Tiger-II Posted April 5, 2024 Posted April 5, 2024 (edited) Hi, Got the trial of this aircraft as I've always been a fan of the Italian aerobatic display team, and like light jets in general. I loaded up the -339A with round tip-tanks and two external wing tanks and took it for a flight. The aircraft seems very slow? Scary slow? I flew out of Nellis AFB, and used what seemed like half the runway just accelerating to 150 kts. It was so slow, I had to check the engine was developing full power (it was). In level flight it won't accelerate faster than 300 kts at 3000 ft. Does this sound right for this configuration? Maybe I've flown fast jets for too long. Even a 747 accelerates faster and flies faster at max gross. Air temperature is +15 deg. C., and there is no wind in the mission at any altitude. If it's correct, then great, but the manual states time-to-climb to 40000 ft takes 7.5 minutes. Hmm. Is that from brakes release or starting in flight from sea level?! Edited April 5, 2024 by Tiger-II Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port "When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover. The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts. "An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."
6S.Duke Posted April 5, 2024 Posted April 5, 2024 Hi, yes. The aircraft is not so performant how it looks.The Italian display team flies only with underwing tanks without the tip tanks who make it more agile but the top speed in level flight at sea level it is around 340 kts.Only in "clean" configurazion (elliptical tip tanks with no underwing payloads) it can reach 400 kts in level flight at sea levelInviato dal mio SM-F731B utilizzando Tapatalk 4 MB339 EFM Coder Frecce Tricolori Virtuali [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Ramsay Posted April 5, 2024 Posted April 5, 2024 (edited) 22 hours ago, Tiger-II said: ... the manual states time-to-climb to 40000 ft takes 7.5 minutes. Which manual is that, I don't see a 40,000 ft climb listed in the DCS MB-339A Flight Manual ? 22 hours ago, Tiger-II said: ... Is that from brakes release or starting in flight from sea level? Climb rates in the Real MB-339A Instrument and Navigation flight planning section assume a 12 minutes taxi, take-off and level acceleration prior to initiating the climb (i.e. 80 kg fuel burned). Starting with 2x pilots, a clean configuration and full internal fuel (half full wing tip tanks), the RL manual gives a 30,000 ft climb @ 38 NM / 7.5 minutes / 222 kg additional fuel burned. The DCS MB-339A Flight Manual (Page 26) shows a Climb to 30,000ft performance spec. of 7.1 minutes (so is perhaps without filled wing tip tanks). When testing, I found the real MB-339A flight planning tables worked well enough for DCS i.e. climb distance/time +/- 15% and fuel used covered by the 200 kg planning reserve. Edited April 6, 2024 by Ramsay i9 9900K @4.8GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 11 Pro x64, Odyssey G93SC 5120X1440
Dragon1-1 Posted April 18, 2024 Posted April 18, 2024 That's the reality of flying trainers. If you firewall the throttle, it'll take it as a suggestion that you want to go faster. It'll even give it a try, if conditions are right. 1
Bigskill Posted May 10, 2024 Posted May 10, 2024 As other people say, is the faster trainer but it depend which configuration. I play mostly in MP in a Light cas config, so with defa 30 mm 2 rockets pods, Matra, 2 tip tanks, the cylindrical one. In level flight It take me quite a bit to get beyond 300 kts, but easy can get to mach 0.65/0.70 trimming down a bit, also depend which map and what temperature is set by mission makers. Still is the faster of all the othe trainers (L39 and c101). 1
Recommended Posts