I am not the one who programmed the game and needs to fix it.
-
They made improvements into the 90s which increased the engine performance by 25% (per NASA).
-
They reduced fuel consumption in the same process (per NASA).
-
The benchmark is. 40,000ft @ Mach 0.9. Not up to me to make it work. But clearly they have entirely too much drag going on as well.
-
8 x AMRAAM = 2850lbs. Or 10% of the vehicles weight.
-
The Aircraft is a 1.6+ Thrust to Weight ratio clean.
-
10% of 1.6 = 1.44 Thrust to Weight Ratio.
This means its still a positive TWR. So the aircraft should arrive at 40,000ft near Mach 1. Even with armament. If we can’t do this in game, then the game has the aircraft modeled wrong.
Lastly… Now take the ADECS and DEEC improvements which NASA talks about. Add the 25% performance increase and the 16% lowered fuel consumption.
In short, we should be climbing faster, retaining more speed, and using less fuel all around.
1 Like
Where did you find this source?
1 Like
The empty weight of the standard F15A is listed at 28,000lbs. The Climb graph I gave you is 28,653lbs when it rolls. Minimum fuel, clean configuration, should be at Mach 0.9 at 40,000ft. Read my other post on why it should actually be BETTER due to improvements in the engine in the late 80s/90s. We have the 2000s model, so these should be reflected.
Here is another good test. With 8 x Missiles. + Centerline Pylon. 50% fuel load. (28,000lbs + 12,800lbs fuel + 4,000lbs missiles) the aircraft should:
- At 10,000ft
- At 102% Engine (Not 110%).
- Accelerate from 250 KCAS to Mach 1.2 in 40 seconds.
Note this is with the OLD. Not improved engines.
It gets worse if you use the lower power settings like the time to reach Mach 0.9 is supposed to be 30 seconds in the F15C. Same loadout. I tested this with my Spaded F15C and it took 1 minute exactly. Or twice as long:
42,000lbs. Center Pylon. 4x Aim-9, 4x Aim-7. 50% Fuel. Engine power 95%:
To complete this test properly it should take no more than 30 seconds in Test Flight. (Standard Day, Sea level). @Markus752 Can you hit the time marks? I cannot with the proper load out in the F15C (and mind you this is notated with the non-upgraded engines so you should be fine).
I’m assuming that this is unclassified, so put it in a bug report.
1 Like
Engine trim =/= in-game throttle.
@DocUSMC where did you find this source
Why do you think the F-15A in the US tree is a 2000 model?
I don’t know which model it is so I am interested in your source.
Also, again. It did 0.77M at 40K ft with a “stock” plane ina video game that artificially nerfs planes until you spade it…
The graph is for “MAXIMUM THRUST” which is 110% throttle in game. Engine trim is not the same thing as throttle setting.
4 Likes
Also please note that 102% power in real life is not the same as 102% in War Thunder.
As an example:
The P-47M should have 2300HP at military aka 100% power and 2800HP at WEP.
Ingame it has 2100HP at 100% and 2800HP at WEP, unable to achieve 2300HP without ADI.
The D28 at 100% does have 2300HP…
You would need to know the exact weight and the thrust of the aircraft at any given time, which is pretty much impossible.
Mach 0.55. And I would like to see someone hit the time marks for acceleration.
It is as close as we can get in the game. Especially since everyone except for a couple Migs are missing true emergency power. So that is what we have.
?! Where did you get the Mach 0.55 from?
40K Feet is 12,192m… In my video the F-15 is exactly at 0.77M… at that altitude.
2 Likes
You are fundamentally misunderstanding what engine trim is. It is not a throttle setting or anything like that.
Engine trim is a setting in the engine control unit which slightly adjusts the various limiters in the engine to optimise the engine for either better engine life or more thrust. 102% is the highest thrust trim option available and it is what the in game aircraft is modelled as using.
So no; the correct way to test that graph is with 110% throttle in game. That is how you actually recreate maximum thrust with 102% engine trim.
3 Likes
I just re-did the test with the F15C.
- 10,000ft
- 250 KCAS start speed
- Throttle to 100%
- 4 x Aim-9, 4 x Aim-120a (mind you these are lighter than Aim-7s from the flight manual).
- No CFTs (which means the aircraft over performed for the test).
Took 48 seconds to go from 250kcas to Mach 0.9 at 100% throttle.
Target time by the flight manual is 30 seconds.
Note, this was with the fully upgraded engines in game, the flight manual is with the pre-update engines.
Anyway you flip it. The aircraft is performing wrong.
Still doesn’t work as that was not the maximum thrust test.
100% throttle in game is “MILITARY THRUST” in real life. And according to your graph accelerating from 250 KCAS to Mach 0.9 should take 80 seconds.
What on earth are you even trying to test?
1 Like
No. You are testing wrong.
Throttle needs to be at 110% full afterburner.
It doesn’t matter how many sources you find if you don’t actually understand the testing method.
102% engine trim =/= 100% War Thunder Thrust…
It IS a maximum thrust test…
You also seem to evade my question: Where did you see the Mach 0.54?!
Here… https://youtu.be/h7qwTmiUabY another test run, this time in reference mode, still with weaponry, still not perfect, but less harsh pulling up and as you can see the Aircraft keeps Mach 0.8 at 40K feet.
It also reaches the 39K feet from your earlier source in 1:06 seconds which is absolutely within margin of error for a plane that is nowhere near as light as the test plane…
Why are you so aggressively trying to misuse source material to make the F-15 ingame look bad? It’s nowhere near as bad and is within a 15% margin of error to a HEAVILY modified trial aircraft…
Your opening post implied the F-15 is missing “more than 50%” of it’s thrust, yet the ingame model pretty much matches the charts you posted…
1 Like
It’s starting to feel a bit like that, but I am hopeful that it will click in a minute =)
He seems to be genuinely misinformed on the testing method so I see why he is so annoyed back at us, because both sides think they are right, as per usual.
I just hope the confusion get’s cleared and we get to see that either the F-15 is performing pretty close to real life or we find some areas that need some tweaking. But it’s nowhere near as drastic as OP implies…
1 Like
Check his account. He’s not misinformed, he’s just like that.
2 Likes
