F-15C can pull in excess of 12Gs [beyond its wing rip load].
Whereas F-14B pulls slightly less.
F-15 is also significantly lighter both empty & full fuel, while retaining the same engines the F-16 uses. Over 30,000kgf collective at mach-1.
Yes but you’re not taking into consideration the swing wings’ advantages. The F-14 also has a significant portion of body lift to account for, it’s stability at high alpha is not to be messed with. The F-15 doesn’t stack up in that regard I think. This isn’t DCS.
No one claimed this was DCS.
This is WT, a company that works to make FMs as accurately as possible in a short time frame.
F-15 will pull more AOA when needed while retaining more energy.
Everything I’ve pointed out about the two suggests the opposite. Weight has little to do with sustained turn rates or high alpha. Swing wings do better at both.
I referenced DCS because the F-15 has better high alpha than the F-14 in that game for some reason, though the FM’s of the F-15 is “low fidelity” so they give it a pass on realism.
F-15 isn’t even here yet and we all know how Gaijin modeled F-16s or Tornadoes (early in update it was a mess). Its better to wait for release or Dev Servers.
The F-16 is a unique case, due to it’s design and fly-by-wire and whatnot (or the fact that it’s FBW is not modeled anyway). The MiG-29 was implemented mostly accurate to the practical aerodynamics manual but is still not properly modeled due to the East not putting post-critical information into their graphs.
With the F-15 there is plenty of very explicit flight performance graphs and data, likewise with the F-14. Their implementation will be similar, and in fact I think it’s kind of funny. The F-14 was accurate on the dev server but people complained and it was nerfed on live as they thought the high-alpha capacity of the aircraft was “too much” and my report later proved this wasn’t the case. It was fixed very soon after I made my report. With the F-15 I suspect we will see a similar trend, it’s performance will be mostly accurate on dev / launch.
This isn’t true, the F-15 outrates the F-14, and outperforms it at low speed.
Again, this is not real life. The F-14 is not limited to some 7.6G for maneuvers.
G-Limits won’t effect sustained rate, so that’s not an issue, and at low speeds, you are AOA limited, so again, not an issue.
1 Like
G limitations absolutely affect sustained turn rate. The artificial G limitations would imply that the MiG-23MLD was unable to out-rate the F-4 Phantom due to wing sweep requirements and such as well. With the F-14 it runs into a similar issue, and it’s sustained turn rates in-game can be compared to the Eagles comfortably within the ranges where the eagles flight envelope is not limited by the maximum permissible overload as well.
1 Like
1 Like
Sustained turn rate is the following factors: Engine power, AOA, lift/drag.
The better the relationship the better the sustained turn rate.
Higher AOA allows for one to control sustained turn rate better than lower AOA.
2 Likes
I’m fully well aware of what affects sustained turn rates. When the EM graphs show the sustained turn rates up to only the artificial G limitation the sustained turn rates above that limitation are only speculative. This is issue is further compounded when the aircraft’s swing wings are in automatic mode for the testing, or are limited to only a certain percentage of forward sweep.
This is why the manuals for the MiG-23ML show that it has a worse peak instant and sustained turn rate than the F-4 Phantom despite this clearly not being the case in-game. Likewise, the F-14 has a similar issue with the addition of it’s flaps usage in war thunder being different to how it would function in real life.
Again it doesn’t outrate it, the F-15 has an identical max sustained rate. It’s faster and has a higher g load when doing it, but only to around 7.5 G. An ace crew will make that reasonable in a turning fight. The F-15 only has very slightly less rate than the F-14B at low speeds, and at high speeds it will lose less speed in high-g maneuvers.
The F-14B’s rate performance also depends on its wing sweep schedule, I don’t remember if Warthunder’s implementation is correct but even if it is the wings take time to sweep and unsweep which will leave it in the wrong configuration some of the time.
Practically the F-15 has better acceleration and that gives it a serious advantage in practice. It can swing the nose around repeatedly to win the fight and then make the speed back up quickly in a straight line. And it can leverage that to escape a two-circle as well, so even if the F-14 enters into a low speed rate fight it may not be able to make good the advantage there.
1 Like
Few aircraft are able to sustain G over their G-Limits, especially with weapon loads. Peak sustained rate is not always at the same speed as peak sustained G, that’s important to note.
@10,000ft
F-15A with a 4 + 4 load, peak sustained rate: 14.1Deg/s - 7.2G
F-14B with a 4 + 4 load, peak sustained rate: 13.2 Deg/s - 5.75G
F-15A, min speed(M0.2) rate: 8.25Deg/s
F-14B, min speed(M0.2) rate: 4Deg/s
What you are describing is essentially pulling the enemy into the gunsight too quickly. Forcing the F-14B to tighten down will not net you a win in a sustained turn fight. The wing sweep can be set to 0% (full forward) and it will stay there until it has to sweep back near mach.
If the Mig-23ML is inaccurate do please put in a report.
I’m very well aware of the correlation with turn rate and G overload. My point is that in some specific instances the maximum G overload of the aircraft is lower than the peak turn rates’ required overload and this becomes increasingly evident as fuel load decreases.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/955829235493273680/1130255346548621342/image.png
As seen here, the F-14A reaches a point at around 10 minutes of fuel where it would no longer be possible to indefinitely rate at 350 knots with combat flaps out. Also, the only time it can sustain a 400 knot turn is at around 45 minutes of fuel without combat flaps enabled. Though you can effectively increase the maximum sustainable overload to around 8-8.5G due to how long you can turn in war thunder at those overloads. The F-15 will have similar issues, regarding what you said;
Few aircraft are able to sustain G over their G-Limits
I think many gen4 aircraft will have peak sustained turn rates above their sustainable G overload limit depending on airspeed and altitude. This is a totally false statement.
It’s not inaccurate, it follows the manual quite well I think. I don’t think you understood me correctly.
Due to the manuals stating pilots are required to fly in 45 degree sweep for dogfights, the sustained turn rates at those speeds are inferior to the Phantom. In-game because we can fly at 16 degree sweep as we please, the sustained turn rates are higher. If the F-14’s charts were done in automatic sweep, it would have similar issues with sustained turn rates approaching mach that are unaccounted for because the western charts don’t exactly make it illicit what sweep percentage the F-14 was at for the maneuvers. The Eastern stuff is harder to read, but more detailed.
1 Like
I think we must have different definitions of sustained rate then?