They’d have to be renamed still right, when it finally goes live?
A small correction but yes
1 Like
I still don’t get it. What lets su-27 have such small difference?
You can take a look into the intake losses charts but unless you read Russian it is very hard to read and understand the engine documentation and research books. (Something I have been trying to do to fix the MiG-29’s low end thrust). Although I am learning that it seems to be accurate, Gaijin just thinks for some reason the intakes should be more or less closed at low speed even in flight and not during takeoff.
The F-15 seems fine, though.
If you are talking about chart above it does not explain how it was achieved.
If you have anything about it I would like to read it. I can read russian.
https://handoutset.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Jet-Propulsion-A-Simple-Guide-to-the-Aerodynamic-and-Thermodynamic-Design-and-Performance-of-Jet-Engines-Nicholas-Cumpsty.pdf
@asd072
If I am not completely blind that’s just general information about engines and info about f-15\f-16. I don’t see there anything about how Saturn AL-31F engine of Su-27 achieved such efficiency of only 2.9% difference with very similar to f-15 intake.
You’re free to read the Su-27 manual describing the intake losses, in-game it is performing according to the manuals and so is the F-15. If there is a performance loss from the lack of thrust it is something we can point to, I believe someone showed the F-15 had less sustained turn rate at low speed than it should so if that’s due to a lack of installed thrust we can buff it in that way.
Without thrust charts or intake losses charts we can’t really do anything. IMO, it’s mostly accurate but needs a very small low speed buff.
@Giovanex05 @DracoMindC Either of y’all free to do testing for the F-15 sustained turn rate between 0.2 and 0.4 mach? I can just forward the materials you’re looking for right here.
So it is supposed to be only barely more maneuverable then phantom without eagle upgrade?
If 5 deg/s sustained turn rate higher than a 20 minute fuel load F-4E Phantom is “barely more maneuverable”… and with having nearly double the sustained AoA and acceleration… sure?
I am not an expert obviously but that just feels wrong
Thx for all info though
It might actually be missing thrust at low speeds, not sure how they will adjust the FM but it is missing approximately 0.5 - 1G sustained turn rate and cannot do a sustained turn at less than 0.22 mach.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xywUJ4tRxUDO
It’s been reported, again with the help of @RideR2 and his sustained turn rate testing.
Also, a fun fact… the F-15J is 440kg heavier than the F-15A in US tech tree.
2 Likes
Also, a fun fact… the F-15J is 440kg heavier than the F-15A in US tech tree.
Is this because it’s based on the F-15C? Or is this exclusive to the F-15J?
That won’t help, AAM-3 already pulls the same Gs like AIM-9M, they need to create new PID values and change some of the fin AOA and whatnot.
I thought it was 500 kg but I guess that might be an estimated value since it’s thereabouts anyway.
From what I know it’s F-15C so carried over to the F-15J. Something to do with strengthened landing gears and more fuel capacity, along with other changes that I don’t know about like electronics and such.
Yea, I think there was a video posted earlier that showed while it is 40Gs, it still pulls the same as the 9M because the missile values can’t push past 30Gs yet. I’m sure the values were mostly placeholder and they’re working on it (though they did mark a bug report of it not pulling 40Gs as not a bug, so unsure if that’s an issue with the report or if they think it’s fine as is).
It’s like F-16 Block 10 vs ADF all over again. Hopefully the future 220/E engines make up for the difference in weight.
Honestly in the grand scheme of things, it’s probably minor given the role of the F-15 compared to the F-16, but yea, it would be nice. I don’t know of the top of my head if the new engines gave better performance to match the F-15A performance though.
I would like if the F15 can reach past 1350 IAS though like the F16s. There seems to be a massive acceleration wall once you hit around 1250 and almost stops accelerating at 1350 that makes me believe the engine output is correct until that speed, or there is some drag values which is causing this. However, at least according to what I’m seeing from @MiG_23M’s graphs provided, engine output looks pretty spot on with the exception of lower speeds so it leaves my guesses to drag at higher speeds being the issue in the FM right now since you can comfortable accelerate to M1.12 and then things get funky.
yeah can do I’d just need to remember the optimal test config to be close to the manual haha
seems to be a little off a very very low speeds