AI flight model incorrect?

[DarkWanderer]

What are you wondering at? It is called "Strange Flight Model"...

[EvilBivol-1]

I think everyone is a little confused. The original poster was referring to the AI in Flaming Cliffs, which does NOT fly the SFM. The FC AI flies a simplified model when compared to the SFM flyables. For example, the AI FM in FC does not account for AoA.

 

One of the features in FC2 is the transition of all fixed-wing AI to the SFM, which is the same model used on non-AFM flyables.

[DarkWanderer]

No confusion here, just a taunt. Let's not go deep in details.

[Dr_Arrow]

I think the more correct interpretation is, the F-15 enjoys a slight advantage at low to medium altitude, and utterly and completely spanks the flanker at high altitude. To call something an angle/energy fighter, /if/ you were to go by Shaw, you need 10% advantage, and 20% gives you a very significant advantage, or conservatively, a definite edge. The flanker can have this in turn rate and probably turn radius at certain speeds.

 

Starting low, the F-15 has about 10% or less of an advantage, and when you reach about 20000', it's a devastating near 100% advantage. And this diagram shows you exactly why, as an F-15 pilot you want to keep the flanker fighting high, while as a flanker pilot, you want to suck the F-15 guy down low and slow.

 

Note that that, of course, if you run into a plane that's just slow, and the other at combat speed - regardless of which one - the fast plane should have the slow plane dead to rights, regardless of which altitude they're at.

 

 

PS: Thanks EB for finding that doc. I'd like to add that this doc aside, ED also has detailed flight performance charts for both aircraft as well.

PPS: This chart is for an F-15 with the old engines ... post 1986 most F-15s sport the 220/220E which alleviates the supersonic problem, as well as some serious maintenance and stalling issues of the -100.

However, that chart doesn't say anything about weights of both aircraft. Are their weights the same or are both planes fully fueled?

[golfsierra2]

I think everyone is a little confused. The original poster was referring to the AI in Flaming Cliffs, which does NOT fly the SFM. The FC AI flies a simplified model when compared to the SFM flyables. For example, the AI FM in FC does not account for AoA.

 

One of the features in FC2 is the transition of all fixed-wing AI to the SFM, which is the same model used on non-AFM flyables.

 

So in FC 2.0, AI pilots will be limited by the SFC and cannot 'outperform' human pilots that easy than it happens now ?

And if so, using the SFM also for AI, would that have an impact on the CPU load because of more calculations going on for the AI ?

[GGTharos]

They are both at combat configuration weights (the chart is made for combat applications), though I don't recall what those weights actually are. The Flanker is probably 2xR27R + 2xR73, the Eagle likely still has a couple sparrows and sidewinders as well, and I imagine they both have equal amounts of fuel - that would be a fairly typical comparison from such a manual.

 

However, that chart doesn't say anything about weights of both aircraft. Are their weights the same or are both planes fully fueled?

[GGTharos]

So in FC 2.0, AI pilots will be limited by the SFC and cannot 'outperform' human pilots that easy than it happens now ?

 

Correct.

 

And if so, using the SFM also for AI, would that have an impact on the CPU load because of more calculations going on for the AI ?

 

Yes and no. There are more calculations, but you won't feel them.

[lifeliberty]

No doubt the flanker will prefer to use angles tactics against the F-15. I was really coming from the perspective of the overall battle plan. Surely the flanker will be deployed to take advantage of its high energy capabilities. The F-15 is not the only adversary of your air force.

 

I would like to know in FC2.0, what kind of top speeds can we expect to see with a standard combat load? Currently Mach 1.2 seems like the realistic top speed I ever see.

[Moa]

I would like to know in FC2.0, what kind of top speeds can we expect to see with a standard combat load? Currently Mach 1.2 seems like the realistic top speed I ever see.

 

Mach number depends on altitude (more specifically the air temperature, which varies with altitude). If you are high the Mach number will increase for a given airspeed.

