(Fact Check needed)Is F-16C largely over-performing than F-14B in the two-cycle BFM engagements in the real life?

[Sonoda Umi]

 

Note: this topic is not debating about "which one is better". My intention is checking how it matches the reality(or not).

I watched this video, seen the F-16C overwhelmingly over-performing than F-14B in two-cycle BFM engagements.

So, a question here, how accurately those scenarios match the reality? If so, what relatively suitable BFM tactics for F-14B(or A) fighting against F-16C are? 

IIRC, the GE-400 F-14B, D would not defeated by F-16 easily by sustaining turns or vertical maneuverings in real life.

Edited April 4, 2022 by Sonoda Umi

[Reax178]

Be careful with those videos, i like growling sidewinder but the settings that are used on most of his dogfighting videos are just not something that you'll have in most multiplayer servers (No G's, we don't know the amount of fuel each aircraft has, which is very important when using a tomcat, and i even think that he uses the "unlimited fuel" option) so that's not what you'll have to face unless you use those same options.

Now the F14 can pretty easily out turn a F16 with full flaps (without overspeeding the flaps too ...) and 50% fuel, even if it may not be a "realistic" usage of those flaps.

It is sure harder to beat it without using those flaps but it's still possible, specially if you are around 50% fuel.

Also the F16 flight model is still pretty WIP and developped by another team with different standards regarding FM compared to the F14, so there might be some little differences between real life and DCS.

[Nexus-6]

I also enjoy GS's content, but I agree that there is quite a bit that we're not being told.  Things like the respective fuel states of both aircraft (as stated above), and, the comparative skill level of both players.  I know that GS seems to understand BFM principles well, but I've never heard of, and know nothing at all about his opponent.  Is the guy as proficient as Growling Sidewinder at 1v1?  Moreover, is he proficient with a Tomcat?  Or does most of his experience come from planes like the Viper or Hornet?  If both sides were to switch mounts, would he also win as easily, or is GS simply better at DCS?

[Sonoda Umi]

On 4/5/2022 at 4:36 AM, Reax178 said:

Be careful with those videos, i like growling sidewinder but the settings that are used on most of his dogfighting videos are just not something that you'll have in most multiplayer servers (No G's, we don't know the amount of fuel each aircraft has, which is very important when using a tomcat, and i even think that he uses the "unlimited fuel" option) so that's not what you'll have to face unless you use those same options.

Now the F14 can pretty easily out turn a F16 with full flaps (without overspeeding the flaps too ...) and 50% fuel, even if it may not be a "realistic" usage of those flaps.

It is sure harder to beat it without using those flaps but it's still possible, specially if you are around 50% fuel.

Also the F16 flight model is still pretty WIP and developped by another team with different standards regarding FM compared to the F14, so there might be some little differences between real life and DCS.

Basically agree, but F-14 with all flaps down is not a proper way in real BFM combats.

[captain_dalan]

As mentioned above, be extremely cautious with GS's videos. Their primary goal is entertainment and the secondary is promotion. You should avoid building your game plan based on what he presents. For one, most of the bandits seem highly compliant in illustrating the point of the video and two, he doesn't really handle the F-14 well, even when he's winning. 

As for the validity of the current flight models for both planes, i hadn't really tested either in a long time, probably since last fall. The last time i did, they were both pretty close to the specs up to 420 knots, with the Viper being sluggish in the g-onset. To make my opinion even more outdated, i didn't really do much BFM (offline or online) in a few months as well in either plane. 

That being said, some of the most skillful dogfighters i've seen online, and i mean people that really understand BFM, seem to claim that the Viper update did just that, fix the sluggish g-onset, but didn't really change the overall performance. That means, the plane should now be more responsive in the pitch, but ultimately it's turning rates should be roughly the same. I don't know if the E-M properties have been changed to adjust the bleed and recovery rates though, that is if the the 0>Ps>0 has been adjusted as well. However, even if it has, 99% of the user base wouldn't really know what to do with that anyways (please don't take this as a personal attack, i have no idea what your fighting, flying or theoretical skill level is, it's just my overall observation of the people i see online, either on servers or social media). 

[captain_dalan]

4 hours ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

No, the Viper ourtrates the 14B in most configs - especially below 5k. It sometimes isn't by much but it is enough to make a difference. 

You mean in DCS or IRL? 
Cause by the numbers, if both clean and at about 50% fuel, they should both rate just above 19 - maybe 20, even without taking the account the reduced drag on the F-14 if we drop the payload. The difference should be at what airspeed do you peak. 

