F-14A/B Flight Model Tuning - Guided Discussion

[Oberst Struppi]

Hey fellers,

did already some testing with the CAT. The turn performance has been slighty increased. At 10000ft with around 8-9000 pounds of gas i was able to get an average turn rate of around 17 degree.

it feels again more stable at high AoA and the wing rock has been drastically reduced. Low Speed High AoA fighting is possible again. Now you can fly the F14 more aggressive again. I‘am very happy with it. 
Also did some tests with the AoA Buffet Schedule on/off. There is a difference, but not that much if you ask me. Did also tests with Roll SAS off/on.

In my opinion the aircrafts behavior feels great.

I also tried some accelerations. Loadout 4-2-2 with 2 Ext Tanks. 17000 pounds of gas at 35000MSL @ M .85

She was hardly accelerating and was not able to reach M 1.2

 

Edited April 13, 2023 by Oberst Struppi

[Callsign JoNay]

I was able to hit 1.7 starting with your loadout, and 1.85ish if I dumped the XTs. Only difference is I started with 16.2 fuel (17k is a weird number). Both runs required me to burn until I was at 2.5 though.   Yeeesh. This is bad. 

 

2x2x4 with 2 XTs

2x2x4 without XTs

[Despayre]

1 hour ago, Oberst Struppi said:

<snip>...

She was hardly accelerating and was not able to reach M 1.2

 

 

Oh, you took out the hangar queen...

[cheezit]

1 hour ago, Oberst Struppi said:

Hey fellers,

did already some testing with the CAT. The turn performance has been slighty increased. At 10000ft with around 8-9000 pounds of gas i was able to get an average turn rate of around 17 degree.

it feels again more stable at high AoA and the wing rock has been drastically reduced. Low Speed High AoA fighting is possible again. Now you can fly the F14 more aggressive again. I‘am very happy with it. 
Also did some tests with the AoA Buffet Schedule on/off. There is a difference, but not that much if you ask me. Did also tests with Roll SAS off/on.

In my opinion the aircrafts behavior feels great.

I also tried some accelerations. Loadout 4-2-2 with 2 Ext Tanks. 17000 pounds of gas at 35000MSL @ M .85

She was hardly accelerating and was not able to reach M 1.2

 

 

Did you try 2x2x2 w/ 2 XTs in addition to 4x2x2 + 2, by chance?  Because the former config has charts you can try to duplicate, at least:

Spoiler

 

 

Incidentally, looking at the 1g specific excess power diagram, if you do for whatever reason want to end up at 35k feet and Going Pretty Fast, you may want to try a couple somewhat different strategies (please forgive the mspaint quality):

Spoiler

 

[Salty Buckets]

So does the F-14B now accelerate better? Just clarifying since what I felt, it does feel like the aircraft is quicker than it was before.

[WarthogOsl]

Sigh...the pilot model visibility is still not adhering to the settings check box in multiplayer.

[RustBelt]

26 minutes ago, WarthogOsl said:

Sigh...the pilot model visibility is still not adhering to the settings check box in multiplayer.

Did the log say that it was fixed? And is it a factor in Flight Model Characteristics?

[WarthogOsl]

Just now, RustBelt said:

Did the log say that it was fixed? And is it a factor in Flight Model Characteristics?

Sorry, meant this to go into the other topic (I'm not sure it would be in the log, fwiw).

[Clunk1001]

1 hour ago, RustBelt said:

Did the log say that it was fixed? And is it a factor in Flight Model Characteristics?

Acceleration, Mach, and endurance should have a marginal increase, without the weight of the pilot.

[RustBelt]

1 hour ago, Clunk1001 said:

Acceleration, Mach, and endurance should have a marginal increase, without the weight of the pilot.

When you're right, you're right.

[CarbonFox]

Top speed for the F-14B seems capped at Mach 2.1. It does appear to accelerate alittle better in the Mach 1.1 to 1.4 zone.

[Callsign JoNay]

1 hour ago, CarbonFox said:

Top speed for the F-14B seems capped at Mach 2.1. It does appear to accelerate alittle better in the Mach 1.1 to 1.4 zone.

