Does ED public EM charts for the aircraft they make simulations for?

[Orwell]

If not, why not? This top-secret stuff cannot be real. If you want to spend time in the sim doing it, you can MAKE the EM charts within DCS yourself. 
So I'm wondering if ED does it, and if not why not. 

Someone should do it. I don't have the knowhow really. 

[Hobo 1-1]

EM? Are we talking countermeasures? 

[Swift.]

9 minutes ago, Palmetto 1-1 said:

EM? Are we talking countermeasures? 

Energy Manoeuvrability 

[Nealius]

On one hand, I think this would be very useful to us as players. We can know our aircraft's strengths and weaknesses through the EM diagram instead of spending 60 hours of trial and error. The real ones are most likely restricted or hard to source even if not restricted, and there are inevitably going to be differences between the real EM and the sim EM due to obfuscation of real capabilities or coding limitations.

Which brings me to the other hand, the difference between the real EM and sim EM would open the flood gates of complaints from armchair experts.

 

Edited November 18, 2021 by Nealius

[Hulkbust44]

On one hand, I think this would be very useful to us as players. We can know our aircraft's strengths and weaknesses through the EM diagram instead of spending 60 hours of trial and error. The real ones are most likely restricted or hard to source even if not restricted, and there are inevitably going to be differences between the real EM and the sim EM due to obfuscation of real capabilities or coding limitations.
Which brings me to the other hand, the difference between the real EM and sim EM would open the flood gates of complaints from armchair experts.
 

Someone is working on it. Made a "perfect" AI AP for each aircraft to do precise testing of the DCS FM. Just runs the program then wait for the AI to complete the test profile.

Mobius708

[Nealius]

36 minutes ago, Hulkbust44 said:

Just runs the program then wait for the AI to complete the test profile.

The test profile data comes from the DCS AI, not a human-flown DCS module?

[Hulkbust44]

The test profile data comes from the DCS AI, not a human-flown DCS module?

Not the DCS AI. This guy made a program that will fly the aircraft at a specific profile for data collection.

Mobius708

[Nealius]

Ah so "human-flown" module but actually flown by an external AI program? I was worried it would just collect data from the AI SFM.

[icecold951]

20 hours ago, Orwell said:

If not, why not? This top-secret stuff cannot be real. If you want to spend time in the sim doing it, you can MAKE the EM charts within DCS yourself. 
So I'm wondering if ED does it, and if not why not. 

Someone should do it. I don't have the knowhow really. 

 

Here is some help

https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/b454ebd2-7ff8-4348-a48e-c2bc4a4473d3/page/sQMQB

 

I was on this a while back and saw this today. When asking about this information, ED doesn't bother with gathering this information, as far as I can tell. And players to me always want to give a non-answer of "Well, this weight and this and this and this"

Truth is that most of that can be pretty much expected to be obvious. You are not going into a BFM with wings loaded with bombs and tanks. You're dumping them or going slick to start with. With that base line, it isn't hard to come up with a basic number. Basically I have found that either people don't know the answer but want to sound like they know something, or just want to keep it to themselves so they can feel superior in PvP fights.

On a forum I read earlier, one guy simply said the answer someone was looking for, one I had learned earlier. The F18 340-360 is where you want to be for a sustained turn. It was that simple. Didn't need the long winded saying what was obvious, and obviously not the question. The link above gives basic information for several air craft under test circumstances. I'm not sure how accurate it still is. I knew about the F18, but struggled to get the information of the F86 or other air craft.

Hope that link helps. This subject is extremely frustrating to ask a community that either doesn't know, or doesn't want to say but can't avoid sounding superior.  They want that secret advantage in dog fights, knowingly going against people who don't know and fly to fast. Gives them an easy kill. 

I'm sure you understood that is a sustained turn, not max pull turn. You knew you were asking for sustained speed, and don't want answers to a question you didn't ask. Hope this helps. It was not mine, but something I found just today.

