• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

Basics in flight dynamics and which programs do you usually use for editing flight dynamics

S

SimPilotHR

Messages
23
Country
croatia
Hello!

I'm really new to flight dynamics...please help me!

The reason I'm asking for help is that I want to improve the Aerosoft F-16's performance as the engine is too...TOO powerful. Once I hit full afterburner, the aircraft can speed up once vertical...which is not normal at all for the F-16 (tested in BMS) and for any other western jet fighter (even the Raptor cannot speed up once vertical, but reduces its speed slower than most fighters)

I know that AirEd exists, and also started using it on Jurcaga's MiG 21...which resulted in complete failure, so this time I want to educate myself...

If you could help me with this situation, I would really appreciate it!

Kind regards,
Filipe
 
Having watched many combat jets go vertical and accelerate away, where do you get the concept that they can't go vertical??
 
WarpD said:
Having watched many combat jets go vertical and accelerate away, where do you get the concept that they can't go vertical??
Click to expand...
A fighter can go vertical and still have speed, but he will eventually lose it after 5k ft or so (correct me if I'm wrong), but as I said in the post, the Falcon speeds up even on full afterburner vertically, which is not normal.

Poslano sa mog LG-M700 koristeći Tapatalk
 
I know for a fact that the F/A-18C, and up, can in fact accelerate upward at a vertical angle. I've seen them. I've actually seen a Blue Angel trying out a new routine for the solo. They slow as they cross the airport, until they are balanced on the thrust of the engine. They let it dance around like that for a little while, 1 minute or so, then accelerate up and out of the condition.
It was finally decided that it was too dangerous to the crowd to perform. This was at MCAS Yuma, early '87, shortly after they transitioned into the Hornet. Really impressive to watch a Hornet balance on it's thrust. But in any event, it WOULD accelerate very nicely vertically upward. How FAR up, I can't say, but let's face it, it was basically from a dead stop, 0 airspeed, to in excess of 250 kias. On a clear day, it would fly up out of sight from the ground.

The F-14 could accelerate upward as well, but it needed a running start. Really looked awesome at dusk. Made it's take off run, lifted about 10 feet off the runway, full AB's, kept on going to the end of the runway, then pulled into the vertical and kept right on up out of sight. I could see the burner flares long after I lost sight of the plane it's self, going up and up, through cloud layers...
Reall, quite an awe inspiring first sight of an F-14!! Once again, at MCAS Yuma's flight line. Around 83 or 4, IIRC...

Have fun, all!
Pat☺
 
If the aircraft generates more thrust than the aircraft weighs, it will accelerate vertically. I’ve watched the Typhoon (Eurofighter) do this too. You might compare aircraft gross weight with total wet (with full afterburners) thrust for each of the aircraft you mention and you’ll see accelerating vertically is certainly possible.
 
Last edited:
hairyspin said:
If the aircraft generates more thrust than the aircraft weighs, it will accelerate vertically. I’ve watched the Typhoon (Eurofighter) do this too. You might compare aircraft gross weight with total wet (with full afterburners) thrust for each of the aircraft you mention and you’ll see accelerating vertically is certainly possible.
Click to expand...
The Falcon had full fuel and could fly vertical AND accelerate, even faster if I have around 50% of fuel. While in Falcon BMS (which has the most realistic F-16 flight model ever created in any sim), at 50% fuel it can barely keep up with the airspeed once vertical. But it may be aircraft overall weight, I'll check. Thanks!

Poslano sa mog LG-M700 koristeći Tapatalk
 
I would recommend you get or create a test gauge when checking any airplane's performance. You will certainly need one when making any changes to its performance.
You need to be able to display engine variables like:
(A:TOTAL WEIGHT,pounds
(A:AIRSPEED mach,machs)
(A:Incidence alpha,degrees)
(A:Turb Eng Corrected N1:1, percent)
(A:Turb Eng Corrected N2:1, percent)
(A:Turb Eng N1:1, percent)
(A:Turb Eng N2:1, percent)
(A:TURB ENG JET THRUST:1,pounds)
(A:GENERAL ENG THROTTLE LEVER POSITION:1, percent)
(A:TURB ENG AFTERBURNER STAGE ACTIVE:1,number)

Record the values in writing for comparison as you make changes. Screenshots are very useful
There are several programs such as Air Wiz, AirWrench that will give you good predictions and have clear presentations.
And be aware that supersonic thrust has only been accurately calculated since FSXA, earlier versions of the sim required work arounds to get good results. FSXA is not perfect, still has several limitations, but is adequate.
If you present recorded data you will get less arguments that presenting subjective observations
Roy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top