I have tried to test this but it is quite hard to keep a constant G turn while speed varies
1 Like
if you are ceratain about this chart when we should definitely report this
i’m aiming to try and finish the rest of the tests for other G loading within the next few days
2 Likes
ikr its a real pain in the ass, its why i havent been able to finish it yet cause u gotta sit down for a long time to get accurate data doing tests over and over till its correct. Then i gotta comb through the footage frame by frame to tripple check the data is good & within tolerances - cross checking between in game, local host & WTRTI. And i do that a minimum of 3 separate times for each datapoint to get a highly accurate average, and 5-10 times+ for the harder speeds where the power curves of the engine make it difficult to hold steady.
1 Like
yeah it’s madness
Yea, I was trying to do the same for the Su-27. Couldn’t get the margins of error small enough.
What are the units on the Y axis? 0.5 kft/s?
Acceleration along the longitudinal axis in Gs.
1 Like
It cannot be, that is the curves, I was expecting the y axis to be SEP
The curves are each for a a fixed acceleration in the vertical axis in Gs (the thing that people usually talk about when saying Gs). The y-axis shows the longitudinal acceleration.
n_y - vertical acceleration
n_x - longitudinal acceleration
Example: The lowest curve shows longitudinal acceleration at different speeds at fixed vertical 8.0 G.
So at around 830 km/h IAS, and aircraft pulling 8.0 G will have 0 longitudinal acceleration, i.e., constant speed (no speed loss or gain). At around 1000 km/h, while pulling 8 G, it will be accelerating at 0.3 G, which is \sim 0.3 \times 9.81 = 2.943 \frac{m}{s^2}.
2 Likes
Also, I doubt soviets would be using imperial units
2 Likes
It performs to the flight manual, irl and in game are drastically different things
pilots dont pull 12gs or make Mach 1+ turns to the edge of their flight envelope.
1 Like
But if they did, the extrapolated performance should match. The only unrealistic part is where the war thunder plane continues flying and the real world one is going to conduct its final powered landing.
1 Like
crazy how that logic applies to the F-16 and its 9g limiter xD
so much yapping against that
the problem really isnt the 9G limit, its the AoA while in manual control which allows the f16 to pull up to 50+ AoA in a highly stable fashion - which is literally impossible irl as it cannot actually pull more then like 26 or something and if it did have a way to disable this limit irl it would be extremely unstable going above this due to the design. Not nearly as much of an issue in rb where everyone is flying in dampening(what the instructor limits are), but in sim its a massive issue cause a ton of people are well versed in using manual controls there. So, in sim you have this ahistorical change to the combat dynamics of aircraft where the f16 is drastically more oppressive, because in manual it can easily win 1 circle fights even against primarily 1c fighters and then also dominate any 2 circle fights.
It’s something that’s been brought up constantly, but unfortunately gaijin refuses to do anything about it until they are able to properly model a fcs which can properly simulate control for unstable aircraft and then also be compatible with the instructor for RB. I mean the obvious quick fix would be to simply disable the f16 from entering manual control in the first place but gaijin is not willing to do that because reasons.
8 Likes
The F-16 in real life could not exceed a certain pitch rate and G load for a given AoA or it would depart. A pitch-out departure is violent and quite difficult to recover even when the FBW is functioning properly.
Gaijins flight model allegedly can’t handle unstable airframes without bricking mouse aim due to instructor. Due to this, the F-16’s instabilities and departure qualities aren’t present and it can exceed flight parameters that would have caused departures in real life.
Realistically, this doesn’t have much to do with the G limit… But it does when AoA and the acceleration of the maneuver are accounted for.
4 Likes
It’s simply a Deep Stall & every single aircraft on planet earth can enter a Deep Stall. It is not modelled in game for any aircraft by intention.
This was told to you by staff in your failed attempts to nerf the F-16A C & D.
Love the theatrical explanation of a very simple & extremely common aerodynamic phenomena that affects Cessnas you can buy here in the states with as little as 12k USD. Keep up the work.
Now it would be nice if you could turn 180 degrees from mach, and end up going faster than 500kmh. It’s difficult to fight back with fox 3 when defending takes so much energy you can barely turn to notch, and then recommit on the edge of stalling out
3 Likes