F-15 is underpowered in FC2

[Shaman]

you'r using fsx as a guide to compare flight model correctness :megalol:

 

x2 :lol: MEGALOL just do you know

[Shaman]

IRIS is the flight dynamics creator for the aircraft, not Microsoft, you would have to commit me to a mental hospital before I claimed that Microsoft flight dynamics characteristics for anything were 100% accurate

 

IRIS planes are messed up UFO-s. Sorry that you felt for their marketed "detailed flight model".

[HiJack]

IRIS planes are messed up UFO-s. Sorry that you felt for their marketed "detailed flight model".

Agree. Not only that but they charge money for the sh*# as well :P

Edited January 23, 2011 by 159th_Viper
Language

[Jinro]

It would be nice if the AI flight models in FC2 weren't messed up UFOs as well ;)

[mic1184]

popcorn!

 

are you guys real fighter pilots or what makes you rant about the flight model realism? I've never flown a fighter jet in reality and unless you did, you better start blaming yourself for unsufficient gaming skills rather than start another discussion on realism deficits. ;-)

 

I just trust ED to deliver a decent simulation and try to handle it as good as possible. I dont trust HAWX to do that because everyone says so, not because I knew it any better...

 

Maybe the real deal is much easier... Playing GTR2 and Live for Speed i found driving a car to be extremely difficult, while i know in real life its much easier... Those real fighter pilots would probably need the most popcorn if they read threats like this hehe

[GGTharos]

Oh, look, a new argument that we never heard before ;)

 

 

popcorn!

 

are you guys real fighter pilots or what makes you rant about the flight model realism? I've never flown a fighter jet in reality and unless you did, you better start blaming yourself for unsufficient gaming skills rather than start another discussion on realism deficits. ;-)

 

I just trust ED to deliver a decent simulation and try to handle it as good as possible. I dont trust HAWX to do that because everyone says so, not because I knew it any better...

 

Maybe the real deal is much easier... Playing GTR2 and Live for Speed i found driving a car to be extremely difficult, while i know in real life its much easier... Those real fighter pilots would probably need the most popcorn if they read threats like this hehe

[mvsgas]

I think he is on your side GG...or I'm I reading this wrong.

[GGTharos]

Whichever side he's on, he's just made one the most detrimental and worthless arguments that can be made regarding contributions by non-pilots.

[Jinro]

Playing GTR2 and Live for Speed i found driving a car to be extremely difficult, while i know in real life its much easier

 

I find driving in real life a hell of a lot easier than in racing games....

[TeeJay82]

I find driving in real life a hell of a lot easier than in racing games....

 

Thats kinda like comparing flying a sr-71 ingame, and flying a piper cub in real life

[Jinro]

Not when you drive an Audi :D

[mic1184]

Whichever side he's on, he's just made one the most detrimental and worthless arguments that can be made regarding contributions by non-pilots.

 

sorry, will never again remark anything you've read before in your forum. are you a bears fan?

[Mugenjin]

Maybe the real deal is much easier... Playing GTR2 and Live for Speed i found driving a car to be extremely difficult, while i know in real life its much easier...

 

Do you actually race as well in real life? Otherwise it doesn't really compare well...

[topol-m]

sorry, will never again remark anything you've read before in your forum. are you a bears fan?

 

If you want to learn how to fly well the F-15 and use its capabilities, I suggest you read carefully what GGTharos posts, read and take notes.

[mic1184]

Do you actually race as well in real life? Otherwise it doesn't really compare well...

 

Not competiton-wise but I've been on my university's racing team doing drive train engineering and enjoyed driving both an Formula Student car and an Audi A3 race car.

 

IRL you just get a feeling for the car after driving a couple rounds and that enables you to concentrate fully on the race track and your brake points. By then you don't even realize anymore how you control the car, you just do.

 

That doesn't happen driving those racing game sims, even with a fanatec wheel (which i really love, don't misunderstand me) and a lot of setup it still doesn't come close.

 

I have no idea how this compares to flying an aircraft though. I was just mentioning the possibility that it could.

 

http://www.motorsport.rwth-aachen.de/wp-content/gallery/vln/dsc_4076.jpg

http://www.ecurie-aix.rwth-aachen.de/cms/images/stories/fahrzeuge/eac06/eac06_1.jpg

 

If you want to learn how to fly well the F-15 and use its capabilities, I suggest you read carefully what GGTharos posts, read and take notes.

 

i don't fly or care about the F-15. I referred to the old "simulation vs reality" discussion that's on any simulation forum, no matter if it's flying or racing or... fishing

[Frostie]

popcorn!

 

are you guys real fighter pilots or what makes you rant about the flight model realism? I've never flown a fighter jet in reality and unless you did, you better start blaming yourself for unsufficient gaming skills rather than start another discussion on realism deficits. ;-)

 

I just trust ED to deliver a decent simulation and try to handle it as good as possible. I dont trust HAWX to do that because everyone says so, not because I knew it any better...

 

Maybe the real deal is much easier... Playing GTR2 and Live for Speed i found driving a car to be extremely difficult, while i know in real life its much easier... Those real fighter pilots would probably need the most popcorn if they read threats like this hehe

Im pretty sure if you drove a McClarenF1 in GTR2 for eg. and it only reached a max speed of say 120mph and 0-60 in say 8 seconds you'd find reason to debate this as a realistic simulation even though you've never actually driven one. Capiche. :thumbup:

Just because you don't understand the dynamics of aircraft doesn't mean you should be critical of the views of those who do.

