Jump to content

F86 problems


Ghost79

Recommended Posts

Im a year long veteran flying the F86 in DCS and whilst i really do like the aircraft ive got frustrated with a number of issues with it

1) speed of the bullets (already reported many times i know 😁)

2) bullet damage, today i hit a mig15 81 times and the thing still kept flying! Later i managed 102 hits (including 48 while the mig was on the ground) and it still lived!!!! What are these bullets? Blanks!

3) aircraft noise intermitently stops

4) radio intetmitently stops working - the comms menu doesnt appear. Caused me to abort a campaign mission half way through because of this.

Im sure theres more, but all this adds up to a very frustrating experience with the sabre.  This wonderful looking aircraft desperately needs some attention, im now at the point where im giving up on it for the tine being ☹

Now...

 

Wheres my Viggen?

  • Like 3

Youtube channel @Flightenvy680

 

Banner 1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For single player, there are mods that fix the gun issues. Once you get those I think they are actually perfectly fine, provided that you aim the right spot. The Mig-15 can soak a ton of bullets in the fuselage, but I find that aiming for the wing roots allows me to get kills in fairly short bursts. In fact it's got to the point where I actually prefer the Sabre's guns (and better gunsight admittedly) to the Mig's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2022 at 7:15 PM, TLTeo said:

For single player, there are mods that fix the gun issues. Once you get those I think they are actually perfectly fine, provided that you aim the right spot. The Mig-15 can soak a ton of bullets in the fuselage, but I find that aiming for the wing roots allows me to get kills in fairly short bursts. In fact it's got to the point where I actually prefer the Sabre's guns (and better gunsight admittedly) to the Mig's.

Please, could you tell me wich mods are you refering to?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/20/2022 at 10:15 PM, Ghost79 said:

Im a year long veteran flying the F86 in DCS and whilst i really do like the aircraft ive got frustrated with a number of issues with it

2) bullet damage, today i hit a mig15 81 times and the thing still kept flying! Later i managed 102 hits (including 48 while the mig was on the ground) and it still lived!!!! What are these bullets? Blanks!

It's not a BUG. (However I can imagine how frustrating it may be). Think that you're shooting at 0,7-0,8Ma. So a total velocity of Bullets is a lot bigger. Looks good ? No... most of the time your target also flies 0,7-0,8 Ma. So... Comparing to the ground situation you're shooting like upwind ... quite strong one. On ground M2HB is very powerful. In the Air it's quite different story. In '60 and '70 even canons were removed from planes, since relative speed of bullets seems to be slow compared to speed of target... There was accident when F11 shoot himself down with his own burst.

Problem you had was very common to US pilots in Korea war. It's good to read some memories. US pilots complained a lot about 12,7mm guns...


Edited by 303_Kermit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Nop, it's a bug that has been reported and acknowledged by ED. Flying speed has nothing to do with why 50s/60s aircraft often didn't have guns either (hence guns coming back from the 70s onwards - it's not like the planes became significantly slower).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TLTeo said:

 Nop, it's a bug that has been reported and acknowledged by ED. Flying speed has nothing to do with why 50s/60s aircraft often didn't have guns either (hence guns coming back from the 70s onwards - it's not like the planes became significantly slower).

It does a lot and it's well explained in "Fighter Pilot Tactics" by Mike Spick or you may try "Fighter Combat" by R. Shaw. They both mentioned it. Also both wrote about weak performance of 12,7mm in Korea


Edited by 303_Kermit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Muzzle velocity of M2/M3 (up to 870 m/s) was comparable, or better than other aircraft weapons still used in the '50s (ie. up to 880 m/s for Hispano, up to 690 m/s for NS-23) and therefore is not the primary reason in itself for mediocre performance during Korean war and for the issue OP is writing about.

The biggest issues here are, apart from incorrect velocity mentioned in the thread linked above:

a) incorrect gunsight solution (although this one's tied to velocity problem):

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/267542-f86-radar-gunsight-solution-incorrect/

b) old and very rudimentary damage model of all aircraft in the game except the warbirds, which were the only planes that got the new one. Equally simplified flight model of AI MiG-15 doesn't help either. But we can't do much about these issues.


