Jump to content

F-16 Fighting Falcon: History, Performance & Discussion


spacenavy90
 Share

1 hour ago, [email protected] said:

 

The G-Limiter/Fly-By-Wire system isn't modeled in-game.

 

The developers are using elevator compression as a means to mimic the G-Limiter/Fly-By-Wire function in-game so that the plane isn't able to pull more than 9-10g while using mouse aim.

 

Actually modeling the G-Limit would require an entirely new function in their flight modeling system.

 

The same concept probably applies to trim where trim tabs aren't actually modeled as their own separate thing and they are just changing resting control inputs to fullfil the same function as trim.

 

It's not a bug because that's how Gaijin has decided to implement it in their flight modeling system. They don't have an option to turn trim off or limit it because it's not really trim in the first place and to model trim parameters and trim tabs correctly adds a completely unnecessary layer of complexity.

 

 

 

 

So there is no plan to change the way the elevator works? 

Currently I've seen the F-16A struggle to pull 7G at certain altitude/speed combinations. It doesn't feel like a consistent 9G limit, and that is to the detriment of how the plane feels to fly imo. 

  • Thanks 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, MiG_23M said:

You're wrong, some aircraft do not get the ability to adjust trim in matches but rather only in test flights prior.

 

This shows they can easily remove the trim adjustment or only permit it's ability to be set prior to fly out in an actual match.

 

The F-16 doesn't need manual trim.

 

Which aircraft doesn't have manual trim in-game?

 

I don't know of a single one.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SlowHandClap said:

So there is no plan to change the way the elevator works? 

Currently I've seen the F-16A struggle to pull 7G at certain altitude/speed combinations. It doesn't feel like a consistent 9G limit, and that is to the detriment of how the plane feels to fly imo. 


I have no idea. It depends on how charitable you think Gaijin is going to be in the future.
The current limit is based on elevator compression which means that the flight model is mostly accurate at sea level but becomes more and more limited the higher it goes.

They could do nothing. That is the easiest option.

They could more accurately model the fly by wire function that wouldn't cause the plane to lose performance with altitude. This is probably the most difficult option because I presume it requires a bunch of new coding and they would have to also figure out how it interacts with the underlying flight model and how it would also affects other flight models. It probably isn't that hard to do...but it requires some effort.

They could also just set compression so that the F-16 over performs at high speeds in the same way that every other plane is able to in the game.
 

My hot-take is that they will do nothing while trying to develop an actual FBW modeling parameter, it won't be ready in time, and by the time premium F-16 variants are being released for some next big patch in the future they will just remove the old g-limit and tell everyone with old out-dated airplanes that your time in the spotlight is over and you can cry about it. 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, [email protected] said:

 

Which aircraft doesn't have manual trim in-game?

 

I don't know of a single one.

Lots of russian props can only be trimmed in test drive, they don't have trimming in a match

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Conejero00 said:

Lots of russian props can only be trimmed in test drive, they don't have trimming in a match

 

Which ones? Every Russian prop I've used in sim battles is able to be trimmed.

 

 

Edited by [email protected]
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, [email protected] said:

They could also just set compression so that the F-16 over performs at high speeds in the same way that every other plane is able to in the game.

Jets in WT dont quite overperform in the amount of G's they pull because IRL if you fiddle with the controls and limiters you could absolutely induce crazy amounts of G-forces onto an aircraft beyond 16G's(tho obviously you'd risk catastrophic structrual failure). At least depending on the aircraft since the F-16 probably isnt the only one with a hard limitation, yet people seem to have an odd fixation with it's specific 9G limiter for some reason instead of letting it have a more nimble flight model like every other top tier jet so far.

Same goes for the MiG-29's FM even if it pulls slightly more. It too has severe compression issues that you dont get not even in the freaking F-4E...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, [email protected] said:

 

Which ones? Every Russian prop I've used in sim battles is able to be trimmed.

 

 

I-16 for example (some Yak-9s also can't) can only trim it's ailerons in a match, the others has to be a test drive and save it for a match
Iirc (it was a long time ago) I-15 had no trim at all, in the 3 axis
 

image.png.fb3c369c9fea3cba60ef1b3703ae32

Edited by Conejero00

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MacedonianSukhoi said:

Jets in WT dont quite overperform in the amount of G's they pull because IRL if you fiddle with the controls and limiters you could absolutely induce crazy amounts of G-forces onto an aircraft beyond 16G's(tho obviously you'd risk catastrophic structrual failure). At least depending on the aircraft since the F-16 probably isnt the only one with a hard limitation, yet people seem to have an odd fixation with it's specific 9G limiter for some reason instead of letting it have a more nimble flight model like every other top tier jet so far.

