Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, Delta59R said:

What charts were you using to model the B originally?

NAVAIR 01-F14AAP-1.1 for the F-14B (F-14A+) and NAVAIR 01-F14AAA-1.1 for the F-14A.

Systems Engineer & FM Modeler

Heatblur Simulations

Posted (edited)

The 1G flight envelope charts are the ones you want if you're concerned about top speed. These charts are NATOPS speed limitations based on loadout. If you care to read the link I posted, the fact it's about the F-14A isn't relevant, the discussion and methodology is. Any questions as to what we did or why can be answered there, the process on both A and B was the same. You can see what the F-14A's 1G envelope looks like there. Look for the same chart for the F-14B. We'll post about it eventually on the website if you can't figure it out.

Edited by fat creason

Systems Engineer & FM Modeler

Heatblur Simulations

Posted
1 hour ago, fat creason said:

The 1G flight envelope charts are the ones you want if you're concerned about top speed. These charts are NATOPS speed limitations based on loadout. If you care to read the link I posted, the fact it's about the F-14A isn't relevant, the discussion and methodology is. Any questions as to what we did or why can be answered there, the process on both A and B was the same. You can see what the F-14A's 1G envelope looks like there. Look for the same chart for the F-14B. We'll post about it eventually on the website if you can't figure it out.

 

Gotcha, when I get a chance to sit in front of a real computer I'll check it out. 

So, back to your post before, you said the original model was based on these APP1.1 charts. So the charts showed it was capable of 2.2+ but something changed y'all's mind so you change it or they showed it wasn't capable of 2.2+ and y'all modeled it faster anyway? 🤔

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 2tb m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Posted (edited)

No we just made improvements to the model after fixing some other stuff that was impacting it. Things like this take large amounts of time to get right and things have to happen in a particular order. It's all discussed in the link I posted.

Edited by fat creason
  • Like 1

Systems Engineer & FM Modeler

Heatblur Simulations

Posted

Yeah the wheel brakes are definitely off. Made a feedback post on Discord. My squadron mates agree that they're too weak now. Tire rolling resistance feels much better, but braking needs to be stronger.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Posted
10 hours ago, fat creason said:

What would that be? Does the chart make sense?

 

Yes, makes sense. So where does the 2.34/2.38 clean spec come from? Have we all been getting smoke blown up our asses for decades?

Back to the A model, if I'm reading correctly, you guys felt that on the A model with a 4x4 config tested @ m2.15 would only be capable of m2.22 after dropping 4-sparows, 4 sidewinder, 2 pylons, and ammo? Is that right? You would only gain 0.07?

 

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 2tb m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Posted
1 hour ago, Delta59R said:

Yes, makes sense. So where does the 2.34/2.38 clean spec come from? Have we all been getting smoke blown up our asses for decades?

 

 

Posted

Any proof of those speeds or just stories?

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 2tb m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Posted
8 minutes ago, Delta59R said:

Any proof of those speeds or just stories?

That was not my point.

You asked "So where does the 2.34/2.38 clean spec come from?".

Did you read the point about early F-14As having 6000lb more thrust? That later F-14As were de-rated? That it's very likely the 2.34 Mach figure comes from early testing, and it's likely that comes with the benefit of that extra thrust?

And that the B, whilst having GE F110s with greater static thrust, was not as quick as the A when high and fast as the general understanding is that the TF30s benefitted from Ram Air effect better.

 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, DD_Fenrir said:

That was not my point.

You asked "So where does the 2.34/2.38 clean spec come from?".

Did you read the point about early F-14As having 6000lb more thrust? That later F-14As were de-rated? That it's very likely the 2.34 Mach figure comes from early testing, and it's likely that comes with the benefit of that extra thrust?

And that the B, whilst having GE F110s with greater static thrust, was not as quick as the A when high and fast as the general understanding is that the TF30s benefitted from Ram Air effect better.

 

So just stories?

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 2tb m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Delta59R said:

Yes, makes sense. So where does the 2.34/2.38 clean spec come from? Have we all been getting smoke blown up our asses for decades?

