supposed to fix this problem is scheduled to be released on October 14. Incidentally, on October 14, 1947,  Gen. Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier. Coincidence? I think not! 

 

 

Ooh, let's hope we get to replicate the event in an alpha Turkey! 

[draconus]

17 hours ago, TLTeo said:

Having said that, the FM is due for some re-work in the next patch, which will include adjustments to the TF-30 performance.

Read here on what to expect and what not to expect esp. about TF-30:

I suspect the store drag corrections alone can fix it.

[Hawkeye91]

3 hours ago, draconus said:

Read here on what to expect and what not to expect esp. about TF-30:

I suspect the store drag corrections alone can fix it.

Certainly hope it does. Hope the patch includes the visual fixes for the F110 nozzle where the interior of the nozzle is supposed to create a choke point. I forget the technical term for the shape, but essentially believe it’s supposed to look the same as the F16. 

[sLYFa]

14 minutes ago, Hawkeye91 said:

 I forget the technical term for the shape

convergent-divergent nozzle

[captain_dalan]

34 minutes ago, Hawkeye91 said:

Certainly hope it does. Hope the patch includes the visual fixes for the F110 nozzle where the interior of the nozzle is supposed to create a choke point. I forget the technical term for the shape, but essentially believe it’s supposed to look the same as the F16. 

Visual fixes don't seam like flight model features to me 

[Hawkeye91]

12 minutes ago, captain_dalan said:

Visual fixes don't seam like flight model features to me 

Was hoping may fall under that category. 

 

28 minutes ago, sLYFa said:

convergent-divergent nozzle

 

Thanks, I remember reading that before, but couldn't for the life of me remember term.

Edited September 8, 2021 by Hawkeye91

[captain_dalan]

10 minutes ago, Hawkeye91 said:

 

Was hoping may fall under that category. 

 

 

 

 

Haha, i know your pain mate. I have been waiting for this upgrade in almost a year

[Endline]

I've been trying the F-14A BVR instant action mission in the Marianas and true enough it's not possible to go past mach 1.0 with the A (4/2/2 loadout). Which seems weird but maybe it's realistic. Could it be a bug?

[Quid]

3 hours ago, Endline said:

I've been trying the F-14A BVR instant action mission in the Marianas and true enough it's not possible to go past mach 1.0 with the A (4/2/2 loadout). Which seems weird but maybe it's realistic. Could it be a bug?

At what altitude?  A 2/2/2 on the deck should get to about 1.1M, a 2/2/2+tanks just barely over 1.0M.  If you're at just below 40K feet (about 38,000) you should be able to get the plane to about 2.1M with a 2/2/2 sans tanks (fuel permitting), and just over 1.8M with them.  I'd expect a 4/2/2 without tanks to be between those.  Haven't checked myself yet, but I hadn't been aware of the F-14A being unable to break 1.0M in a while; could be a return of a bug, but without more info it's hard to say.

[IronMike]

40 minutes ago, Quid said:

At what altitude?  A 2/2/2 on the deck should get to about 1.1M, a 2/2/2+tanks just barely over 1.0M.  If you're at just below 40K feet (about 38,000) you should be able to get the plane to about 2.1M with a 2/2/2 sans tanks (fuel permitting), and just over 1.8M with them.  I'd expect a 4/2/2 without tanks to be between those.  Haven't checked myself yet, but I hadn't been aware of the F-14A being unable to break 1.0M in a while; could be a return of a bug, but without more info it's hard to say.

What also needs to be noted though, is that it would take a very long time to get there. It is not a continuous or instant acceleration from M 1 to like M 1.5... It takes plenty of time. And climb, level, accelerate, climb level and accelerate again may be needed.

[Quid]

16 minutes ago, IronMike said:

What also needs to be noted though, is that it would take a very long time to get there. It is not a continuous or instant acceleration from M 1 to like M 1.5... It takes plenty of time. And climb, level, accelerate, climb level and accelerate again may be needed.

Indeed, several minutes at full blower!

[Top Jockey]

Not exactly ...

Which fuel grade are you guys selecting at mission editor ?

[Elf1606688794]

2 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

Not exactly ...

Which fuel grade are you guys selecting at mission editor ?

You can select the fuel grade? How?

[IronMike]

57 minutes ago, Elf1606688794 said:

You can select the fuel grade? How?

You can't. And it does take a few minutes... 

[Spurts]

13 hours ago, Quid said:

 I'd expect a 4/2/2 without tanks to be between those.  

I've gotten the A with 4/2/2 to ~1.6M at 50,000+ft.  Not the best altitude for max speed but it saves a bunch on gas.

[IronMike]

So, just out of curiosity I tried 2x2x2 at around 38-39k feet, and reached M2.14 top speed. Of course, fuel is getting less, aircraft is getting lighter, etc. As a balancing factor the mission was started with 100% internal fuel though, which after a climb would be less, and thus you would reach high speeds faster.

But I would say 2x2x2 gets you easily to 1.6-1.8 without completely going out of fuel above 38k feet.

2x2x2_38kft.zip.acmi

Edited November 3, 2022 by IronMike

[Endline]

On 11/2/2022 at 12:28 AM, Quid said:

At what altitude?  A 2/2/2 on the deck should get to about 1.1M, a 2/2/2+tanks just barely over 1.0M.  If you're at just below 40K feet (about 38,000) you should be able to get the plane to about 2.1M with a 2/2/2 sans tanks (fuel permitting), and just over 1.8M with them.  I'd expect a 4/2/2 without tanks to be between those.  Haven't checked myself yet, but I hadn't been aware of the F-14A being unable to break 1.0M in a while; could be a return of a bug, but without more info it's hard to say.

The mission starts around 32k I think. I was trying to climb too but at a very shallow angle. Maybe it justs needs more time although with 4 J-11s incoming at 40k that's in short supply. 

[IronMike]

16 minutes ago, Endline said:

The mission starts around 32k I think. I was trying to climb too but at a very shallow angle. Maybe it justs needs more time although with 4 J-11s incoming at 40k that's in short supply. 

In this particular mission, what you really need is to get to around 40k at about M1.1 - so you first speed up, then climb, then speed up again. Being any faster than that is not really necessary, and also detrimental to your fuel management. They are pretty far, so what also helps is to circle climb, or extend and climb then turn back in, there is enough time for that. But ideally you want to make it back to base on one hand, and of course also not rush into them otoh. I could have set the starting altitude at 40k, but chose 32k specifically to have the player put some tactical thought into climbing and fuel management here, and to represent a more realistic cap station. So how you climb, and how much speed you want to bring and how much fuel you burn that far out at sea, is a challenge ofc.

Additionally, mind you, my test above was not in reaction to the mission (which has a much heavier and draggier payload), but in reaction to the OP, saying that he could not pass the transonic region with 2x2x2.

EDIT: I just noticed you did not reply to me at all Apologies, glanced over it. But the above still applies and hope it helps.

Edited November 3, 2022 by IronMike