but its important to note this graph is for an F-15A at 60% internal fuel while the Su-27’s is for ~27% fuel + 2 R-73 and 2 R-27R
2 Likes
Su-27 is for 50% fuel + missiles
3 Likes
50% of normal 5.5t fuel refueling
4 Likes
launched too early + locked on a flare
1 Like
Speed on the russian graph is true airspeed, equivalent airspeed…?
The Su-27 schedule…Posted above-DeltaSBW…
1…0.4M=489.8 km/h
2…250 knots=463 km/h
3…200 knots=370.4 km/h
Su-27=50% fuel+2_R-27 (between engines)+2_R-73 (on the wingtips)…
According to this graph, at an altitude of 200 meters (steady turn) …
the Su-27 should have …
1…200 knots-16.5 degrees per second …
2…250 knots-18.5 degrees per second…
3 Likes
Yes!..this is the true speed…
2 Likes
Who is interested in comparing it themselves…Graphs of F-15A…
1.Clean…
2.With pylons…
3.4_AIM-7+4_AIM-9…
Spoiler
That’s not even the point of what I said… read again
It’s 50% of normal fuel load not 50% of maximum fuel
you said the missile followed the wrong path off the rail and would have hit the jet otherwise
that’s wrong, had the missile been launched slightly later and not locked on/gotten fooled by flares, it would have turned harder off the rail and probably could have hit the jet
Is there any quote on the document saying that? To me it looks like it is equivalent airspeed.
This is 50%(half)refueling of fuel in internal tanks…
Manual specifies in the introduction that velocity should be assumed to be indicated unless states otherwise as posted above, so it is IAS not TAS
1 Like
This now makes sense and renders the comparation posted above as wrong
In-game at 30 minutes fuel it is already doing ~14.65 deg/s prior to the Oswald efficiency buff. Now that it has a cockpit WTRTI will track the data properly so when dev server opens next we can test again. What I saw was that its’ sustained turn rate was already for the most part correct (and superior to the F-15s).
The F-15 when testing had underperforming sustained turn rate below 0.4 mach airspeeds (by like 0.5-1G)… However, at speeds 0.4 mach + it was performing pretty much identical to the charts.
This whole discussion is based on a line from the Russian documentation claiming as much as 5 deg/s difference which is nothing short of absurd. I don’t see where / how this is the case.
this should be the initial trajectory of the missile, taking into account the position of the nose at the moment it fired
but in reality the missile goes in a totally different direction from where the nose of the plane is pointing
thats my point, the missile should not go down like that when you are pointing your nose almost direct at the other plane, like i said for @MiG_23M - it seems that the pitch up it’s so sudden that the game still thinks the plane is in the initial position before he pulled full AoA to lead the missile
i also pointed out another example here comparing to how it is in DCS