 

One interesting thing is that fighter engines are designed so that they can be run at higher thrust at a particular higher altitude (they can overheat at full power at lower altitudes but run nicely at full power higher up).

[Moa]

Of course it's a great angles fighter as well. But the way I see it, angles is not much advantage if you're outnumbered by cheaper planes. One flanker cannot out turn three F-5's!

 

Flanker is also outnumbered by more expensive aircraft (in absolute terms) as well. This is because the US economy was vastly larger than the Soviet economy, which meant despite individual aircraft being more expensive a lot more could be purchased while still spending a smaller proportion of GDP on defense. This fact is a lost on a lot of folk who only seem to consider 1 vs 1 or small unit tactics.

 

There is an old saying that "Amatuers talk tactics, professionals talk logistics". In this case there is no doubt that in the Cold War the Flanker was far too expensive for the diminutive Russian economy - something that arguably contributed to the collapse of that economy and the unravelling of the associated political system. The US both had the industrial and financial capacity to produce larger numbers of Eagles. So, my point is, despite being more expensive than the Flanker there are over 1500 Eagles built of all types vs under 700 Flankers. Coupled a higher availability rate for the Eagle the Flankers would almost always be outnumbered.

[Bucic]

I think everyone is a little confused. The original poster was referring to the AI in Flaming Cliffs, which does NOT fly the SFM. The FC AI flies a simplified model when compared to the SFM flyables. For example, the AI FM in FC does not account for AoA.

 

One of the features in FC2 is the transition of all fixed-wing AI to the SFM, which is the same model used on non-AFM flyables.

 

I recall that FC (1.0), aside from Su-25/39 with AFM, braught BVR revolution for fighters. I think it will be similar with FC 2.0 and AI FM transition to SFM, among other improvements.

[lifeliberty]

Mach number depends on altitude (more specifically the air temperature, which varies with altitude). If you are high the Mach number will increase for a given airspeed.

 

One interesting thing is that fighter engines are designed so that they can be run at higher thrust at a particular higher altitude (they can overheat at full power at lower altitudes but run nicely at full power higher up).

I haven't seen it exceed mach 1.2-1.3ish at ANY altitude with a full combat load. In a clean configuration I can reproduce the mach 2.3+ around 15000 meters. With only ECM and 2 R27's I fall far short of mach 2. This doesn't seem correct to me. I'm under the impression that near mach 2 is a useful design speed for these planes.

 

 

Flanker is also outnumbered by more expensive aircraft (in absolute terms) as well. This is because the US economy was vastly larger than the Soviet economy, which meant despite individual aircraft being more expensive a lot more could be purchased while still spending a smaller proportion of GDP on defense. This fact is a lost on a lot of folk who only seem to consider 1 vs 1 or small unit tactics.

 

There is an old saying that "Amatuers talk tactics, professionals talk logistics". In this case there is no doubt that in the Cold War the Flanker was far too expensive for the diminutive Russian economy - something that arguably contributed to the collapse of that economy and the unravelling of the associated political system. The US both had the industrial and financial capacity to produce larger numbers of Eagles. So, my point is, despite being more expensive than the Flanker there are over 1500 Eagles built of all types vs under 700 Flankers. Coupled a higher availability rate for the Eagle the Flankers would almost always be outnumbered.

According to wikipedia the Russian air force has 449 flankers in service. Almost all of this was produced during the FOUR OR FIVE YEARS 1986-1991 (with the other former SSR's included the number is closer to 600). There should be no confusing the RUSSIAN economy with the SOVIET economy.

 

Also if you're going to count all versions of F15, you'd need to add in the 300-400 SU30's in service worldwide.

 

I do agree with you about the availability rate. I think the Soviets were not counting on a high life expectancy to be too worried about availability.

Edited January 9, 2010 by lifeliberty

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Just check the encyclopedia.

 

It marks maximum speed at S/L and at altitude. IIRC, the Su-27 could do about 1.2 or 1.3 at sea level. 1.400km/h is easy to catch with full combat load at about 3K, fuel at about 100%.