J79 sounds...brotha eww

[Onslott]

https://discord.com/channels/1071433028045377637/1243238207668355093

I talked about this in the HB #f-4 general chat and @IronMike and user @fat creason apparently confirmed that this is what the Phantom is supposed to sound like. I don't know...I really don't think I agree. The majority of the audio files in Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\CoreMods\aircraft\F-4E\Sounds\Effects\Aircrafts\Engines\J79 just sound WAY blown out to me. I understand that the sounds are a mix of these files on various loops based on angles and things and stuff, but jesus do they sound bad compared to what im hearing on prety much any youtube video of the real phantom. If these files were higher quality and less blown out, then they would probably be great. @IronMike even said that the one file I provided as as example wasn't supposed to sound like that prior to asking for confirmation, which says alot about initial reactions.

Note: I uninstalled the Echo 19 Core mod prior to these clips. There are no mods enabled currently for me. I brought this up to Echo 19 and they confirmed that the Core mod has nothing to do with the Phantom sounds (pretty obvious as its brand new, but just wanted to confirm with them).

Just take a look at this taxiing example @3:10 vs the attached clip. Those howl sounds trying to mimic air rushing in (I think) are not even close.

I really  think this needs to be looked at again. 

 

Also check out the sounds from inside the cockpit above (also the spool times on this engine are stupid fast - not surte this is realistic either).

• Helmet on (don't think this makes a difference, but it should).
• Canopy open
• "Hear like in Helmet" is checked off

Edited May 23, 2024 by Onslott

[Turbolious]

Can confirm this sounds like an issue and something i noticed right away. The clipping is really bad in some of the outside views and when someone does a flyby. It is NOT supposed to sound like that.

[Longiron]

+1 for the spool times, the engines are super snappy.

[Badger1-1]

What Ive noticed is the EGT being too constant, it climbs up to 450 ish and stays there  until idle. Never seen an engine do that in my live.(not saying it cant be, just dont really makes sense)

Edited May 23, 2024 by Badger1-1

[BeforeBroadband]

53 minutes ago, Longiron said:

+1 for the spool times, the engines are super snappy.

Insanely so. Caught me off guard the first time I touched the throttle. Never seen a jet engine tachometer move like a formula one tachometer till now. If that's how fast a J79 actually spools up then fine, but no way it does, right? I wouldn't think any turbojet or turbofan in existence could.

[Tiger-II]

44 minutes ago, Badger1-1 said:

What Ive noticed is the EGT being too constant, it climbs up to 450 ish and stays there  until idle. Never seen an engine do that in my live.(not saying it cant be, just dont really makes sense)

 

This hit me in the face, too. Not how EGT behaves during engine start.

The engine start sound is just the idle sound at lower frequency. Turbines do not sound this way during start-up!

[Generio]

Another +1 for this topic. To me, everything except idle is super crunchy and overdone. This module really deserves a rework and some replacing of some old recycled F-14 sounds, to fully flesh out the experience.

[=475FG= Dawger]

John Trotti said when discussing engine response in Phantom over Vietnam

”By contrast, the J-79’s response is so superb, there is virtually no lag”

 

[Kev2go]

i just hope the later F4E variant planned ( with DMAS) will also have smokless engine variant of the J79. 

[BeforeBroadband]

36 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

John Trotti said when discussing engine response in Phantom over Vietnam

”By contrast, the J-79’s response is so superb, there is virtually no lag”

 

Incredible. Will take some getting used to, but a very nice perk to have.

[Nealius]

External engine sound is also almost half volume compared to that of inside the cockpit, even with canopy closed.

[MysteriousHonza]

On 5/24/2024 at 2:19 AM, =475FG= Dawger said:

John Trotti said when discussing engine response in Phantom over Vietnam

”By contrast, the J-79’s response is so superb, there is virtually no lag”

 

There is huge difference between saying no lag in 60-70s and in case of modern engines. Spool time was an issue back then so engine that improved on it but still had one, would be praised like from another dimension.

[Kalasnkova74]

On 5/23/2024 at 6:19 PM, BeforeBroadband said:

Insanely so. Caught me off guard the first time I touched the throttle. Never seen a jet engine tachometer move like a formula one tachometer till now. If that's how fast a J79 actually spools up then fine, but no way it does, right? I wouldn't think any turbojet or turbofan in existence could.

The first F-4 Phantom II was a Naval interceptor. Fast engine response time is a paramount criterion when landing a 35,000 lb jet on a 1960s era carrier. Remember, back then the U.S. Navy still had escort carriers left over from WWII. Landing a big Phantom II on those short deck ships meant needing very precise throttle control. Part of that responsiveness is the J-79 motor itself, and part of that is the Phantom II’s intake bellmouth system that matches airflow to throttle and engine settings nicely to avert compressor stalls & other common jet engine throttle issues. The original TF-30 F-14 is a textbook case of what happens when that engineering isn’t done fully. 

Later on, pilots who exchange toured between the U.S. and UK navies noticed the British Spey-powered Phantoms were harder to land on ships due to reduced throttle response vs their less powerful but more responsive American J-79 cousins.

[=475FG= Dawger]

3 hours ago, MysteriousHonza said:

There is huge difference between saying no lag in 60-70s and in case of modern engines. Spool time was an issue back then so engine that improved on it but still had one, would be praised like from another dimension.

It would be a mistake to assume that engine response time constantly improved with successive generations of fighter jet engines. 

[Art-J]

Navy engine or not, there's a thread in bugs section with chart from the manual of -15 version of J-79 showing spool up time from idle to military as 3 seconds. "Our" simulated -17 does it within a second. Seems to be an excessive difference for just a slightly different version of the same engine, though unless someone finds a similar manual for -17, we can't go much beyond "feel" for now. I hope devs are going to take a look at that aspect later once more pressing module issues get addressed.

[zaelu]

+1 Sounds need some re-touching in many ares. It's possible to sound better on different setups.

[Ramstein]

Yes, they are not even close,, but I just can't complain... Yet,, give them time... my ears still ring from them IRL. No to be snarky, but they are like a vacuum cleaner with a plugged hose now...

Edited June 6, 2024 by Ramstein