Performance/FM Development Status DCS 2.8.3.37556 Open Beta FEEDBACK

[Schlomo1933]

vor 23 Stunden schrieb captain_dalan:

Testing purposes, handling and performance evaluation under different conditions. How else do you learn to fly the plane unless you push her to the limits? 

I understand, but its written in the natops that’s high AoA with Roll SAS on is a really bad idea.

Learning Pushing the limits is ok, but only in the right conditions, otherwise it makes not much sence and will just lead to bad behaviors.

Btw. Im not shure if the errors with high AoA in combination with roll Sas are now implemented .

Edited March 15, 2023 by Schlomo1933

[WarthogOsl]

Anyone find that the A model has less thrust when in MIL power since the update, at least at high altitude?  I feel like in the past I could cruise up at 38-39k fully loaded for A2A, and I could maintain around Mach .8.  Now it seems like I'm almost stalling.  And what seems odd is that my speed doesn't increase as time goes on, as you would expect to happen as the fuel and weight burns off when flying at a constant altitude and throttle setting.  Maybe just my imagination, I dunno.

[captain_dalan]

11 hours ago, draconus said:

RL pilots learn specifically to never push the limits.

And test pilots are what? Imaginary pilots? Or mythical beasts?  

1 hour ago, Schlomo1933 said:

I understand, but its written in the natops that’s high AoA with Roll SAS on is a really bad idea.

Learning Pushing the limits is ok, but only in the right conditions, otherwise it makes not much sence and will just lead to bad behaviors.

Btw. Im not shure if the errors with high AoA in combination with roll Sas are now implemented .

 

There are guys who fly by the NATOPS and there are guys who write the NATOPS. Both are equally valid ways to enjoy this product. As for the the latter point, i'm not sure either,  as i haven't yet done extensive testing myself. I have a hunch, but i'd rather wait for the developers to chime in, or someone do the tests for me!

[Spurts]

12 hours ago, WarthogOsl said:

Anyone find that the A model has less thrust when in MIL power since the update, at least at high altitude?  I feel like in the past I could cruise up at 38-39k fully loaded for A2A, and I could maintain around Mach .8.  Now it seems like I'm almost stalling.  And what seems odd is that my speed doesn't increase as time goes on, as you would expect to happen as the fuel and weight burns off when flying at a constant altitude and throttle setting.  Maybe just my imagination, I dunno.

Haven't flown since the update, but I do recall stories from pilots talking about how the A+/B finally let the F-14 operate above the low 30s without afterburner.  Maybe this is what they meant?  Also, the F-14 unlike many other planes does not vary significantly between a heavy AA load and a common AG load.

[CarbonFox]

What is the max mil power rated at in the TF30? With the F110, it's rated alittle over 16,000.

[cheezit]

19 hours ago, WarthogOsl said:

Anyone find that the A model has less thrust when in MIL power since the update, at least at high altitude?  I feel like in the past I could cruise up at 38-39k fully loaded for A2A, and I could maintain around Mach .8.  Now it seems like I'm almost stalling.  And what seems odd is that my speed doesn't increase as time goes on, as you would expect to happen as the fuel and weight burns off when flying at a constant altitude and throttle setting.  Maybe just my imagination, I dunno.

Mach 0.8 at 39000 feet is about 250 kias.  Do you recall the old saw from some F-14A pilot to this effect: "in mil power above 25k feet and below 250 kias, all the TF30 does is turn JP-5 into noise"?

[Quid]

8 hours ago, CarbonFox said:

What is the max mil power rated at in the TF30? With the F110, it's rated alittle over 16,000.

It's highly dynamic and will change significantly with altitude and airspeed.  Most basically, the higher you are, the less thrust the engine produces, the faster you are, the more thrust it produces, but the relationship is not linear and looks like a curve.  The F-14's thrust will also be affected by the variable inlets.  These things having been said, for point performance, at static (as in 0 altitude, 0 airspeed, full blower on the cat waiting for launch) the TF-30's military power is rated at 10,875lbs installed thrust/engine.

[captain_dalan]

1 hour ago, Quid said:

...These things having been said, for point performance, at static (as in 0 altitude, 0 airspeed, full blower on the cat waiting for launch) the TF-30's military power is rated at 10,875lbs installed thrust/engine.

This is what i've read as well.
As for preliminary flight model testing......i'm impressed! Still getting used to the new stick, so took me a bit longer then what i would have wanted, but here it is. And what can i say, HB outdid themselves. The only significant difference i found between the charts and the current F-14A FM is the region at the mach 1 number, or 675 knots to be exact. It might be a DCS thing, or it might be charts flaw, but at this point instead of the 5g expected available, i could only do 3.4-3.5. Aside from that...... it's extremely close! It's either inside 0.1 g of expected, or inside 10 knots of expected, which is IMPRESSIVE to say the least. Not to mention that the charts may not be all that precise to begin with. Needless to say, i'm looking forward to the B adjustments as well.

