I’m trying to understand what this means. Are you saying the intake loss should be worse on the Su-27? And that it’s compensated for by excess thrust from the dev’s modelling or when the afterburner is engaged? Are you saying that this issue, which may be essentially fixed/compensated for is then compounded by the problem of excess drag on the flight model?
Multiple early T10’s have different intake designs, and I’m not sure they all had intake ramps for different positions. So if we have a Frankenstein model for drag and other coefficiencies on the Su-27 based off of an early T10, not the T10-15, then the entire intake process is completely screwed.
I don’t think the game models intakes with different flaps for different positions on the throttle and air speeds. So that’s a problem too.
Thrust is higher than it should be because intake losses are not properly accounted for.
To account for the excess thrust, they increased the drag.
The increased drag and thrust was also “amended” by a terrible oswald coefficient and made worse by incorrect geometry of the basic airframe in the files.
The plane also doesn’t accelerate correctly at lower angles of attack. At a 5G turn it will accelerate but it’s still short of its manual by 15 percent.
The entire lift/drag curve of the plane is completely wrong.
Frankly. It may have actually been a little different given the dimensional changes to the wings etc. Again, this is part of the reason why I think the Su-34 feels like the first real Flanker, I think they built it it’s own FM.
While I absolutely respect the attempts, tthe snail simply doesn’t want to spend development time on older fm. They’ve said that after ride2r did his thing.
