Can anyone give me a quick rundown which radar modes of the F-15 is best for which situation?
PD HDN is HPRF. HPRF puts more energy on target and therefore has increased range, not decreased range. The issue with HPRF is its range return is ambiguous, but its velocity return is accurate, which is why you also have PDV modes.
2 Likes
We are not arguing about OWS modernization, that’s what I’m writing too.
I mean, f15s have pulled 15+Gs without the wings ripping off, normally with slight deformation to the wings but not total failure
This is often claimed but in truth the peak milisecond overloads calculated for certain sections of the airframe are not the total normal load factor across the entire airframe. Peak G forces applied are generally never more than ~12G’s with the aircraft staying in one piece.
2 Likes
The correction is simple, give the F-15 an audible warning, that is simply put an OWS system in the game to the F-15.
15G on symmetrical load on both wings and it sustained damage.
You can do the same in game at low weights.
But when you roll, pull and yank rudder at supersonic you are pulling assymetrical loads with your wings, making so that one wing is being overloaded with all the g load.
Wings sustain way less asymmetrical loads so the wing rips.
Solution is nerfing the rollrate at high speed or nerfing the pull at high speeds on instructor.
The asymmetric limitation is about 5.7 G, it’s for all US aircraft because it’s the standard. Except maybe the F-22.
Have you even played the F-15? It does have the audible warning for Gs
No. I don’t. If he has OWS and a good FM, then ideally War Thunder should say that the problem is on the player’s side. If he doesn’t have a good FM then he should say when it will be fixed.
The problem is not the FM. The problem is the instructor/mouse aim. The instructor will flutter all of the flight controls even just rolling back to level. I have yet to be able to get the F-15 to rip in Sim once the external wing tanks are dumped, even slamming the rudders and stick around trying to get it to break. I would have better data on with the Wing tanks installed, but I hardly use them.
2 Likes
In the future I look forward Multirole Eagle 90’s era from 2 countries
1 Like
My point is that structural limit isn’t the limit that instantly destroys the plane, even 1.5x that. The structural design limit is the load at which the fatigue life is infinite, or in the case of aluminum, high enough that the engineers aren’t worried about it for the life of the airframe(probably hundreds of thousands or millions of cycles at that stress). If you exceed that limit you risk reducing the life of the airframe, depending on how much over and for how many cycles, not instant death.
Even if you assume 1.5x the structural limit would cause yield(a very poor assumption judging from the fatigue curves) you’re still going to be in the hundreds if not thousands of cycles before failure range, aluminum is not brittle like modeled in game. That’s why planes IRL survive Over-G and why it requires part replacement, because that part now has reduced fatigue life by an unknown amount. It’s also why structural failures generally happen on high hour airframes(read about the f-15 structural failures due to incorrect longeron here: PICTURES: Manufacturing defects caused cracks that downed USAF F-15 | News | Flight Global , it took 25 years before enough fatigue cracking occurred for a faulty part to fail during a high G maneuver). Fatigue cracking is your enemy in airplanes not ultimate tensile strength.
My point is no 4th gen aircraft from any nation should be experiencing wing rips from over-G unless it’s insanely high, It’s not realistic and it’s not fun. Engineers think of this stuff.
Chart is for 6061, but should be a similar shape just shifted to higher strengths for an aircraft aluminum like 7074, 2024, or whatever custom magic mix the f-15 is made from.
Note: This all applies to a fresh airframe, I’m ok with ripping before unlocking the “airframe restoration” modification due to potential existing fatigue cracks, as that’s at least grounded in some realism.
2 Likes
In real life airplanes are not in the regimes caused by mouse aim in a online videogame either.
Try to fly it on simulator, you will find it impossible to break…
what you say also applies to every aircraft and how it is modeled in game.
If you want to change how wing g overload is modeled in game I guess you can do a suggestion.
3 Likes
If we all agree that the G-force overload condition doesn’t immediately result in the aircraft ripping apart at that moment but rather reduces the structural lifespan, and considering that RB battles typically last no more than 24 minutes and rarely exceed a hundred hours in SIM mode, with aircraft being repaired at the end of each battle or upon landing, the rip condition must be addressed across most aircraft present in the game, and this won’t be a specific change just for the F15As.
3 Likes
It reduces the structural failiure load, but there is still a failiure load even with no fatigue.
What you are suggesting is that planes should no rip and we would see planes pulling 40G in a turn
Yeah, my suggestion might seem foolish.
however, We can make an aircraft rip just because the game allows us to use a mouse for control. It’s strange that this isn’t considered a bug.
For example, if we have an aircraft that can experience a similar condition but without afterburning, can they play it on PC? RB is not a simulation, some things need adjustment based on the devices in use.
This also indirectly denies the effectiveness of the OWS system. The F15 rips in less than a second.
No player wants their aircraft to maneuver incorrectly leading to a Rip, but no one can control how their aircraft maneuvers using the mouse. Developers must be responsible for making it function properly since they have allowed players to use the mouse.
5 Likes
it sounds like you want mouse aim to do all the actual work of the pilot for you, so that you dont have to demonstrate any skill at all in controlling your airplane and staying within design spec…
That’s what mouse aim does already. Gaijin is forced to strike a balance between maneuverability, energy conservation, playability of the vehicle and I think they’ve got the balance right here already.
But in RB most of the players play with mouse aim only wdym