Configuration, 4 Sidewinders, 4 Sparrows, no tanks, 53873lbs gross weight. Fuel burn disabled to maintain constant parameters. This of course also needs crosschecking with linear accelerations, but i hope someone else can do it! Also, other altitudes like 5000ft, 10000ft, 25000ft and especially 35000ft need to be checked. And of course, other loads, like 2x2x2 and 2x2x2x2, which i'm especially interested about!

Enjoy:

 

[DSplayer]

8 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

This is what i've read as well.
As for preliminary flight model testing......i'm impressed! Still getting used to the new stick, so took me a bit longer then what i would have wanted, but here it is. And what can i say, HB outdid themselves. The only significant difference i found between the charts and the current F-14A FM is the region at the mach 1 number, or 675 knots to be exact. It might be a DCS thing, or it might be charts flaw, but at this point instead of the 5g expected available, i could only do 3.4-3.5. Aside from that...... it's extremely close! It's either inside 0.1 g of expected, or inside 10 knots of expected, which is IMPRESSIVE to say the least. Not to mention that the charts may not be all that precise to begin with. Needless to say, i'm looking forward to the B adjustments as well.

Configuration, 4 Sidewinders, 4 Sparrows, no tanks, 53873lbs gross weight. Fuel burn disabled to maintain constant parameters. This of course also needs crosschecking with linear accelerations, but i hope someone else can do it! Also, other altitudes like 5000ft, 10000ft, 25000ft and especially 35000ft need to be checked. And of course, other loads, like 2x2x2 and 2x2x2x2, which i'm especially interested about!

Enjoy:

 

Woah what mission is that?

[FR4GGL3]

I tried the A yesterday. Flew the instant Mission against the Flanker. I don't know why, but the A felt almost a tad better than the B in the same Mission. Sure, there is some missing power, but it felt responsive, I would say it turned better.... even if I am wrong, simply "Thank you".

[Doggo]

Are the mirrors broken for anybody else in VR? I just have some default masks, no mirror views.

[captain_dalan]

On 3/17/2023 at 3:31 PM, FR4GGL3 said:

I tried the A yesterday. Flew the instant Mission against the Flanker. I don't know why, but the A felt almost a tad better than the B in the same Mission. Sure, there is some missing power, but it felt responsive, I would say it turned better.... even if I am wrong, simply "Thank you".

I think the most important change is actually a part of the envelope not often used by many DCS F-14 users, that's between 400-480 knots, and when in the right conditions you can have a very favorable energy retention and recovery for very small sacrifice in turn rate or gains in altitude. 

[FR4GGL3]

32 minutes ago, captain_dalan said:

I think the most important change is actually a part of the envelope not often used by many DCS F-14 users, that's between 400-480 knots

That might be an explanation because especialliy with the A I tend to go faster in the merge (and also in general). I have at least 420-450 knots before the merge. So that might explain my feelings. It never felt that "light" in the first turn. Anyway. I like it and I am looking forward for similar finetuning for the B.

[Scotia]

@IronMikeare we going to get an official feedback thread soon?

[IronMike]

45 minutes ago, Scotia said:

@IronMikeare we going to get an official feedback thread soon?

Yes, our apologies, the last two weeks unfortunately exploded in development tasks, which pushed the updates back a bit. We hope to get it out this week. Thank you for your very kind patience.

[Scotia]

Thanks for the quick response!

[Uxi]

I noticed the wing rock first time since MT patch in the IA Marianas dogfight with the JF I like to run as a warm up followed by a plug and then trap to stay in practice when I don't have long to sit at the computer. 

 

I was used to the shuddering but not that one. I'll get used to it! 

[Despayre]

59 minutes ago, Uxi said:

I noticed the wing rock first time since MT patch in the IA Marianas dogfight with the JF I like to run as a warm up followed by a plug and then trap to stay in practice when I don't have long to sit at the computer. 

 

I was used to the shuddering but not that one. I'll get used to it! 

Ya, that's quite noticeable now at low speeds (less than 160) with any kind of bank, it gets nasty, but as Iron Mike mentioned before, at that speed, a gentle rudder input instead of stick works wonders, waaaay less wobble at that speed.

[maxsin72]

On 3/11/2023 at 3:39 PM, fat creason said:

B is coming in the next patch.

Is the B new FM coming next 12th April?

[IronMike]

18 minutes ago, maxsin72 said:

Is the B new FM coming next 12th April?

Best not to promise anything yet, in case it takes a bit longer, but rest assured that it is one of our top priorities currently.

Thank you for your kind patience!

[maxsin72]

57 minutes ago, IronMike said:

Best not to promise anything yet, in case it takes a bit longer, but rest assured that it is one of our top priorities currently.

Thank you for your kind patience!

Copy that

[fat creason]

Info on this is coming either today or tomorrow...

Edited March 30, 2023 by fat creason

[IronMike]

Our apologies for the delay, but the FM update thread is finally up. Thank you for your feedback in advance!
 

In light of this we will lock this thread and kindly ask you to move the discussion over to the pinned thread for guided discussion. Thank you!