I personally believe everything I read on the internet and never look into it...

 

Seriously though, the DCS F-14A hits about 2.30. I think the numbers in the write-up didn't get updated, we'll fix it.

Edited by fat creason
  • Like 3

Systems Engineer & FM Modeler

Heatblur Simulations

Posted
25 minutes ago, DD_Fenrir said:

Sheesh...

eyeroll-robert-downey-jr.gif

No, not sheesh, people have a hard time with simple questions around here.

I get that you are just explaining where that spec might have come from. Cool. Awesome. Thanks for the insight.

Now that we are past the pleasantries, is there any proof/documentation of those speeds or just stories?

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 2tb m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Posted
4 hours ago, Dannyvandelft said:

Yeah the wheel brakes are definitely off. Made a feedback post on Discord. My squadron mates agree that they're too weak now. Tire rolling resistance feels much better, but braking needs to be stronger.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

We're aware, part 2 of the fixes just didn't make the patch in time, it will come in the next one.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Systems Engineer & FM Modeler

Heatblur Simulations

Posted
8 minutes ago, fat creason said:

I believe everything I read on the internet and never look into it...

Well, we can still clutch those Rio stories close to our heart and the like can't we? 😅

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 2tb m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Posted
3 minutes ago, Delta59R said:

No, not sheesh, people have a hard time with simple questions around here.

I get that you are just explaining where that spec might have come from. Cool. Awesome. Thanks for the insight.

Now that we are past the pleasantries, is there any proof/documentation of those speeds or just stories?

Then may I suggest you work on your tone.

Perhaps instead of "So just stories?", you can type "Awesome. Thanks for the insight. Anyone know of any datapoints that can corroborate these anecdotes?"

Comes across much less... prickly.

 

  • Like 4
Posted
7 minutes ago, DD_Fenrir said:

Then may I suggest you work on your tone.

Perhaps instead of "So just stories?", you can type "Awesome. Thanks for the insight. Anyone know of any datapoints that can corroborate these anecdotes?"

Comes across much less... prickly.

 

I apologize, I'll add some sugar on top next time. 😘

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 2tb m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Posted (edited)
57 minutes ago, fat creason said:

Seriously though, the DCS F-14A hits about 2.30. I think the numbers in the write-up didn't get updated, we'll fix it.

 

Ahh, cool!

Edited by Delta59R

Meshify C w Noctua Fans, MSI Carbon Z790, 13900KS, 64gb 7200 Gskill, MSI 4090, MSI 240, Sam 1tb m2, Sam 2tb m2, Seasonic 1000w, MSFF2 Stick + X56 Throttle, HP Reverb G2, Sony 83in A90J OLED

Posted
6 hours ago, Dannyvandelft said:

Yeah the wheel brakes are definitely off. Made a feedback post on Discord. My squadron mates agree that they're too weak now. Tire rolling resistance feels much better, but braking needs to be stronger.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Do they? Or are they finally acting the way they should after removing the crazy ground friction we've had for the last few years?

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Callsign JoNay said:

Do they? Or are they finally acting the way they should after removing the crazy ground friction we've had for the last few years?

The previous brakes didn't need to provide much brake torque, as there was so much rolling resistance it was as if the brakes were being applied at all times. Now that rolling resistance is much lower, we have to crank the max brake torque back up. This issue was discovered just after the submit deadline for the last patch. They'll be able to hold Zone 1 AB in the next patch.

Edited by fat creason
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 5

Systems Engineer & FM Modeler

Heatblur Simulations

Posted (edited)

There was an interview with F-14 test pilot Kurt Schroeder who got an F-14A to Mach 2.4 and said that was the fastest it ever went.  However, speeds were pretty quickly restricted to under Mach 2 due to some issues that the Navy didn't feel like spending money to solve.

Of all the Tomcat pilots interviewed in the Tomcast podcast, none said they ever broke Mach 2, fwiw.

Edited by WarthogOsl
  • Like 1
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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