Edited by Art-J
  • Like 4

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Art-J said:

^ Muzzle velocity of M2/M3 (up to 870 m/s) was comparable, or better than other aircraft weapons still used in the '50s (ie. up to 880 m/s for Hispano, up to 690 m/s for NS-23) and therefore is not the primary reason in itself for mediocre performance during Korean war and for the issue OP is writing about.

 

Hispano or NS or any other automatic cannon take their hitting power not only from greater kinetic energy, but what's more important from HE charge. 12,7mm bullet has nothing but kinetic energy. If that's gone they're useless.

And for comparable hitting power:
12,7mm with 42g bullet gives 18,050 J Kinetic Energy

23mm with 172g bullet from NS -23 gives 47,900 J Kinetic Energy

37mm HEI-T from N37 (~500g bullet mass) gives about 80 000 J Kinetic Energy

So... There you have your hitting power. Yes it's comparable. Like M1A2 Abrams against IS-2, or T-80U against M4A1 Sherman Tank... You may compare them as well 

... Stick to the facts gents. It's not War Thunder


Edited by 303_Kermit
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two are separate issues. Was the M3 .50 cal a mediocre fighter gun because of its small caliber and limited kinetic power? Yes. As you said, it's well known and documented.

Is it even worse in DCS because its muzzle speed is lower than reality? Also yes, as I documented and as ED acknowledged.


Edited by TLTeo
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@303_Kermit - OK, but stick to your own words then, or make up your mind about what you want to convey in your post. You started talking about muzzle velocity in context of hitting power, not us. Now you're changing subject to another, kinetic energy, and even though what you wrote is all correct, it's still not directly relevant to OP's issue.

As a sidenote, to point out how primitive DM of most AI planes in DCS is, I'll use example of An-26/30. If player with unlimited ammo switched on flies behind it and hits one of the  engines only, the engine will smoke first, then burn and stop later. So far so good. The plane will still fly on the other engine. But if you keep pumping rounds into the dead engine, you can hit it with 100, 1000 or 10 000 rounds and nothing will change, because DCS doesn't model cumulative structural damage. The plane will still fly, because the engine is considered "dead" already and it cannot be "more dead" - next hits in the same area are not registered as damaging ones. That messes up statistics of how many rounds are needed to bring the AI plane down.

I can only guess that maybe DM of MiG-15 has some "critical" hitboxes that need to be hit, plus some "less important" ones that can soak up lots of hits and not cause airplane loss.

Both F-86 and MiG should have the new DM developed together with warbirds if you ask me, but being ex-Belsimtek products, I'm afraid they're in practical terms pretty much abandonware nowadays.

  • Like 1

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Art-J said:

@303_Kermit - OK, but stick to your own words then, or make up your mind about what you want to convey in your post. You started talking about muzzle velocity in context of hitting power, not us. Now you're changing subject to another, kinetic energy, and even though what you wrote is all correct, it's still not directly relevant to OP's issue.

As a sidenote, to point out how primitive DM of most AI planes in DCS is, I'll use example of An-26/30. If player with unlimited ammo switched on flies behind it and hits one of the  engines only, the engine will smoke first, then burn and stop later. So far so good. The plane will still fly on the other engine. But if you keep pumping rounds into the dead engine, you can hit it with 100, 1000 or 10 000 rounds and nothing will change, because DCS doesn't model cumulative structural damage. The plane will still fly, because the engine is considered "dead" already and it cannot be "more dead" - next hits in the same area are not registered as damaging ones. That messes up statistics of how many rounds are needed to bring the AI plane down.

I can only guess that maybe DM of MiG-15 has some "critical" hitboxes that need to be hit, plus some "less important" ones that can soak up lots of hits and not cause airplane loss.

