No
Everything we have just talked about and discussed and compared would show a harrier 1 pulling 5.25 G at .6 Mach with just 12 degrees AOA
And it would sustain that
The ITR line on the Gr.3 e-m is buffet onset G
hey did they change gen 1 Harrier turn rate at one point? I’ve not used it in ages but I could have sworn the GR7 turned faster but the stat card suggests the inverse.
No. According to the math it would gain speed. Which taken at face value would say it could sustain higher G than indicated.
Wow really a clean Gr.3 will have the smallest 31 sep over a Gr.3 with pylons and guns
It checks out even if you like it or not
So we are using clean configuration in lieu of dirty configuration with 5 pylons?
Dude
The math you did is naturally assuming a clean harrier
The E-M is not
The sustained G that the clean harrier resulted in is so extremely close to the dirty one that it is very easy to assume correct
No it’s bad still
No.
The CL/CD assumes whatever it is. If you are giving me estimates for clean harrier and then claiming that means dirty harrier values are accurate…you are reducing any confidence factor in equation to basically nil. This is already with a setup that I did not even have a reasonable confidence factor in to present in my videos. This is in spite of having values for various airplanes for over a year.
Right well the lift coefficient I gave you at the .6 Mach came from a harrier with 2x100 gallon tanks 2 gun pods and a recce pod
This source didn’t include drag
So drag was taken from the nasa source using a clean harrier
You’re being very pedantic the coefficients are not going to change so outlandishly so that all of a sudden you need vastly different amounts of AOA and thrust to do the same things
Dude you literally do not understand how any of this works. The way that the equation works is such that minor variations in coefficients matters quite a bit. The fact that we are using drag coefficients from a clean Harrier is going to skew things. And the direction that it skews things is not even equal in magnitude.
It’s 31 off a draggy harrier
You do realize that equipping stores does not have a direct and proportional impact on CL and CD? Right?
Ok so think about this
A harrier with a clean profile only sustains a Sep of 31 when pulling the ps-0 line of one with pylons and guns
What you are basically implying is that your opinion of what the harrier should be doing in the pylon and guns configuration is worse then the known IRL value for ps0
Give me a break
Talking to you is like talking to a spoiled child who doesn’t know what he’s talking about
You should have moved on once you realized the Sep values match very closely once you start imputing my primary docs values
Please. Think about this statement for a second.
You are also the guy who tried to use GROSS thrust in a Sep equation……
So you might understand the formula
But you obviously don’t understand the concept
You also didn’t put 2 and 2 together about the G load
Yeah super easy to think about the clean harrier has a slight advantage in sustained G over the harrier with a higher drag profile
That’s very simple
I don’t think you understand the equation.
What do you think happens in the equation if you put in F-16 CL/CD and something less than gross thrust?
You’re making yourself look very foolish right now
Sep is calculated with Net thrust via the thrust equation
The net thrust on something like the viper increases with airspeed velocity
F-16 pushes out less air faster harrier pushes out more air slower
The net thrust is important. So are things like the velocity of the exhaust compared with the velocity of the aircraft
The velocity of the jet exhaust needs to be faster then the velocity of the aircraft in order for it to continue accelerating simple logic here