I’m working on a bug report to fix the F-14’s flightmodel. Currently, even in best case scenario, the F-14s cannot go their accurate top speed of 2.34 Mach. The F-14B barely breaks Mach 2.1 and the F-14A literally falls apart at 2.25. Their acceleration also falls off a cliff at those speeds, which is exactly what they were optimized for (and why they can’t reliably supercruise) so I’ll probably add that in there too. The Ramjet turbines on the F-14A are nowhere to be seen. I highly doubt the devs haven’t seen the thousands of sources out there saying the top speed for both of these aircraft is Mach 2.34 (some even saying higher for the F-14A), so I’ll just assume this is another one of those artificial nerfs they’ve tacked on to the already nerfed jet.
I wish there was a forum thread like this for the F-4E. Ive tried soo many times to get things fixed on the F-4E in game for so long and I feel like they just dont care about fixing existing planes in game unless its top tier related.
I think he got confused with the wording.
There is RAT (Ram Air Turbine) which a back-up power source for hydraulic and electric power in emergencies and many planes (if not all) have it with the Ramjet-like effect (there is no turbine or a mechanism) of TF30s .
The TF30s 14A used had a ram-jet effect, on high speeds , but that doesn’t mean they were ramjet engines. Just that the engine has a similar effect with how ramjets behave , having more thrust the faster you go.
Also , F-14A could go well over its said limit …
and that’s not the only time i’ve read of such feats.
Also the TF30s in F-14As were de-tuned for the most part of thier life (from late 70s) , because the more you push something, the more maintenance it needs… and those engines were big b…es in maintenance…
So, i don’t know what sources GJ works with…
but 2,34m … the plane should be able to do it at least naked .
This proves how their implementation of heat signature modeling is so bad.
From my manual(2004 version), the temperature of the air coming out of the engine exhaust nozzle should be more cooler from current one but, I can’t use it for bug report for obvious reasons.
Fortunately, I may be able to obtain a unclassified NAVAIR 01-F14AAA-1 from the mid-1980s, so I might write a bug report.
They don’t really need the manual …
In newer jets in general i think they use free sources.
I don’t think there is a Rafale manual , at least not online , though i’ve seen plenty of those https://elektroflug.ch/media/anleitungen/het/Rafalemanual.pdf
about various types!
I don’t think they help :P
If HOME of MATS has it then that part isn’t classified then…
and from a little bit of reading i did about engines in general, inlet turbine temperature is always warmer than the outlet, else it drops the laws of thermodynamics.
GJ using the inlet number for the outlet is just wrong…
The problem is that NAVAIR 01-F14AAA-1 contains both items that are subject to export restrictions and items that are not.
The manual I have is literally the latest flight manual for the A model, so I can’t use it for bug reports, but there are many manuals from the 1980s that are not subject to export restrictions.
The Smithsonian has a 1986 version of the manual, which, to my knowledge, is not subject to export restrictions. You can also get an edited version of the manual on Amazon for a few bucks. That manual is based on the Block 120, which was the newest model at the time, so it’s probably from the mid-80s too
They don’t really need the manuals.
Here they even fix things because a brochure said so or it’s calculated in the video.
Meanwhile about that specific thing with the engines, it’s the laws of thermodynamics.
You have to use a value well below the turbine input temperature, because there is ALWAYS ΔT , it will always lose temperature from inlet to outlet… the value depends. It can be from 15% -65% temperature loss… but it’s ALWAYS the loss of ΔΤ.
They don’t need source on that, 15mins reading thermodynamics and a basic understanding…
Put the minimum… still it will be something like 980 deg C.
PS: and no i’m no physicist , i was accountant , doorman , bellman, receptionist and now i’m supply manager in a hotel… Nothing to do with physics. You just need some reading. 15 mins. Can’t they do it on their own?
Even DC’s uses a value of 926 deg C. I don’t know what they are thinking…
The TF-30s power band was adapted for higher speeds, that doesn’t mean it works like a ramjet. It doesn’t. Simply put, most of the compression used to improve thrust and SFC is done by the intake and not by the compressor, therefore the thrust continues to increase the faster you go.
Of course, it is not as bad as the “run-a-way” engines on the MiG-25, which could potentially be difficult to stop and can run away in thrust or RPM if you go too fast iirc.
Even the MiG-29 has this kind of a design, where the engine can only produce the maximum thrust at high speeds. Something that is different, like the F-18’s F404 engine, produce very close to maximum thrust at static speeds. This is far more ideal for carrier operations.
Ram air intakes are not ramjets, and there is a very big distinction. Using compressed air from the intake is not the same as solely compressing air using an inlet throat.