Both F-86 and MiG should have the new DM developed together with warbirds if you ask me, but being ex-Belsimtek products, I'm afraid they're in practical terms pretty much abandonware nowadays.

From start to end I refer to main subject. Hitting power. As you mentioned trajectory is different problem. It's just some of my adversaries here mixed both subjects.

I refered from the beginnig to Ghost 79 point 2:

"2) bullet damage, today i hit a mig15 81 times and the thing still kept flying! Later i managed 102 hits (including 48 while the mig was on the ground) and it still lived!!!! What are these bullets? Blanks!"
 

It's all about hitting power from start to end.

 

Actually TLTeo confused both subjects. It's 8-th post from the top...

 

As for Hitting boxes in MiG engine. Just one hit is enough to seriously reduce thrust. Good burst from 300m is always effective. In many cases pilot is dead or plane burns. 


Edited by 303_Kermit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I download the mod from TLTEO links.

1. The gunsight still doesn't match.  Still have to lead the target by quite a lot.

2. But it does do more damage, in 2 rounds of 2 v 2 dogfight.

I shot down 3 MiGs.

One I raked the plane as it flew past me. It kept flying for maybe a minute. Then the plane just broke apart. 

In rounds to, I hit the wing as it fly past in the merge. It seemed fine. I lost track of it. Then I see it had broken apart again. Maybe 2 minutes after I had hit it. The game didn't register that as my kill. In fact the game didn't register the plane as lost. It exploded crashed and burned but the game said it was fine, nothing to see here.

The second one in round 2, ended up in a classic turn chase. Here's were I still had to lead a lot further than the gunsight claimed. But I got in a good hit, the plane flew a few seconds, then broke up.

Seems like the mod makes the MiG break up.

 

i7 13700k @5.2ghz, GTX 3090, 64Gig ram 4800mhz DDR5, M2 drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But are the mods satisfactory on the latest beta? I have avoided updating because I want to keep the ability to edit .luas. 

As far as the physics argument has gone, I concur with the regulars here and was part of the discussion myself. The main thing that was overlooked above this time was G loading and corner speed. Maj. "Boots" Blesse did a fantastic interview for Dogfights years ago where he described the main advantage the 50s had over the cannons during the conflict. And this led to air superiority. The higher muzzle velocity, and it HAS to be higher and correct, meant that the Sabre could pull lead on the MiGs in high g turns over 4 g, where it was IMPOSSIBLE for the MiG to pull enough lead to get hits on the Sabre. Look at my sig file and you will see Boots famous quote, often told to rookies when they were in trouble. This, combined with the superior radar gunsight, are key traits of the Sabre and must be represented accurately.

 

Yes the SFM for the MiG is "undefined" at Mach = 0.0, meaning it should be 0 and not 1 point something... Sputnik cheat and so on. 😉 We can edit lift, drag, roll rate and even the first and second "polars" of the lift coefficient. I have done my best and made progress but there is something fundamental to the all powerful British jet engine that gives them almost infinite thrust. 

 

  • Like 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

It's perfectly ordinary banter Squiffy, "Bally Jerry, pranged his kite, right in the 'how's your father.'" - Monty Python, RAF Banter Sketch.

Squiffy, a. slang. 1. Intoxicated; drunk. 2. Askew, skew-whiff. - OED

 

"Put that sucker in a 4G turn and keep it there!!" - Maj. Gen. "Boots" Blesse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/28/2022 at 11:20 PM, Gunfreak said:

I download the mod from TLTEO links.

1. The gunsight still doesn't match.  Still have to lead the target by quite a lot.

2. But it does do more damage, in 2 rounds of 2 v 2 dogfight.

I shot down 3 MiGs.

One I raked the plane as it flew past me. It kept flying for maybe a minute. Then the plane just broke apart. 

In rounds to, I hit the wing as it fly past in the merge. It seemed fine. I lost track of it. Then I see it had broken apart again. Maybe 2 minutes after I had hit it. The game didn't register that as my kill. In fact the game didn't register the plane as lost. It exploded crashed and burned but the game said it was fine, nothing to see here.