[GGTharos]

Yep ... we all know that the 'seat of the pants' feeling isn't there. That's no excuse to skimp on any other realism that can be acquired.

 

And frankly, reviews from people with a lot of flight experience have been good where it comes to the handling representations that CAN be provided at least in DCS.

[mic1184]

Im pretty sure if you drove a McClarenF1 in GTR2 for eg. and it only reached a max speed of say 120mph and 0-60 in say 8 seconds you'd find reason to debate this as a realistic simulation even though you've never actually driven one. Capiche. :thumbup:

Just because you don't understand the dynamics of aircraft doesn't mean you should be critical of the views of those who do.

 

Or maybe the simulation is just so good that it's perfectly normal for my McLaren just to reach 120mph because I damaged my exhaust driving over a curb 2 laps ago without realizing.

 

Just because I don't understand the dynamics of the aircraft doesn't mean I shouldn't be critical of the views of those who think they do it better. Maybe he just likes to fly CAT III in dogfights, who knows?

 

Man we could go on like this forever, until a real F-15 pilot joins and tells us if the real Eagle can pull more than those 4 G's in such a specific situation.

[GGTharos]

No, we will not 'go on like this forever'.

 

We have the -1, and that tells you exactly what you want to know regarding the sustained turn capability of the F-15C at given altitude at certain weight, drag index and engine used. Pilot not required. Pilots can tell you other useful things - things do not depend on 'seat of the pants' when it comes to operating the aircraft. The only way to simulate a vehicle is from specifications and existing performance charts, and then you can have a pilot verify that certain things are correct. With the A-10C things like acceleration, engine thrust and other basic flight characteristics were not an issue in general. The sim's lower-rate-of-roll was not detected by pilots, it was detected by persons who never flew an A-10. The stall 'kick' however was something that an experienced pilot could describe as being 'just a bit too much' - that, see, was useful input from pilots and non-pilots alike there.

 

Much like the car example, the driver's assertion that 'uh, it goes slower when the exchaust is damaged' is useless to simulation. A chart relating exhaust to other things that might curb acceleration is actually useful.

 

Man we could go on like this forever, until a real F-15 pilot joins and tells us if the real Eagle can pull more than those 4 G's in such a specific situation.

Edited January 25, 2011 by GGTharos

[mic1184]

No, we will not 'go on like this forever'.

 

We have the -1, and that tells you exactly what you want to know regarding the sustained turn capability of the F-15C at given altitude at certain weight, drag index and engine used. Pilot not required. Pilots can tell you other useful things - things do not depend on 'seat of the pants' when it comes to operating the aircraft. The only way to simulate a vehicle is from specifications and existing performance charts, and then you can have a pilot verify that certain things are correct. With the A-10C things like acceleration, engine thrust and other basic flight characteristics were not an issue in general. The sim's lower-rate-of-roll was not detected by pilots, it was detected by persons who never flew an A-10. The stall 'kick' however was something that an experienced pilot could describe as being 'just a bit too much' - that, see, was useful input from pilots and non-pilots alike there.

 

Much like the car example, the driver's assertion that 'uh, it goes slower when the exchaust is damaged' is useless to simulation. A chart relating exhaust to other things that might curb acceleration is actually useful.

 

So by those charts the Eagle should be able to pull more G's than is possible in FC2 and this isn't just a "the eagle is the best aircraft in the world and should rule more in FC2"-thread?

 

BTW, you're right, a simulation of course depends on such charts. But there are infinite possible interactions and no manufacturer has charts for any possible defect or effect. It's up to the sim-makers to decide how far to go and simulate the mechanics and how to simplify these cause-effect-chains. It seems as if ED does a good job with that, so I would be really surprised to hear that the F15 really is considerably "underpowered" in the sim compared to real life specs.

Edited January 25, 2011 by mic1184

[GGTharos]

... have you followed the thread?

 

So by those charts the Eagle should be able to pull more G's than is possible in FC2 and this isn't just a "the eagle is the best aircraft in the world and should rule more in FC2"-thread?

[Pilotasso]

Dont think the F-15 is underpowered, though I do think the Mig-29 is still way off. Some called it "Raptorsky" for good measure :D

[EtherealN]

Like GG said earlier: the sim gives you an F-15 that mirrors the real deal as closely as is possible with the SFM, based on the -1. The -1 is actually very exhaustive in regards to having charts for a lot of variables. But also as GG said, there are some quirks in the SFM that may cause the F-15 to be either slightly over or slightly under RL specs in certain conditions (this goes for all planes in FC2, possible exception being the Frogfoot since the AFM helps adjusting for these things simply through being AFM).

[GGTharos]

Nope, it's fine. We had charts for that, too, and it is in fact slightly under-powered at the very top ends of its performance (speed/altitude), but this was simply not possible to correct. Mind you, it's something you'll only see in numbers rather than something that would affect it in combat in FC2.

 

Dont think the F-15 is underpowered, though I do think the Mig-29 is still way off. Some called it "Raptorsky" for good measure :D

[Cali]

It's clear to see that this young lad has no clue. The Eagle has no problem pulling G's in FC2.

Edited January 25, 2011 by Cali