Really? It feels worse to me in that zone, but it's hard to tell if I'm imagining it. Looking forward to the full breakdown.

[bkthunder]

@fat creason will you come back to fix the trim-speedbrake interaction? 

 

Edited April 14, 2023 by bkthunder

[FlankerKiller]

9 hours ago, Callsign JoNay said:

Really? It feels worse to me in that zone, but it's hard to tell if I'm imagining it. Looking forward to the full breakdown.

Too me It definitely gets through the transonic zone a good bit quicker. Clean the B is a rocketship now I also got to 2.1. I also got the A to 2.4 with fuel to spare. Both runs were started on the ramp at Groom Lake. The jet was as clean as they let you make it for both as well. Both were at angels 35. 

Edited April 15, 2023 by FlankerKiller

[maxsin72]

Finally, after more than 2 years, i can say that i feel all the GE F110's power. The F14B accelerates very well and is able to regain energy quickly, very happy about all this. This was not a marginal changement respect to the last FM, imho it seems to me a huge changement.

On the other hand the realistic buffet option makes the plane totally different in ITR repect to the standard setting. Maybe be i'm missing something and i have to do the necesary training, but even over 300 kias at low altitude with AoA no more than 20 units several times i have a strong wing rock effect. I also put very much attention to avoid lateral inputs, using only rudder.

 

[fat creason]

On 4/14/2023 at 11:55 AM, bkthunder said:

@fat creason will you come back to fix the trim-speedbrake interaction? 

 

 

Maybe, but not anytime soon as it's super low priority. Reading some of the "reviews" of this update is amusing. The placebo effect is real and I'll leave it at that. 

Edited April 17, 2023 by fat creason

[maxsin72]

6 hours ago, Бойовий Сокіл said:

Roll SAS off?

On

[maxsin72]

6 hours ago, fat creason said:

Maybe, but not anytime soon as it's super low priority. Reading some of the "reviews" of this update is amusing. The placebo effect is real and I'll leave it at that. 

 

Are you talking about me?

If yes i must say there is no placebo effect at all, now i'm able to out turn the F18, with the old FM it was simply impossibile. Or maybe the placebo effect made me a better virtual pilot, who knows? I' ve also seen that the cat consumes less fuel in full AB. Last but not least now i can chase my opponent due to fact the plane accelerate better. 

And i must repeat i'm happy about all this

Edited April 17, 2023 by maxsin72

[Fulcrumkiller31]

Maybe slightly better acceleration on the low end , but it is hardly a rocket ship. A clean F14 should be a rocket right up to 2.2 right ? Stagnates at 1.4 then slowly up to about 2 burning all my fuel.

[captain_dalan]

10 minutes ago, Fulcrumkiller31 said:

A clean F14 should be a rocket right up to ...

No room for should here. Compare in-game performance to known configurations and metrics in the manuals. If a mismatch is found, report it. 

[Fulcrumkiller31]

5 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

No room for should here. Compare in-game performance to known configurations and metrics in the manuals. If a mismatch is found, report it. 

Hence the “?” The charts are clear, it doesn’t line up. Unless I am doing something wrong. Top speed run standard day zoomed up to 38k and stalled out at 2.0 . 

 

edit: completely clean I might add. 

 

Edited April 18, 2023 by Fulcrumkiller31

[Redliner7]

Has flat spins and post gyro stalls become more difficult to initiate with the latest FM changes?

I can't get it to depart flight and I'm doing some really stupid things on the stick including cross-talking all 3-axis and one engine idle and the other in burner.

I figured at least one or 2 of these stupid moves would've departed flight.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[captain_dalan]

On 4/17/2023 at 9:17 PM, maxsin72 said:

I' ve also seen that the cat consumes less fuel in full AB.

 

That is a placebo though
I ran both A and B through the same fuel flow test i did back when we were flying, and any difference in FF in a continuous 350-360 KIAS turn ASL are marginal. Like 3-6 seconds up or down, values that are easily attributed to pilot error. The planes still have about 3 minutes 40ish seconds of burner time inside those parameters with the A having a bit more, but not much. Seriously, i should do a full fuel flow test at some point, with tighter margin and time in burner charts in mind, but that will have to wait me retiring i think.

