Sustained Turn Rate of Fighters

[mikoyan]

I did some testing today and now the f-15 out accelerates the mig-29; it also out climbs it... wasn't the mig supposed to have the best climb performance? Also the eagle turn performance seems too god to be true.

[Rhino104]

I did some testing today and now the f-15 out accelerates the mig-29; it also out climbs it... wasn't the mig supposed to have the best climb performance? Also the eagle turn performance seems too god to be true.

 

The F-15 probably has the best T:W ratio in the sim, as it is in real life with what aircraft are included in the sim. There is probably only 1 warplane in the world today that could outclimb it, that being the F-22.

[mikoyan]

The F-15 probably has the best T:W ratio in the sim, as it is in real life with what aircraft are included in the sim. There is probably only 1 warplane in the world today that could outclimb it, that being the F-22.

 

what about the mig-29 it is supposed to have better T:W, late model f-16s and the eurofighter?

[Rhino104]

what about the mig-29 it is supposed to have better T:W, late model f-16s and the eurofighter?

 

T:W Ratios (Known)

 

F-15 with -220 Engines (Same as LOFC2): 1.12

-229 Engines: 1.30

 

Mig-29: 1.01

 

F-16 (Block 30): 1.095

 

Typhoon: 1.25

[GGTharos]

Definitely not. The F-15C has the best TWR out of all the flyable fighters. It is the energy King.

 

what about the mig-29 it is supposed to have better T:W, late model f-16s and the eurofighter?

[GGTharos]

It sounds like a solid idea unless I am missing something.

 

The fact that people will start dropping landing gear in a dogfight. Best to fix this the right way.

[A.S]

The fact that people will start dropping landing gear in a dogfight. Best to fix this the right way.

 

<250kts and then lower gears in a dogfight ...... :lol::lol::megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:

[RvEYoda]

<250kts and then lower gears in a dogfight ...... :lol::lol::megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:

 

Both me and AS know a guy who does this all the time for fun :)

[A.S]

Do i? :huh: It does friggn make no sense whatsoever to use gears in a dogfight ( being <250kts is already n critical area, or you might be thinking about wing on wing desc scissors ..more drag bla bla bla ..slower dropping, not even there)....btw what happens with your agility (rollrate, FCS-response change etc etc) in F4 with lowered gears ...ever wondered why?

Edited April 4, 2010 by A.S

[GGTharos]

You know it will happen ... there are a few people who make it a permament part of their dogfight repertoire ... flaps, gear, brake! ;)

[A.S]

You know it will happen ... there are a few people who make it a permament part of their dogfight repertoire ... flaps, gear, brake! ;)

 

 

GG ..to those guys you can say with 2.0 and its new performance curves:

 

GOOD LUCK trying to make a burnout with your gears in the sky, it could be something else smoking soon too. :D

Edited April 4, 2010 by A.S

[Scart]

Both me and AS know a guy who does this all the time for fun :)

SM?

[A.S]

LoL, really? ..nahh, never saw him doing that.....erm does he =? :)

[BeachAV8R]

Yes..all of this is good and well and everything..but none of it answers the fundamental question: Will it takeoff from the treadmill??

 

:shifty:

[3Sqn_Dubb]

Thx Dubb.

 

Id be very interested in the data collected presented as graphs if possible (overlayed?)

 

We will see if I get around to posting this info. But fundamentally the following comments can be stated:

 

1. The flanker still has the best instantaneous pitch rate with roughtly 30+ degrees alpha instantaneous which is expected.

2. The MiG-29A/G/S still have solid climb rates as expected. The MiG also struggles the most at low speed and performs best at higher speed, as expected.

3. The F-15 has the least accurate turn rates, relative to observed tables, and really does require re-modelling.

 

I fly the F-15 usually online, so it doesn't affect me too much, but I would prefer the F-15 to fly at least somewhat more realistically in terms of it's best rate of turn.

 

With all my collected data, all configurations are 50% fuel, full missile loadout (all aspect BVR and WVR) and all at 1000ft as a standard so as not to confuse different weights etc... and to record 'typical' loadout configurations. I have deliberately chosen not to produce these curves with a 'clean' configuration.

