alright then, but still doesnt look right the amount of speed that the su27 is bleeding…that book that even was signed by the su27 designer could be a good source, but i trust you, i hope the su27 get fixed thanks for the bug reports
yeah true, lets wait for them to fix the su27
Developer answer:
User used configuration with 4xr73, with 11min of fuel it is ~19200kg, +400 heavier than reference 305kg/m2 wing load.
18920kg with 4xR73 should be ~9min of fuel.
18920kg with 2xR73+2xR27 should be ~7.7…8min of fuel.
Sustained turn rate for ref weight is correct (and even overperforming a bit).
22800kg weight is given for 2xR27+2xR73 configuration. Not other weights.
50% fuel is 2600kg (base fuel load 5200kg), so the actual weight for 2xR27+2xR73 (720kg according Su-27SK manual) with 50% fuel load should be 20200, 1280kg heavier than used reference 18920kg weight. It means article used clean configuration, or less than 50% fuel actually, or used more than base fuel load for 22800kg weight, or it has mistakes or misprints.
However this changes nothing, because it was clearly set that comparison was calculated and estimated for the 305kg/m2 wing load (18920kg).
TLDR according to this graph the Su-27S is correctly configured I wouldnt expect the flight model to change
It’s complete nonsense, but FM is shit
xD
The FM is shit and accurate or is shit and innacurate?
This is shit and inaccurate
So we need reports showing what are the innacuracies to get it fixed I guess.
Let’s hope someone do it, reading the topic I understand the DracoMindC report was deemed wrong, we need correct reports.
The problem, if i understood correctly, is that the way they chose to interpret the charts corroborates their narrative that the model is correct, i think we’d need another manual
The chart should not be ambiguous, it should not have interpretation. Can we prove they are reading it wrong?
Idk, it’s pure interpretation of the devs
Devs appear to be interpreting the chart correctly in both the Su-27 and MiG-29 manuals. If there are errors in the manuals we will not know… although in the case of the MiG-29 there are multiple manuals and the charts seem to align with what the devs say in both.
I trust the devs here.
Yeah, anyways if you want an improved Su-27 gonna have to wait for the SM series with improved AL-31FM engines and similar mass. Right now the flight model isnt bad though a lot of people seem to think so but at low speed even in its lowest possible speed where it no longer loses energy anymore it has a smaller turn radius than stuff like the F-16C
Even their geometric dimensions are incorrect, as are the moments of inertia.They even made a 3D model with mistakes, what are you talking about.It’s a waste of time.
What I think that is a waste of time is to discuss shit without data to support it.
I wrote about it above
A waste of time is discussing with data and nothing changing afterwards. A pointless discussion
They adjusted it per my reports to correct the sustained turn rate. It really doesn’t mean much, performs according to the manual now.
Is Oswald still ~0.4?
Yes, 0.44
F-15
SU-27