The plane does accelerate much better though, especially in the transonic region. I only got to test the A thus far, and with 2x2x2x2 at 35000ft, GW of 66000pds, mach 0.691 to mach 1.2 is about 2 minutes, 20 seconds. Which is right on the money (it used to be almost impossible without modified climb profile that involved climbing above 35kft and then diving bellow it). However, the plane also overperforms above that. Should take about 6 minutes to get to mach 1.6, but in DCS we get there in about 4 minutes 40 seconds. Also, max mach should be 1.75, but in DCS we get up to mach 1.8 AND instead of 10 minutes, we do it in 9. Something that calls for immediate attention? Hardly, as we not gonna fight at mach 1.6. But still something to keep in mind for the future. And i am itching to test the F-14B and see how it performs. Not to mention, this is linear acceleration, we need cross-testing with excess energy in maneuvering situations as well. And i'd rather take more precise values here then in the former, if there's a tradeoff.  

On 4/18/2023 at 4:16 AM, Fulcrumkiller31 said:

Hence the “?” The charts are clear, it doesn’t line up. Unless I am doing something wrong. Top speed run standard day zoomed up to 38k and stalled out at 2.0 . 

 

edit: completely clean I might add. 

 

 

What i had in mind was more something like this (Tacview attached bellow). The above mentioned test. Possibly associated with a track file and or a video.

Tacview-20230420-031153-DCS-FM test 35000ft f14A 2x2x2x2.zip.acmi

Edited April 20, 2023 by captain_dalan

[bkthunder]

On 4/17/2023 at 4:06 PM, fat creason said:

Maybe, but not anytime soon as it's super low priority. Reading some of the "reviews" of this update is amusing. The placebo effect is real and I'll leave it at that. 

 

oh..ok. to be honest I am sorry to read this, it is something I was looking forward to being correct as part of the controls check. I hope you reconsider it.

[maxsin72]

On 4/20/2023 at 3:36 AM, captain_dalan said:

That is a placebo though
I ran both A and B through the same fuel flow test i did back when we were flying, and any difference in FF in a continuous 350-360 KIAS turn ASL are marginal. Like 3-6 seconds up or down, values that are easily attributed to pilot error. The planes still have about 3 minutes 40ish seconds of burner time inside those parameters with the A having a bit more, but not much. Seriously, i should do a full fuel flow test at some point, with tighter margin and time in burner charts in mind, but that will have to wait me retiring i think.

The plane does accelerate much better though, especially in the transonic region. I only got to test the A thus far, and with 2x2x2x2 at 35000ft, GW of 66000pds, mach 0.691 to mach 1.2 is about 2 minutes, 20 seconds. Which is right on the money (it used to be almost impossible without modified climb profile that involved climbing above 35kft and then diving bellow it). However, the plane also overperforms above that. Should take about 6 minutes to get to mach 1.6, but in DCS we get there in about 4 minutes 40 seconds. Also, max mach should be 1.75, but in DCS we get up to mach 1.8 AND instead of 10 minutes, we do it in 9. Something that calls for immediate attention? Hardly, as we not gonna fight at mach 1.6. But still something to keep in mind for the future. And i am itching to test the F-14B and see how it performs. Not to mention, this is linear acceleration, we need cross-testing with excess energy in maneuvering situations as well. And i'd rather take more precise values here then in the former, if there's a tradeoff.  

What i had in mind was more something like this (Tacview attached bellow). The above mentioned test. Possibly associated with a track file and or a video.

Tacview-20230420-031153-DCS-FM test 35000ft f14A 2x2x2x2.zip.acmi 197.96 kB · 4 downloads

 

I have done my tests at 0° celsius and F14 performs a bit better giving me the chance to out turn the F18, the behavior is different from that at 20°C, at 20°C the F18 is still almost unbeatable, so no placebo my friend