Flight Model Discussion: F-16I Sufa Overperformance vs F/A-18C Drag Modeling
Hello everyone,
I’m posting this to highlight a significant discrepancy in maximum speed performance observed in Simulator/Realistic Battles (SB/RB) that suggests a severe error in the Flight Models (FM) for drag or mass.
1. The Discrepancy (Observed In-Game)
In test flights at low altitude (approx. 100 m AGL), the following maximum sustained speeds were observed:
Aircraft Configuration
Loadout
Max Speed Observed (km/h)
F-16I Sufa (Heavily Loaded)
3 x Drop Tanks (PTBs) + CFTs + 2 x 2000lb Bombs + 4 x AAMs (AIM-120/9)
approx. 1400+
F/A-18C (-402) (Clean)
Min Fuel (20%) + 2 x AIM-9 (Wingtip)
approx. 1350
Conclusion: The heavily penalized F-16I is able to accelerate to a higher max speed than the virtually clean F/A-18C. Aerodynamically, this is impossible in real life.
2. Theoretical Analysis: Thrust-to-Weight Ratio (TWR)
We can quantify the error by comparing the Thrust-to-Weight Ratio (P/G), which is the primary driver of acceleration and max speed against drag.
Parameter
F/A-18C (Clean)
F-16I Sufa (Loaded)
Max Thrust (Pmax)
approx. 16430 kgf
approx. 13560 kgf
Est. Operating Mass (G)
approx. 12518 kg
approx. 17548 kg
Calculated TWR (P/G)
1.31
0.77
The Reality Check:
The clean F/A-18C has a TWR that is approx. 70% higher than the heavily loaded F-16I. This means the Hornet should have vastly superior energy performance, acceleration, and a higher maximum speed.
3. Conclusion and Proposed Fix
The observed in-game data strongly indicates a serious inaccuracy in the modeling of one or more components:
F-16I Drag: The parasitic drag penalty from the 3 x PTBs, the CFTs, and the two massive 2000 lb bombs on the F-16I is severely underestimated in the Flight Model (FM). This immense loadout should limit the Sufa’s top speed to well below that of a clean fighter.
F/A-18C Drag: The F/A-18C’s base airframe parasite drag may be overestimated/under-modeled, especially when combined with its engine performance at high Mach numbers at low altitude.
Request: Gaijin needs to re-evaluate the drag tables for external stores on the F-16I Sufa and/or the base airframe resistance of the F/A-18C to align the in-game performance with real-world physics. A plane with a 0.77 TWR should not outrun a plane with a 1.31 TWR at sea level.
Second of all, weight does not significantly affect top speed and only drag plays a major contributing factor here. Weight affects acceleration.
The reason a loaded F-16I does not lose much speed is that weapon drag is significantly undermodelled ingame for gameplay purposes. If this weren’t the case, all aircraft would be penalised heavily for carrying extensive armament, including the hornet which becomes subsonic at sea level with a light combat load in real life.
The information is not correct as weight does not affect top speed, only really time to speed. It’s basically asking for weapons drag to be implemented in-game which would affect all aircraft equally and would make a 10 AMRAAM F-18C hit Mach 0.75~ max at sea level.
Yes it does matter. AI topics are considered spam. Please bother with actually reading the rules of the forum before asking if it matters.
Yeah I am aware, though it is severely reduced compared to real numbers especially on fuel tanks and as you said pylon drag is completely non-existant. Either way, the topic is essentially asking for drag associated with weapons and their pylons to be modelled which would affect all vehicles severely and significantly reduce quality of gameplay.
Properly create your thread. Getting the information right and avoid using AI are just basic things.
Additionally, if you believe that something is off and should be corrected, then you should create a bug report on the CBR instead of posting on the Forum (mind you, don’t create useless bug reports).