[captain_dalan]

1 hour ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

There are no clean charts for the 14, nor are there SL charts. Speaking IRL. In DCS someone needs to re-test the current builds.

You can adjust for the change in atmosphere density within 0.8% accuracy for the change in altitude and then further adjust for the reduction in weight as a result of the removal of external ordnance. This should give you a conservative estimate of the performance that doesn't include the added extra from the reduction in drag due to the clean cavities. The above mentioned math gives the above mentioned results more or less. 

[FR4GGL3]

I don't think that official numbers are correct numbers. Why would anyone post real correct numbers on Weapon Systems - especially if they are still in service? That doesn't make sense to me. As it could bring you in disadvantage situations if your opponent is allowed to know everything about what you can do and what you can't do. The people who really need the real numbers will get them. But only these people. No one else.

 

The best thing that we can get is the judgement of pilots that flew both models or at least had some Aircombat Training against the other aircraft. I remember F-14 Pilots (youtube video - so whatever that means) that stated that they where happy if they could manage to not get shut down VS the F-16 and then there was this Q&A with Okie Nance (as far as I know, he flew both planes). He said that he would pick the F-16 over the F-14 in a pure BFM Situation because it was so good in that situation.

 

Sure, that also doesn't mean much, but I guess it can at least tell us, that a F-14 has really some disadvantages against a F-16 in somewhat artifical Situations (both Pilots fly their Plane well, we just look at BFM perhaps Guns only and so on). I mean, I don't think that this Questions matter. There are jobs that have to be done (other than BFM) and a Pilot has to use its Plane the best way to do that. If there was THE best plane to do all jobs, why are there different ones?

Edited April 7, 2022 by FR4GGL3

[Dragon1-1]

We do have real numbers, the F-16, for example, was flown by NASA, and so was the Hornet. Data from those tests is public. Russians like to obscure things for the sake of obscuring them, but truth to be told, kinetic performance data doesn't tell you a whole damn lot on a modern battlefield. The classified stuff is related to radar, ECM and so on, that's what really wins air battles these days. Dogfights are decided by the skill of the pilot, anyway, more than by the airframe. You could probably take out the Su-57 in the F-14, if the former was flown anything like Russians planes in Ukraine.

The Viper is a true BFM machine and two circle is its specialty, so it's no wonder the Tomcat can't really keep up. It might be close in some narrow flight regimes, but ultimately the Tomcat is gonna have a very hard time coming out on top.

[54-40]

If you do some math and interpolate the F-14B with its charts, V-n, Turn, SEP , the clean Sea Level turn rate probably is a few notches under 20.  Say mid 19's.  

The problem is the F-16 manual is a HAF manual for GREEK aircraft, it even says for Peace Xenia 2&3 aircraft.  The weight charts 20,200-20,000-21,200lbs seem to be strictly for the Greek aircraft,  For instance the Weight and Equipment pages that list those weights also  lists the IRIST missile, the 600 gallon fuel tanks and their pylons, neither of which American Block 50 or 52 Vipers use.  In addition, if you read into the manual,  READ THE ENTIRE THING!, it lists for example a maximum allowable take off gross weight of 44,900lbs on pages A2-3 and on page C2-3.  Also on page C1-3 totals to 43,229lbs weight in that problem.  While the American Block 50 and 52 has a maximum take off gross weight of 42,300lbs.  So something is not right here.

Then on pages A8-4 and B8-4 and C8-4 for the Acceleration examples beginning with GW of 20,000lbs, well by logic the earlier 20,200lbs, 20,000lbs, 21,200lbs Weight and Equipment pages would not match those Acceleration charts because the jet would be out of fuel or at negative fuel weights and that is impossible.  

Most importantly, on page B1-3 it lists another weight,  The Block 50 Start Engine Weight  lists "Operating Empty Weight" of 19,261lbs and says that this figure is what is used in subsequent problems to eliminate "reworking".  

 

So if you take that 19,261lbs number in the flight manual, and guessing that is its real weight.   Use the 22,000lbs sea level max AB chart, and then take 22,000lbs -19,261 is 2,739.  or about 38% internal fuel. To get 50% add about 840lbs and turn rate for sea level goes down from 21.7 to about 20.8.  And that 20.8 is over 1 degree more than the F-14's max rate.  So yeah in real life, in a two circle the F-16 (if it actually is not the Greek one) will out rate the F-14 by a large margin.

 

But you really need a non HAF manual, because the Greek one is simply full of too many contradictions. .  

