Technically TSFC would imply the motor is already installed in the aircraft, otherwise fuel consumption is normally rated as a function of mass flow rate of fuel over uninstalled thrust. TSFC is thus nominally the mass flow rate of fuel over installed thrust. In performance data charts they usually erroneously label the uninstalled fuel consumption “TSFC”.
The relation between S (uninstalled) and TSFC (installed) in equation form is given as;
S = TSFC (1 - inlet loss coefficient - nozzle loss coefficient).
To make it simple, if there is less thrust installed due to channel losses the installed (TSFC) specific fuel consumption will be higher than uninstalled. If the document suggests ~1.7, and the channel losses are not quite 10%, then the SFC will be a little bit higher as the same amount of fuel will be used but less thrust will be made. So if it is ~1.8 in-game, that would be roughly correct according to the documentation you provided.
What’s up with the EF nerf? Nothing is wrong with it before the nerf. So many crying babies cry that EF is too OP, imagine the F/A-18 was added with that level of performance, they will protect it at all cost…
It’s software development. Some dufe changed 1 line of code somewhere and screwed up 99 other classes. It’s fine, its the dev server they are trying to get this WORK IN PROGRESS flight model to where they want it.
Development will likely continue after the patch too, like F-15E Drag/Thrust levels, I hope they do this for the sake of having an accurate, playable and amazing FM that lives up to the near impossible standards set by the typhoon irl
Nice example yeah! Also remember the UFO JF17 flight model on release of the actual patch?
It was fixed within a week. And since Eurofighter is one of two main vehicles this patch, going to 3 whole techtrees as the top of the line. I VERY much suspect that the FM will be completely fine upon release.
Isn’t that still too high? All sources state 11.000 kg empty mass. It varies among some sources between 10.500 and 11.500 kg but the “Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH” says 11.000 kg empty mass.
The initial 11.700 kg were the weight of the two-seater-variant and the fuel mass (~4.500 kg instead of ~5.000 kg) fitted the two-seater variant too. So it seemed like they took the data of the two-seater and slapped that onto the one-seater (by error or for balance reasons as “it cannot be what should not be”).