Same goes for the MiG-29's FM even if it pulls slightly more. It too has severe compression issues that you dont get not even in the freaking F-4E...

Probably because we actually have data on how its supposed to react and it doesn't even approach what it should?

2066844553_F-16A-15SAC1985.png.92cdabbe5

Notice how the "Sustained Turn Capabilities" graph maps G-load vs speed, not altitude so it shouldn't factor into it directly.

Edited by tripod2008
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, MiG_23M said:

@TrickZZter Can you explain what you mean by this? Is there no modeled G limits on the F-16 right now?
image.png


He said it's not a significant exploit and at the same time it's actually a feature on these planes. 

 

So, it's kind of an exploit, not a bug. But also, a feature on the aircraft. Oh, and AFLCS is not modeled.

 

Sounds good. 

 

 

9 hours ago, Nostalgistic said:

Submitted my F-16I "Sufa" suggestion, and it is approved and opened.

Best F16s!  I am in love with the Israeli one at the moment. 

Edited by Ziggy1989
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, [email protected] said:

 

It seems to me that a mod forwarded it to developers....developer tells mod it's not a bug...and then mod puts out statement that it isn't a bug.

 

It's a simple process. Sorry that you were wrong again.

In all fairness the mod concedes it is an exploit, but not significant enough. Then goes on to say that it's also a feature of these aircraft. After just confirming AFLCS is not implemented. 

 

I am very confused on the subject after that response. Can someone explain in detail ? 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

I am very confused on the subject after that response. Can someone explain in detail ? 

 

The last part of his statement means that trim control is not instantaneous so it's not actually all that useful for changing directions quickly. You can trim but it only applies a gradual input.

 

Trimming was also used on some airplanes to assist in maneuvering in real life so using trim to overcome a compression limit is not exactly ahistorical either.

 

It's in-game use is basically limited to proving people wrong about underlying flight models and using it as a tool to assist in things like dive recovery in planes with horrible elevator compression like the I-225.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, [email protected] said:

Trimming was also used on some airplanes to assist in maneuvering in real life so using trim to overcome a compression limit is not exactly ahistorical either.

 

It's in-game use is basically limited to proving people wrong about underlying flight models and using it as a tool to assist in things like dive recovery in planes with horrible elevator compression like the I-225.

understood, makes sense. I agree 

 

However, we are not talking about some planes. We are talking about the F16A. How does his response apply to the F16? 

 

 The F16 already has a ridiculously good turn rate. Yes it's huge, but no fighter can keep up with its wide (but really fast turn rate) especially in a climb. how is it assisting the F16 legitimately? 

Edited by Ziggy1989
  • Confused 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

understood, makes sense. I agree 

 

However, we are not talking about some planes. We are talking about the F16A. How does his response apply to the F16? 

 

 The F16 already has a ridiculously good turn rate. Yes it's huge, but no fighter can keep up with its wide (but really fast turn rate) especially in a climb. how is it assisting the F16 legitimately? 

 

It's not assisting the F-16.

 

It's implementation is the result of a modeling decision by Gaijin in a game that was originally limited to World War II planes.

 

Gaijins basic position is that they are not going to go through the trouble of remodeling how trim is implemented just because someone could use it to force a never ending 10g+ rate fight in theory. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, [email protected] said:

 

It's not assisting the F-16.

 

If the F16 has one the best turn rate in a climb. How would eliminating the only thing holding it back, the G limiter in an exploit not assist it illegitimately? Being able to now pull 14Gs in its unmatched rate speed and climb performance? 

 

Being able to perform a sustained turn rate higher than double what a human being can physically withstand in sim, is an assist. You really do not agree?  Respectfully asking.

The F16, without any manipulation or exploit can already outrate any fighter in a climb. You are aware, yes? 

1 hour ago, [email protected] said:

It's implementation is the result of a modeling decision by Gaijin in a game that was originally limited to World War II planes.

I get it. Ancient modelling decisions by Gaijin. But that is not an excuse to sit on our hands and not attempt to make the game better. Right? 

 

1 hour ago, [email protected] said:

Gaijins basic position is that they are not going to go through the trouble of remodeling how trim is implemented just because someone could use it to force a never ending 10g+ rate fight in theory. 

Why? This is in direct conflict to War Thunder's model and why we love the game. 

 

It is why we have a community and the ability to submit reports. To make the "trouble" and burden easier on them.