Edited November 18, 2021 by icecold951

[AdrianL]

This is updated monthly and compares various DCS aircraft performance  https://dcs.silver.ru/39,12,53

[icecold951]

11 hours ago, Hulkbust44 said:

Someone is working on it. Made a "perfect" AI AP for each aircraft to do precise testing of the DCS FM. Just runs the program then wait for the AI to complete the test profile.

Mobius708
 

I think I just posted it for the OP, having found it earlier today. Was frustrated with people giving non answers that ignored common sense. "Well, it depends on your exact wieght, and stores and"

And no one is going into ACM with wings loaded with bombs. I think we can assume fuel only. And we can assume 5000 ft to 10000. Few people will try ACM at 40k. So we have basic parameters to work with.

3 minutes ago, AdrianL said:

This is updated monthly and compares various DCS aircraft performance  https://dcs.silver.ru/39,12,53

 

Thanks, probably better than the one I found. I don't know why this isn't a pinned thing, so that a hand full of people do go doing PvP with an enormous advantage just to rack up kills. I'm not afraid of people knowing something this basic. heaven forbid I have to actually have skill, not just know what speed to maintain and rate the hell out of them. There are a few guys that absolutely love rate fights, since they have that one bit of data. Makes them look impressive as hell, until someone else knows and knows a few other things beside rate fighting.

[icecold951]

32 minutes ago, AdrianL said:

This is updated monthly and compares various DCS aircraft performance  https://dcs.silver.ru/39,12,53

 

Question...Conventional wisdom is that an F18 is best at 340-360, yet this says 450, but flaps off. Is this thing able to show with auto flaps, probably where the 340 comes from.

[wilbur81]

On 11/18/2021 at 11:52 AM, icecold951 said:

 

Question...Conventional wisdom is that an F18 is best at 340-360, yet this says 450, but flaps off. Is this thing able to show with auto flaps, probably where the 340 comes from.

350-370 knots is correct in real life and in DCS. The data that said 450 is either bad or the paddle switch was being pulled. 450 knots will yield a pretty lazy-wide turn in the Hornet. 

[Jenson]

On 11/19/2021 at 1:18 AM, AdrianL said:

This is updated monthly and compares various DCS aircraft performance  https://dcs.silver.ru/39,12,53

you're a superstar

[Hulkbust44]

Because the Hornet EM and perf. charts are in the tactical manual, which is classified or restricted. They either have it and can't say or they simply don't, which is why the DCS Hornet kind of flies out of whack and out-rates Vipers.

As it should. Block 50 Viper is not a block 30 lmao.

Mobius708

[Snappy]

20 minutes ago, Hulkbust44 said:

As it should. Block 50 Viper is not a block 30 lmao.

Mobius708
 

True. Neither is the F-18 a F-22 that it currently does decent job of emulating in DCS.
Conveniently it’s FM review just got postponed until development resources allow, which in DCS time likely means years.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Snappy

[Hulkbust44]

True. Neither is the F-18 the F-22 that is currently emulates in DCS.

Actually, the DCS Hornet is quite lacking in high alpha capability. See pirouette, and pirouette entry. It should be much better.

Based on the limited data available with both aircraft at 60% fuel, DI=50 the Hornet has a slight higher (degree and a half or so) STR.

Mobius708

[Snappy]

8 minutes ago, Hulkbust44 said:

Actually, the DCS Hornet is quite lacking in high alpha capability. See pirouette, and pirouette entry. It should be much better.

Based on the limited data available with both aircraft at 60% fuel, DI=50 the Hornet has a slight higher (degree and a half or so) STR.

Mobius708
 

The alpha adjustment is fine, but given the very limited publicly available data and EDs not really forthcoming behaviour about what they actually modelled it on  I have serious doubts about its STR capability across the speed range.It wouldn’t be the first FM they got wrong, though admittedly it is often a strong point of their modules and in general they get it quite accurate it seems.

I don’t count that single data point from the GAO report as a valid way of cross-checking, even if the FM meets it on that point.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Snappy

[Hulkbust44]

26 minutes ago, Snappy said:

The alpha adjustment is fine, but given the very limited publicly available data and EDs not really forthcoming behaviour about what they actually modelled it on  I have serious doubts about its STR capability across the speed range. It wouldn’t be the first FM they got wrong, though admittedly it is often a strong point of their modules and in general they get it quite accurate it seems.