 

 

 

Edited April 14, 2022 by 54-40

[Sonoda Umi]

15 hours ago, 54-40 said:

If you do some math and interpolate the F-14B with its charts, V-n, Turn, SEP , the clean Sea Level turn rate probably is a few notches under 20.  Say mid 19's.  

The problem is the F-16 manual is a HAF manual for GREEK aircraft, it even says for Peace Xenia 1 &2 aircraft.  The weight charts 20,200-20,000-21,200lbs seem to be strictly for the Greek aircraft,  For instance the Weight and Equipment pages that list those weights also  lists the IRIST missile, and 600 gallon fuel tanks, neither of which American Block 50 or 52 Vipers use.  In addition, if you read into the manual,  READ THE ENTIRE THING!, it lists for example a maximum allowable take off gross weight of 44,900lbs on pages A2-3 and on page C2-3.  Also on page C1-3 totals to 43,229lbs weight in that problem.  While the American Block 50 and 52 has a maximum of 42,300lbs.  So something is not right here.

Then on pages A8-4 and B8-4 and C8-4 for the Acceleration examples beginning with GW of 20,000lbs, well by logic the earlier 20,200lbs, 20,000lbs, 21,200lbs Weight and Equipment pages would not match those Acceleration charts because the jet would be out of fuel or at negative fuel weights and that is impossible.  

Most importantly, on page B1-3 it lists another weight,  The Block 50 Start Engine Weight  lists "Operating Empty Weight" of 19,261lbs and says that this figure is what is used in subsequent problems to eliminate "reworking".  

 

So if you use that 19,261lbs number, and guessing that is its real weight.   22,000lbs -19261 is 2739.  or about 38% internal fuel. To get 50% add about 840lbs and turn rate for sea level goes down from 21.7 to about 20.8.  And that 20.8 is over 1 degree more than the F-14's max rate.  So yeah, in a two circle the F-16 (if it actually is not the Greek one) will out rate the F-14 by a large margin.

 

But you really need a non HAF manual, because the Greek one is simply full of too many contradictions. .  

 

I didn't read F-16 Envelope neither, unfortunately. That's why I posted this question.

 

 

I didn't read F-16 envelops or charts neither, unfortunately. That's why I posted this question.

Edited April 8, 2022 by Sonoda Umi

[captain_dalan]

19 hours ago, 54-40 said:

If you do some math and interpolate the F-14B with its charts, V-n, Turn, SEP , the clean Sea Level turn rate probably is a few notches under 20.  Say mid 19's.  

The problem is the F-16 manual is a HAF manual for GREEK aircraft, it even says for Peace Xenia 1 &2 aircraft.  The weight charts 20,200-20,000-21,200lbs seem to be strictly for the Greek aircraft,  For instance the Weight and Equipment pages that list those weights also  lists the IRIST missile, and 600 gallon fuel tanks, neither of which American Block 50 or 52 Vipers use.  In addition, if you read into the manual,  READ THE ENTIRE THING!, it lists for example a maximum allowable take off gross weight of 44,900lbs on pages A2-3 and on page C2-3.  Also on page C1-3 totals to 43,229lbs weight in that problem.  While the American Block 50 and 52 has a maximum of 42,300lbs.  So something is not right here.

Then on pages A8-4 and B8-4 and C8-4 for the Acceleration examples beginning with GW of 20,000lbs, well by logic the earlier 20,200lbs, 20,000lbs, 21,200lbs Weight and Equipment pages would not match those Acceleration charts because the jet would be out of fuel or at negative fuel weights and that is impossible.  

Most importantly, on page B1-3 it lists another weight,  The Block 50 Start Engine Weight  lists "Operating Empty Weight" of 19,261lbs and says that this figure is what is used in subsequent problems to eliminate "reworking".  

 

So if you use that 19,261lbs number, and guessing that is its real weight.   22,000lbs -19261 is 2739.  or about 38% internal fuel. To get 50% add about 840lbs and turn rate for sea level goes down from 21.7 to about 20.8.  And that 20.8 is over 1 degree more than the F-14's max rate.  So yeah, in a two circle the F-16 (if it actually is not the Greek one) will out rate the F-14 by a large margin.

 

But you really need a non HAF manual, because the Greek one is simply full of too many contradictions. .  

 

 

 

 

Our Vipers seem to be a bit heavier though, even without CM's and gun ammo. 

[captain_dalan]

1 hour ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

You can easily adjust for the weight difference via fuel - drag index can be the same (although the DCS drag indeces for each store are different). It's the same jet, same engine, same FLCS. 