 

it is to strive for most real-world, historical experience. Especially in sim battles.  The Mod has conceded that this is an exploit, but not in any significant magnitude. Your comment and your vast experience in game indicates that it is exploit, but they just do not want to go through the "trouble" of correcting.

 

A never ending 10g+ turn rate (we know it's much more) paired with the F-16A's legendary thrust to weight in a climb will render it undefeatable in a 1v1 situation every time.  

 

You can set the relative control step to anything between 1 and 50% trim so that all you have to do is find out what % you need and it if it's below 50% it's a single tap away to put you in the highest speed sustained turn you can get in the plane. It makes sustaining a high speed turn extremely easy. If it's above 50% it's as simple as dividing the number you want by 2 and setting the control step as that, double tapping the key when necessary to sustain a high speed turn.

 

Seeing how you and Mig23 are so well versed on the game's mechanics, it baffles me how you both are bumping heads. When privately, I believe you both would agree on many things. 

 

Edited by Ziggy1989
  • Thanks 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

If the F16 has one the best turn rate in a climb. How would eliminating the only thing holding it back, the G limiter in an exploit not assisting it illegitimately? Being able to now pull 14Gs in its unmatched rate and climb performance? 

 

Being able to perform a sustained turn rate high than double what a human being can physically withstand is an assist. You really do not agree?  Respectfully asking.

The F16 already can without any manipulation or exploit can outrate any fighter in a climb already. You are aware, yes? 


In order to do so requires a highly contrived control scheme where you switch to full realistic controls and use the trim function.
 

13 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

I get it. Ancient modelling decisions by gaijin. But that is not an excuse to sit on our hands and not attempt to make the game better. Right? 

You are naïve if you think the company that made a half-hearted effort at implementing a G limit for the F-16 is going to go back and change the entire way the model trim just because your squadron leader was proven wrong.  Trim is effectively a niche function for a game mode that nobody plays. 
 

20 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

Why? This is in direct conflict to War Thunder's model and why we love the game. 

 

It is why we have a community and the ability to submit reports. To make the "trouble" and burden easier on them.

 

it is to strive for most real-world, historical experience. Especially in sim battles.  The Mod has conceded that this is an exploit, but not in any significant magnitude. Your comment and your vast experience in game indicates that it is exploit they just do not want to go through the "trouble" of correcting.


This is a game that allows planes to pull 14g turns while in simulator and realistic modes and it's been that way for 10 years. 

The whole gameplay loop has never been about historical accuracy or even the experience; it's about using manipulative psychology to convince people to spend tons of money on what is ostensibly a "free" product in order to progress to the section of the game that they are convinced that they want to play.

How does one even reach top tier in all 7 tech trees while having basically no time spent playing below 9.7BR? I feel like I am seeing things because Thunderskill makes it look like you used golden eagles to unlock every single tech tree.

https://thunderskill.com/en/stat/Ziggy1989/vehicles/r

 

40 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

A never ending 10g+ turn rate (we know it's much more) paired with the F-16A's legendary thrust to weight will render it undefeatable in a 1v1 situation every time.  

 

You can set the relative control step to anything between 1 and 50% trim so that all you have to do is find out what % you need and it if it's below 50% it's a single tap away to put you in the highest speed sustained turn you can get in the plane. It makes sustaining a high speed turn extremely easy. If it's above 50% it's as simple as dividing the number you want by 2 and setting the control step as that, double tapping the key when necessary to sustain a high speed turn.


And yet nobody actually does this because it is more convoluted than just learning to play the game. 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, [email protected] said:

You are naïve if you think the company that made a half-hearted effort at implementing a G limit for the F-16 is going to go back and change the entire way the model trim just because your squadron leader was proven wrong.  Trim is effectively a niche function for a game mode that nobody plays. 


Why is it so personal with you? why are you still bringing up my squadron in a negative light? I said nothing negative to you or your spat with him other than you both would actually agree on many things privately. That's a compliment. 

 

Clearly you do not like GJ. I read that loud and clear. We, on the other hand love WarThunder and strive to make the game better no matter how much push back we receive from the community and of those who are only looking for likes and upvotes. 

 

How is this relevant to the F16?

 

1 hour ago, [email protected] said:

How does one even reach top tier in all 7 tech trees while having basically no time spent playing below 9.7BR? I feel like I am seeing things because Thunderskill makes it look like you used golden eagles to unlock every single tech tree.

Are u suggesting that golden eagles being spent is a thing that players should not do?  

 

As for Thunderskill, would you like to 1v1 in any fighter of your choice and see how irrelevant Thunderskill is to GJ and Warthunder?  How do you know 
I golden eagled anything? Are you absolutely positive?  