I don’t count that single data point from the GAO report as a valid way of cross-checking, even if the FM meets it on that point.

 

There are multiple data points, and it's sourced. We just need someone with access to the source to check it... 
It at least makes sense, a 7.5G capable Hornet with the EPEs of course turns well, better than 1:1 TWR on top of the alpha capability. 
I whole heartedly believe that a F/A-18C lot 20 EPE that is 7.5G capable has a higher sustained turn rate then an F-16C block 50. However, as a whole the F-16  is better in the 2C due to it's better TWR, acceleration, and STR via the corner plateau of the Viper's envelope. It's just that if both aircraft at co-alt only do level turns, the Hornet will edge out. Based on the data this is logical, and to me makes total sense of pilot testimonies in this context.

Edited December 8, 2021 by Hulkbust44

[wilbur81]

2 hours ago, FwkDewd69 said:

 which is why the DCS Hornet kind of flies out of whack and out-rates Vipers.

Only when guys emulating Growling Sidewinder TM   pull the paddle switch...

[NineLine]

On 11/17/2021 at 1:06 PM, Orwell said:

If not, why not? This top-secret stuff cannot be real. If you want to spend time in the sim doing it, you can MAKE the EM charts within DCS yourself. 
So I'm wondering if ED does it, and if not why not. 

Someone should do it. I don't have the knowhow really. 

We do make charts on our own for testing purposes and to verify the PFM, its something I, personally, would like to see us start adding to the manual when complete, from time to time you will see one of our devs share them from a finished module. As for the Hornet, anything we have right now would not be final, and would not make sense to share at this time.

[totmacher]

20 часов назад, Hulkbust44 сказал:

There are multiple data points, and it's sourced. We just need someone with access to the source to check it... 
It at least makes sense, a 7.5G capable Hornet with the EPEs of course turns well, better than 1:1 TWR on top of the alpha capability. 
I whole heartedly believe that a F/A-18C lot 20 EPE that is 7.5G capable has a higher sustained turn rate then an F-16C block 50. However, as a whole the F-16  is better in the 2C due to it's better TWR, acceleration, and STR via the corner plateau of the Viper's envelope. It's just that if both aircraft at co-alt only do level turns, the Hornet will edge out. Based on the data this is logical, and to me makes total sense of pilot testimonies in this context.

 

F/A-18C 33325lbs 2xAIM-9 2xAIM-120, sea level get 7.5g  on speed ~ 410KIAS

Turn rate at this speed 20.2 deg/sec instead 19.2deg/sec like in GAO document

[Hulkbust44]

F/A-18C 33325lbs 2xAIM-9 2xAIM-120, sea level get 7.5g  on speed ~ 410KIAS

Turn rate at this speed 20.2 deg/sec instead 19.2deg/sec like in GAO document

Is that actually measured at 7.5G? Because at that loading it's not possible for the Hornet to get to 7.5. Take that into account and it should be like 7.3-7.4 G. You'll probably get closer to your 19.2.


Edit: don't forget that this is *sustained* turn rate. Kts should be around 360-375.
Mobius708

[Swift.]

The difference between 20.2 and 19.2 deg/sec is probably smaller than the difference between airframes of the same type within the fleet. You are looking at a 5% gap, which is miniscule in the scheme of things.

Edited December 9, 2021 by Swiftwin9s

[totmacher]

5 часов назад, Hulkbust44 сказал:

Is that actually measured at 7.5G? Because at that loading it's not possible for the Hornet to get to 7.5. Take that into account and it should be like 7.3-7.4 G. You'll probably get closer to your 19.2.


Edit: don't forget that this is *sustained* turn rate. Kts should be around 360-375.
Mobius708

 

Here track file (Only unlimited fuel turned on), don't using "paddle switch".  Getting 7.4g (G-LIM on this mass) on speed ~405kias. turn rate 20.2 deg/sec

fa-18c 10m 7.4g.trk