 

One particular fix which could address some of the issues people have raised is the following: If flaps or gear is deployed for more than say 5secs under a G-load of say 3G for example, the aircraft becomes damaged and unusable.

 

Just a suggestion.

[GGTharos]

The best configurations to use should match -1 configurations, but the most important thing is total weight I suppose.

 

Sustained turns (without flaps) at 10k and 25k supposedly match spot on, though I haven't tested those myself.

[3Sqn_Dubb]

The best configurations to use should match -1 configurations, but the most important thing is total weight I suppose.

 

Sustained turns (without flaps) at 10k and 25k supposedly match spot on, though I haven't tested those myself.

 

Fair point on the configurations mate, however, I'd have to see some data before I am convinced that these are accurate.

 

My plan with each aircraft is to conduct sustained turn rates at the following profiles:

 

1. 1kft

2. 10kft

3. 25kft

 

With those profiles, the turn radius, G-load, mach number and turn rate (dps) will be captured and plotted for sustained turns. Note: it takes about 4 hours to complete the tests, per altitude profile. Combine this with 6 available fighters, and it's a fair amount of work. So please be patient.

[GGTharos]

Look at the pages AS posted. They include aircraft configuration as well as well as weight (so you can adjust the fuel).

 

Flaps UP. :)

We already know flaps down = problems.

[A.S]

Those were PW-100 engines GG, but have same charts (various configurations, grossweights at diff alt) for PW-200s aswell.

 

A short replication with Yoda showed me, 2.0 is pretty accurate in "middle" areas....deeper tests i still have to do, but looks good so far.

 

PS: @Dubb: i hope you guys are not using tacview telemetries..cuz they are WAAY OFF

 

.... i did similar thing before.....maybe that helps as hint.

 

www.as-private.com/FlightDocs/F-16C-52-Performance-Charts.rar those are 1:1 reflections of ingame wich can be compared with real charts.

Its pretty handy though to have a tool, which reads out the 2.0 FM-core datas and converts them right into charts rather then plotting them flight by flight :)

Edited April 4, 2010 by A.S

[A.S]

@ Dubb: here try this

 

Take this (F-15C PW-200 engines (lockon))

 

 

 

Use same config: Clean and same Grossweight and MaX Thrust

 

Let someone read you that picture in TS and fly it same time.

 

start on sea level going higher step by step in alt as pictured (graphs)

 

Look, if you can sustain under same mach speeds, same G loads

 

Then you can go down to second picture and test your sustain rates by using counter or similar under same mach speeds.

 

 

BUT DO NOT USE FLAPS OR PAYLOAD OR TACVIEW ! (payload not cuz you dont know if drag and weight of those is correct modeled, do you?)

Edited April 4, 2010 by A.S

[contact]

well,i can say,i`ll set my F15 for 400knots into a head to head dogfight,then i pull my stick all back start to turn,when i reaching 250knots,i drop my flaps,still,full stick back,untill get a shot .

 

So easy,isn`t it? That`s the way of dogfight ? LOL

[3Sqn_Dubb]

PS: @Dubb: i hope you guys are not using tacview telemetries..cuz they are WAAY OFF

 

.... i did similar thing before.....maybe that helps as hint.

 

You're kidding me right? You think I'm that stupid? My technique is simple and reliable, but requires 7 measurements per data point to ensure good statistics, increased degrees of freedom and greater confidence in the numbers.

[Kuky]

@AS, no Dubb didn't use tackview to measure this, he used track and watched in game, measured multiple turns with stopwatch, it's pretty accurate because when taken quite a few measuring points for different speeds the graph points are pretty accurate. That curve shape is what matters the most and its completely off right now.

[RvEYoda]

Best way is to use an export script to produce turn rate logs. Then the only limiting factor

is how precise you can fly. This is one of the methods used during beta testing.

 

F-15 turn rates above M 0.7 should be VERY accurate for altitudes SL, 10k, 15k, 20k, 25k,

matching the rates in the chart AS posted, within 5%.

 

Flaps are broken atm.

Edited April 5, 2010 by =RvE=Yoda

[3Sqn_TomAce]

"Flaps up" 600+ KIAS at 18.2 Deg per/sec is way off also, maybe we need to look at extra G settings to combat this kind of false BFM flying?