The second one in round 2, ended up in a classic turn chase. Here's were I still had to lead a lot further than the gunsight claimed. But I got in a good hit, the plane flew a few seconds, then broke up.

Seems like the mod makes the MiG break up.

 

Compare your 12,7mm with a real ones. Yours are much too powerful. You created F86 armed with M61 Vulcan...

 

To become a real devastating effects US Pilots had to came real close. No chance for Head on kill, or brilliant win in scissors... Also effectivness of high "G" leading bursts is questionable. There's no single case of success from such situation in 14 min. of guncams.

Stick to the facts Gents, please. And facts aren't favoring 12,7mm. Only some fairy - tales. 

 

As for superior  (quote) "radar gunsight". MiG-15bis in Korea from 1952 had Syrena 1 onboard (not modelled in DCS). Simple device making a noise always when wavelength of rangefinder from F86 was detected in rear hemisphere. Check my info if you like. 


Edited by 303_Kermit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MiG cannons were powerful, scary and extremely effective!  Now I can't find the exact clip but this episode has Boots in it. He was there and he scored kills. As crummy as the radar gunsight was, it was good enough to make a difference.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

It's perfectly ordinary banter Squiffy, "Bally Jerry, pranged his kite, right in the 'how's your father.'" - Monty Python, RAF Banter Sketch.

Squiffy, a. slang. 1. Intoxicated; drunk. 2. Askew, skew-whiff. - OED

 

"Put that sucker in a 4G turn and keep it there!!" - Maj. Gen. "Boots" Blesse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2022 at 12:43 AM, 303_Kermit said:

Compare your 12,7mm with a real ones. Yours are much too powerful. You created F86 armed with M61 Vulcan...

 

To become a real devastating effects US Pilots had to came real close. No chance for Head on kill, or brilliant win in scissors... Also effectivness of high "G" leading bursts is questionable. There's no single case of success from such situation in 14 min. of guncams.

Stick to the facts Gents, please. And facts aren't favoring 12,7mm. Only some fairy - tales. 

 

As for superior  (quote) "radar gunsight". MiG-15bis in Korea from 1952 had Syrena 1 onboard (not modelled in DCS). Simple device making a noise always when wavelength of rangefinder from F86 was detected in rear hemisphere. Check my info if you like. 

 

Just to chime in about historical references. The sirena -1 didn´t start to appear on Russian jets in Korea until March 1953. You can find this in the Seidov books or this other Russian book called "Mig -15 fighter " by Arsenev.

I wrote this long rant on the DM models and state of affairs for Korea jets but got logged out of forum and can´t be bothered to do it again. Next time. 🙂

Cheers,

Kong

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/30/2022 at 7:54 PM, Ravenus said:

Just to chime in about historical references. The sirena -1 didn´t start to appear on Russian jets in Korea until March 1953. You can find this in the Seidov books or this other Russian book called "Mig -15 fighter " by Arsenev.

I wrote this long rant on the DM models and state of affairs for Korea jets but got logged out of forum and can´t be bothered to do it again. Next time. 🙂

Cheers,

Kong

Thank you. Correction base on sources is always much appreciated. It seems to me that F86F - the one we have in DCS came into service even later? So it would be fair if MiG-15bis would be equipped in these device 🙂

Also I read somewhere that these version was used exclusively in Europe. Can someone check these info?

Actually you made me want to jump again into F86... Some friend of mine said that it's a WWII with a jet engine. I think 6 moths campaign over Korea would be fine...


Edited by 303_Kermit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DCS Sabre is a bit of an odd variant. From what I can find, the block 35 technically entered service somewhere in 1953 ish in Korea, but it became nuclear capable only in 1954 and would have received AIM-9s somewhat later, so in that sense we have a pretty late aircraft that's more similar to the ones deployed in Europe. On the other hand, by that later time Sabres also received the larger slatted wing of the Block 40, which was retrofitted to many export aircraft, while our aircraft still has the 6-3 wing.