Yeah, i've done that for my training missions, to adjust for different Viper variants as well. However, that does leave us with less mission time. I'm not sure how different dogfighter servers handle this, but i think most do either 50% fuel, or same time in burner for all planes. So one should take it into account when managing expectations. 

[Hummingbird]

Wait with any comparisons until the F-14's FM is also complete. As Fat Creason has said, adjustments are still needed.

 

When both modules completely match their respective RL EM charts, they will feature a max STR within 0.2 deg/sec og each other, albeit at two very different speeds. 

Edited April 9, 2022 by Hummingbird

[Digitalvole]

I love DCS, but when I read threads like this I realise that maybe I don’t have the requisite levels of intelligence for this hobby.

[=475FG= Dawger]

People I know who have been in BFM engagements with Tomcats IRL consider it a big, fat target.

[near_blind]

https://gfycat.com/samesomberalbino-fury-road-tom-hardy-mad-max

[Mr_sukebe]

I believe that the normal approach is to assume that ED are right, unless you have "good" evidence to challenge it.  After all, they put a lot of research into making the aircraft.

[Quid]

4 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

People I know who have been in BFM engagements with Tomcats IRL consider it a big, fat target.

Oh, cool!  Random opinion bullsh*t because my platform is the best and above all!  I happen to know a Tomcat pilot whose opinion was that, against the B, the Viper "made a nice lunch after its first 9g vapor/Viper ball" turn!  That's all I need to know.  F-14B>F-16 in a gunfight!

Seriously.

[FR4GGL3]

If you want to know who is the better pilot, why don't you simply use the same machine with the same settings (loadout, fuel amount) and then go into the merge? Because this is the only thing to know who is better in a artifical situation like DCS.

 

I mean, everybody will know a story that sets his preferred plane over the other. And most of us have never been in a real Jet. We haven't felt the borders of our fitness, of our bodies and of our stresslevel. It is pretty much useless what the plane x or y could do if the pilots physics can't handle that. Or if you got scared to death as soon as you got the real life bandit on your real life six or if it comes down on you from above. In real life there is no key combination to start over - and I am sure that this fact stresses the hell out of you.

 

The guys and ladies that flew or actually still fly this machines deserve respect for what they can handle. I only know that I couldn't handle it and from that point it doesn't bother me if a plane x or y is "better" than the other in a simulation that can't integrate the weakest point: me. If you wan't to know who is better, take the same (simulated) plane.

[=475FG= Dawger]

12 hours ago, Quid said:

Oh, cool!  Random opinion bullsh*t because my platform is the best and above all!  I happen to know a Tomcat pilot whose opinion was that, against the B, the Viper "made a nice lunch after its first 9g vapor/Viper ball" turn!  That's all I need to know.  F-14B>F-16 in a gunfight!

Seriously.

I don't have a "platform". I don't fly either module in DCS. I just know that the Tomcat is not what anyone in the real world would consider good at BFM, pilots being approximately equal.

You are free to disagree, vehemently.

[Quid]

1 hour ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

I don't have a "platform". I don't fly either module in DCS. I just know that the Tomcat is not what anyone in the real world would consider good at BFM, pilots being approximately equal.

You are free to disagree, vehemently.

Well, that's the thing, I know pilots IRL who considered it a great BFM platform, so "anyone in the real world" is beyond a stretch.  I turned my sarcasm up to 11 in that post above because what you posted is the kind of hyperbole that I hear from every aircrew of every platform.  So, I posted a Tomcat pilot's own thoughts about the Viper as it was relevant to the thread and was an example of both an alternate opinion, and that it tells me next to nothing about the two, yet I can take it and run with it as if now the F-14's supposed to come out on top every time.  Every single fighter apparently kicks the living snot out of the other guy every time, or has something it can do that the other guy can't.  "Like shooting fish in a barrel," "eat them for lunch," "not really a challenge, but their plane looks nice," "is a grape," "is a big fat target," etc.  It's all a bunch of BS.  It comes down to the pilot/aircrew, not the crate, and anyone who has said one of those things has also probably gotten their proverbial brains drilled out by the pilot/aircrew of plane they are making fun of, they just don't like to admit it.

[Jayhawk1971]

When dealing with (fighter) pilots in anecdote mode, remember the "10 percent true" rule.  

[cheezit]

I have now learnt that there are fundamentally only two arguments in comparative performance discussions:

 

1. Drawing lines on charts

2. "My dad could beat up your dad!"

[Dragon1-1]

From what I hear, real pilots have these discussions all the time. Well, we wanted a realistic simulation, I suppose...