Jump to content
Mustafa_admin

F-14 love

Recommended Posts

I thought this was a pretty cool original concept for a video and very well put together. I'm not a big fan of the F-14 but I did purchase the aircraft to support Heatblur but I'm thinking even if this aircraft is not your cup of tea you might still enjoy this video.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a good demonstration of the HB Tomcat.  I hope they get the in game sounds to match what they showed in this video.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was impressed with that 1/4 mile turn so, after I got my chores done, I went to Wikipedia to look up all the Thrust-to-Weight numbers. Yes, those numbers would seem to support such a tight turn radius. So I tried in the F-18, then the F-15, then in all the other aircraft that DCS has.

The F-18 has a Thrust/weight: 0.96 (1.13 with loaded weight at 50% internal fuel)

The F-15 as a Thrust/weight: 1.07 (1.26 with loaded weight at 50% internal fuel)

With 50% fuel, these two aircraft should be able to  go down the runway at 250 knots, go full burner, pull up into a pure vertical climb and then continue to increase speed. That's what Thrust to weight means.

There isn't an aircraft that can do it. Not in DCS. (The Harrier can from a hover.) The Mig 29S gets the closest but still can only hold speed for a very short while.

We all have been looking at procedures and weapon employment to be as realistic as can be. Yet, none of the A2G weapons are accurate, none of the A2A BVR weapons are accurate, nor are any of the flight dynamics any where near accurate. Wikipedia reports the Hornet can do Mach 1.8. I don't think I can get that even in a dive.

I'm not complaining, though. I am thoroughly content with DCS... even with its quirks. A couple months ago, someone was yammering about how powerful DCS aircraft are. Then, when I heard that 1/4 mile turn in a Tomcat, well, it brought back all those numbers.

DCS is just not real. So, it's still just a game. A very very good one, but still... (Oh, and there is no other simulator on the civilian market that comes anywhere near as close.)

Now, I'm going to go finish washing dishes... :)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to be careful using Wikipedia as a reference source as it’s a community driven site. In this case I would go with the DCS numbers because They actually licensed the product with Boeing and we’re given access to the performance data from the manufacturer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mac said:

With 50% fuel, these two aircraft should be able to  go down the runway at 250 knots, go full burner, pull up into a pure vertical climb and then continue to increase speed. That's what Thrust to weight means.

There isn't an aircraft that can do it. Not in DCS. (The Harrier can from a hover.) The Mig 29S gets the closest but still can only hold speed for a very short while.

 

Aside from using Wikipedia as a source, the major flaw here is you're forgetting about drag. You have to overcome gravity AND drag. If either of those aircraft had drag coefficients of zero then sure, they could accelerate straight up. Fighters are draggy by nature (compared to other types of aircraft designed to be much more sleek) in reality you'd probably need ~1.5:1 TWR or greater to actually be able to accelerate straight up in the average fighter. Maybe something like the F22 loaded light on fuel could approach that, but I even doubt that.

I've hit mach 1.8 in the hornet btw, in level flight, extreme altitude and very light on fuel and it's doable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps most of the numbers quoted in Wikipedia are quite accurate. You can begin at:

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-18.htm

Scroll down to the FA-18C specifications.

GE's reference is at:

https://www.geaviation.com/sites/default/files/datasheet-F404-Family.pdf

The empty weight of an FA-18C is 24,000 lbs.

Internal fuel weights 11,000 lbs.

Half of that is 5,500 lbs.

That's 29,500 lbs at 50% fuel.

Each 404 engine produces a static 17,000 lbs thrust. (That's the lowest number I could find.)

Times two engines comes to 34,000 lbs.

This leaves about 4,000 lbs of thrust for vertical acceleration that DCS Hornet just cannot do.

Are any of my numbers incorrect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you see a fighter do a Performance Climb after take off, they are going a lot faster than 250 before they pull up. They take off and stay low until after they pass the end of the runway or just after.  That's an easy 350kts and they only keep that climb going to 10-15k ft mostly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many real life pilots that have tried the F18 have said she's underpowered. So I wouldn't worry about it Mac. Maybe in the future she will get that power added. Not going to worry about it really. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drag. Drag easily cancels out the minorly positive TWR. The effect of drag on a fighter is far greater than being a few percentage points over 1:1 TWR.

IRL these jets cant accelerate straight up either.

Another things to consider: thrust decreases with altitude, lower density air. These jets get high very fast when you pull vertical. So you're losing a lot of your thrust as soon as you climb above 10000, maybe even 5000, I dont have numbers in front of me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To many veritable missing to come to any conclusion. The information you gave is basic promotional information given by the manufacturer to sell their product  

“17,700 lbs of static thrust at sea level on a standard day while being tested on an engine stand”

No other performance data given for the engine.

how much proformance does it loose with altitude. What performance hit does it take when having to draw air through the F-18s intakes. What about aircraft AoA does that reduce the performance? I would assume it does depending on the angle and speed as some intakes move to help reduce this performance cost.

McDonald Douglas spent years doing all kinds of  performance test with the F-18. DCS paid a good bit of money to have access to that information. I’m not saying DCS has it right after all this is a $70 flight sim but, I do think they have access to more information then what can be found on the internet. 

As for real life pilots saying it does not have the thrust it should well that reminds me of the Spitfire - Bf109 debate as to which ones turns tighter. Some RAF and Luftwaffe pilots are record as saying they believe the Spitfire can outrun the Bf109 and then there are some RAF and Luftwaffe pilots on recorded as saying the Bf109 was better. There are even some pilots that had the opertunity to fly both that disagree. 

All things being equal on paper the Spitfire could outrun the Bf109 at most altitudes and slower speeds. But, at higher altitudes and higher speeds the Bf109 has the advantage.

where the pilots wrong in there accounts? No, because life is not equal most of the time. Pilot skill plays a big role as does variables like weight, altitude and speed along with shit ton more. Without knowing this you are left with only an opinion and not fact. I wonder how much not having the seat of your pants feeling as the jet excellerates might play into them thinking it does not have the right thrust.

anyways like Highway says I would not worry about it and just have fun with what we have.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Mac said:

I'm not complaining, though. I am thoroughly content with DCS... even with its quirks.

 

I am quoting the original poster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/11/2018 at 4:23 PM, Highway said:

Exact flight copy and narration from 2002 Oceana Air Show. At least they didn't steal the engine sounds too. 

Unfortunately, a Heatblur dev admitted those weren't the actual engine sounds.  They were enhanced with the real life audio.  They hope to get close to the sound in the video though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


vVMFA-251 is a virtual DCS World F/A-18C squadron flying the Belsimtek/Eagle Dynamics F/A-18C module exclusively. We focus on real-world tactics as best we can within the DCS Wold environment.

vVMFA-251 is not your run of the mill DCS World squadron.

"Custos Caelorum"
DCS World Simple Radio TACview LotAtc
×