TLDR yes, a late production Mig-15bis is a closer match to the DCS Sabre than the ones deployed in Korea.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While high g leading may not have been the norm for the Sabre, it was an established defensive effect for avoiding the slower Mv cannons of the MiG. This was the main point of Boots advice. In a 4g turn or higher, it was impossible for the MiG to lead the Sabre enough to hit it. I did not mean to say the Sabre COULD make hits vice versa. The higher Mv of the bullets meant the Sabre could make more effective leading shots, especially at longer ranges, and lower g. Remember, the 6 50 cals are grouped close together, just like on the P-38, Mosquito, and B-25 gunships of WWII. In no way am I saying they on par with cannon, but grouped 50 cals did do damage and were a step up from the dispersed 303s of the early Spits. We have all heard the quotes of surviving LW pilots on how the Spits 303s sounded like gravel on a tin roof when getting hit. The 8 50s of the P-47 Jug are legendary.

And on another tac, one of the most annoying things I find about trying to land hits on the MiG is the difference in roll center between the two planes. The MiG wing is shoulder mounted, the Sabre is belly mounted. So when at low speed, say at the top of a standard climb defense from the AI, rolling or yawing to get your pipper on the bandit can be really annoying because the gunsight moves in an arc around the wing spar below the cockpit, while the MiG pivots closer to the the center of the cockpit if not the gunsight itself. Maybe it's my old clunky HOTAS Cougar but I have flow the Sabre enough to see this.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

It's perfectly ordinary banter Squiffy, "Bally Jerry, pranged his kite, right in the 'how's your father.'" - Monty Python, RAF Banter Sketch.

Squiffy, a. slang. 1. Intoxicated; drunk. 2. Askew, skew-whiff. - OED

 

"Put that sucker in a 4G turn and keep it there!!" - Maj. Gen. "Boots" Blesse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 303_Kermit said:

Thank you. Correction base on sources is always much appreciated. It seems to me that F86F - the one we have in DCS came into service even later? So it would be fair if MiG-15bis would be equipped in these device 🙂

Also I read somewhere that these version was used exclusively in Europe. Can someone check these info?

Actually you made me want to jump again into F86... Some friend of mine said that it's a WWII with a jet engine. I think 6 moths campaign over Korea would be fine...

 

Absolutely right. The DCS sabre is a version that was in towards the very end or after the war. Though, performance wise, it should be near identical to the F-1,F86 F-5  etcc blocks that were. Our mig is a mid 1952 series. There were a few improvements that came after. The automatic speedbrake ( though i think i recall it being fielded earlier but it would only deploy below 5000m, not sure), the multichannel radio akin to the mig 19 set, and finally the sirena warning receiver.

In all honesty, the mig15 bis mostly fought F86Es even into 1953. The only improvement upto 1952 that I recall on the mig since it was introduced en masse by summer 1951 was the enlarged speedbrake. The F variant became prominent only after february or march 53 when the figther bomber sabres replaced thunderjets and whatnot. Before that it was mixed bag of Es and slowly increasing F from aug 1952. Imo, this is the sabre we should have had or included

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ravenus said:

Absolutely right. The DCS sabre is a version that was in towards the very end or after the war. Though, performance wise, it should be near identical to the F-1,F86 F-5  etcc blocks that were. Our mig is a mid 1952 series. There were a few improvements that came after. The automatic speedbrake ( though i think i recall it being fielded earlier but it would only deploy below 5000m, not sure), the multichannel radio akin to the mig 19 set, and finally the sirena warning receiver.

In all honesty, the mig15 bis mostly fought F86Es even into 1953. The only improvement upto 1952 that I recall on the mig since it was introduced en masse by summer 1951 was the enlarged speedbrake. The F variant became prominent only after february or march 53 when the figther bomber sabres replaced thunderjets and whatnot. Before that it was mixed bag of Es and slowly increasing F from aug 1952. Imo, this is the sabre we should have had or included

Thank you very much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...