NGL kinda like being able to change MFD colors
Would be nice to be able to change the units from imperial to metric as well …
I understand that it’s not realistic, but IRL it would be a simple software change (and of course documentation and training change but that’s irrelevant for WT).
IRL most pilots fly at most a handful of aircraft types over their entire carrier, and usually from a single origin … In WT you fly hundreds of different aircrafts from various origins, so it would be nice to have consistent measurement units in the HUD and MFDs …
the problem my autistic brain has,is that it only changes 1 mfd page and that is the c-scope
and something funny happens when you switch the UI color to black
Funny, not suprised the only other person to mark they have the same problem with the F-18’s skipped the Finnish hud lmao, typical warthunder playerbase.
I dont play china or Isreal (yet) still spading all of France, yet i still take some time to look at bug reports and mark them. I figure i want people to buff the nations i play and I’ll eventually play the other vehicles i dont have or even if i never play it id like them to be changed.
I mean, “I have the same issue” sort of represents the priority of the reports. (Not the only factor, but one of the factors)
Obviously I would put more priority on the reports regarding nations that I actually play …
Not saying the Finish F-18 cockpit shouldn’t get its unique attributes, but obviously for me the priority would be the F-18 that I actually can play …
To be fair all it really does is add said change to the void of accepted reports. Where they sit there in Limbo until the snail decides to stop being lazy.
The government accountability office performed an investigation into the Navy Super Hornet program to determine if the legacy hornets indeed had the deficiencies claimed. What they found was that they really didn’t when it came to performance, and in spite of increases in thrust made by the F414 modification, the F-18E/F performed worse in acceleration, climb rate, etc. In any case, what they found was that claimed thrust and installed thrust differed wildly from document to document.
To answer your question directly, that graph is from this source.
QNEP is the Quick Navy Engine Program, the author had access to this and used all of the available thrust data at the time to match the known data to the datapoints from 0.8 to 1.2 mach in sea level conditions. The rest is extrapolated from the program.
Without legitimate thrust charts from performance manuals and other restricted sources, this is the next best thing available.
I hope the document provides some good insight, as you can see, it was validated using far better tools and resources than what has been linked here otherwise.
I don’t have your last two sources on hand, but if they are in agreement with the ADA142103 that you have also cited, then the tech mod is right.
Tracked targets =/= DL channels
In fact, based on 10 targets tracked and 8 displayed, 4 datalink channels seems a bit higher than usual … Wouldn’t be surprised if it was actually 2 (at least for the “baseline” APG-65)
“(With the F-16’s previous APG-68 fire control radar), I had the ability to target up to two tracks, that’s it,” said Lt. Col. Michael Trujillo, District of Columbia ANG’s 113th Aerospace Control Alert Detachment commander, the unit responsible for the air defense of the national capital region. “At that point, my radar is completely saturated and has no more bandwidth. With the AESA radar, (without getting into) specific numbers, I can target more things than I can shoot.”
Doubtful, the AN/APG-73 Phase 2 / RSP II is directly quoted at having 10 weapons engagement channels with an additional 2 being added by the Phase 2 / RSP II upgrade.
The AN/APG-65 and subsequent 73 series are second to none for their generation beyond the F-15’s radar and vastly outperform the F-16’s radars which were limited by installed space.
Here are my citation snippets, they should be in order from top to bottom (might be slightly mixed up) according to the citations in the original report if you need them.