 

How is any of this relevant to the F16? 

 

Edited by Ziggy1989
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

Why is it so personal with you? why are you still bringing up my squadron in a negative light? I said nothing negative to you or your spat with him other than you both would actually agree on many things privately. 


I am just stating that it is naïve to expect a company that uses a variety of different methods to simplify their flight models to completely alter the way that they model trim just because of a potential extremely niche use case.
 

14 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

Are u suggesting that golden eagles being spent is a thing that players should not do?  

I am suggesting that Gaijin uses the success of it's monetization model to gauge whether or not the game is successful and not the stated opinions of players on the forums. 
 

15 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

As for Thunderskill would you like to 1v1 in any fighter of your choice and see how irrelevant Thunderskill is to GJ and Warthunder?  How do you know 
I golden eagled anything? Are you absolutely positive?  

You have Japan's top tier aircraft while only having played a total of 1 game in the J2M2. 
I don't see how one would unlock entire tech trees without playing them unless it was through the use of golden eagles. 
image.png.eef238226319fd047e43df8e9f8eef

Why would I waste my time 1 v 1-ing you? I don't see the point. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, [email protected] said:

The whole gameplay loop has never been about historical accuracy or even the experience; it's about using manipulative psychology to convince people to spend tons of money on what is ostensibly a "free" product in order to progress to the section of the game that they are convinced that they want to play.

It does not matter my friend. It does not matter what conspiracy or deeps seated animosity you hold toward the game, nor their business practices.

 

We are here to strive for historical accuracy and the experience.  We love War Thunder.

 

How is this relevant to the F16A? 

Edited by Ziggy1989
  • Confused 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

It does not matter my friend. It does not matter what conspiracy or deeps seated animosity you hold toward the game.

 

It's not a conspiracy; it's just a matter of fact with how "free-to-play" games monetize their player-base. 

 

6 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

We are here to strive for historical accuracy and the experience.  We love War Thunder.

 

War Thunder has never strived for historical accuracy. 

 

Let me put it this way;

 

I can queue up a Cl-13 Mk.6, a plane that exited production in 1958, and I will most likely get slammed by a missile that entered production in 1977, or by a different missile that entered production in 1982.

 

That's the equivalent of a Sopwith Camel fighting against a P-38 Lighting.

 

You would probably understand that War Thunder does not care about historical accuracy or the gameplay experience if you hadn't paid money to bypass the vast majority of the game.

 

 

21 minutes ago, Ziggy1989 said:

How is this relevant to the F16A? 

 

Go back and read the statement that you made and that I was replying to. 

 

You were trying to claim that Gaijin simplifying trim was inconsistent with War Thunders game design.

 

I was simply pointing out that it isn't. High fidelity and extremely detailed flight models have never been a part of War Thunder's business model or even their game model.

 

The vast majority of gameplay is done with mouse aim and keyboard. It is perfectly consistent for them to not prioritize altering the way that they implement trim functions when it's not even a factor in the vast majority player experiences. 

 

Your buddy made the bug report, attacked me for "abusing an exploit" or whatever, and then the developers did the logical thing that I thought they would do and basically told him to go pound sand.

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really mind about the trim issue, I really doubt there are loads of players using it in RB to gain an edge.I just want to see the Devs acknowledge that there is something wrong with the current f-16a FM, and that it will be improved in the future. 

  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just found out today, if you get one of your wings damaged (orange wing) and you use only mouse aim to turn and manoeuvre (not WASD keys), you can turn easily at 11 G overload and not lose speed (at Mach .95).

 

I didn't try but perhaps you could use a friend and have him damage your wing for better manoeuvrability.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, [email protected] said:

So the F-16 gets a correction to its G Indicator, in the cockpit HUD view. That’s it? 

Yeah I'm hoping this was just a small fix they were able to release without much testing, and that they still have more planned. This F-16 is nothing like how I imagined it would be to fly. I don't care about how good it is, or how amazing the missiles are, it's still annoying to fly when it turns so poorly. 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SlowHandClap said:

Yeah I'm hoping this was just a small fix they were able to release without much testing, and that they still have more planned. This F-16 is nothing like how I imagined it would be to fly. I don't care about how good it is, or how amazing the missiles are, it's still annoying to fly when it turns so poorly. 

It turns normally,... but again,... 

You base your referential on other aircrafts not limited by pilot G-strain.

 

And also, most people expect to see the best values of the aircraft around Mach 1.0, when in reality it is about 0.6-0.7 Mach.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...