Legacy Hornet Flight Model
-
Dear mates, every time I have the opportunity to write something the first thing I do is to thankful for this awesome Simulator, it is part of my life.
Flying the hornet model A or C, I have noticed that at high altitude (ex: FL300), the EDR and RNG parameters maybe are not correct at all, for my short understanding they look too high speed to reach such requirements.
Normally EDR or RNG is fixed in a AoA (doesn’t depend on the altitude), you can check it for example flying the Viper, in Viper (I am using my memory now) EDR is 9-10º AoA and RNG around 7-8º AoA.
In the case of Hornet, according to real flight manual is around 4.2º AoA RNG y EDR 5.6º.
Here I see the problem, because of auto-flaps logic in the sim I guess, please test it and let me know your opinion on it. I see different AoA depending on the altitude and at high flight level for example RNG indicator is above M0.9 and in a different AoA than low level, what it looks like too much speed by the way.
waiting for your feedback.
-
Spartan,
As a Hornet Guy myself, I was intrigued by your question. When I started flying the BMS Hornet C I was curious to see how EDR, etc.worked (especially a Hornet flying Viper avionics/no FPAS). I don’t know the Flight Model logic by which the Devs programmed this. So, on several flights I collected data at FL26. I looked at the ICP values for fuel at home and at what EDR. I followed those recommendations and I did arrive with around the fuel earlier indicated. I became assured that whatever BMS’ logic on this is, that I could trust the values.
Now, I realize this doesn’t specifically answer your question, so I dove into the C NATOPS. The Flight Performance Advisory System (FPAS) is described on 1-2-24-26. It doesn’t go into AoA as a factor.
It would be interesting to see the C NATOPS Performance manual and see what it says. All I can tell you is I’m comfortable with the HOME/EDR values I get(at least in a ball park way), and at least at 26K -
Yes, normally the AoA is fixed for EDR or RNG according the design and aircraft engine. I guess it is not working properly for hornet in BMS. Because auto flap is modifying the AoA, that is different than in viper.
-
…I wish people would learn to speak Navy…!
-
dude ships lmao
-
…I wish people would learn to speak Navy…!
I hear you, compadre. I did after all give you a FPAS reference ;). However, given we’re dealing with a Hornet/Viper mutant, how about we speak BMS?
-
I hear you, compadre. I did after all give you a FPAS reference ;). However, given we’re dealing with a Hornet/Viper mutant, how about we speak BMS?
I think if people spent more time talking like Hornet drivers it would encourage the BMS devs to make their Hornet models more “Hornet-like”. Might even help them along their way…but I get that right now all we really have is a Viper with a Hornet dress on it.
-
I think if people spent more time talking like Hornet drivers it would encourage the BMS devs to make their Hornet models more “Hornet-like”.
Seriously?? Where’d you come up with that??
So if everyone talked more like Darth Vader do you believe the BMS devs would build an X-Wing Fighter?? :rolleyes:
C9
-
@Cloud:
Seriously?? Where’d you come up with that??
So if everyone talked more like Darth Vader do you believe the BMS devs would build an X-Wing Fighter?? :rolleyes:
C9
Yes, in a way…
My point is that as long as WE don’t take things seriously, why should we expect anyone else to? We’re serious about F-16s, and we’ve got a REAL fine one for being so. Spread the wealth, I say: want a good product? Support one.
-
I think if people spent more time talking like Hornet drivers it would encourage the BMS devs to make their Hornet models more “Hornet-like”. Might even help them along their way…but I get that right now all we really have is a Viper with a Hornet dress on it.
I do not agree with you, I fly in my squadron with real hornet drivers, and they say that current flight model is impressive, just minor points to be improved like the one I mentioned.
Avionics it is another story, but I guess everything will come…
-
Yes, in a way…
We’re serious about F-16s, and we’ve got a REAL fine one for being so. Spread the wealth, I say: want a good product? Support one.
It’s not because people are serious about the F-16, it’s because Falcon is and will always be a Viper sim plain and simple, and that’s what BMS has been focused on, it’s the top priority.
I know plenty of people/VFW’s who fly other aircraft, Hornet(aka, Mower, lol), Mirages, A-10’s and they’re totally serious about it and they’ll tell ya.
Supporting a project, whether it be an aircraft or any other facet of a simulation only works in the payware arena, and not that well to begin with, they barely even listen to the masses. All you have to do is look at DCS for confirmation.
I understand what you are trying to convey, but time and again, BMS has stated their stance about the direction they are moving and what they believe is the best approach for them. And that lies with the F-16, AND, what they want to work on, regardless of what “We” support. There is work going on with regard to the Hornet anyways.
Cheers,
C9
-
So beeping speed breaks are out of the question ?
-
-
@Cloud:
It’s not because people are serious about the F-16, it’s because Falcon is and will always be a Viper sim plain and simple, and that’s what BMS has been focused on, it’s the top priority.
I know plenty of people/VFW’s who fly other aircraft, Hornet(aka, Mower, lol), Mirages, A-10’s and they’re totally serious about it and they’ll tell ya.
Supporting a project, whether it be an aircraft or any other facet of a simulation only works in the payware arena, and not that well to begin with, they barely even listen to the masses. All you have to do is look at DCS for confirmation.
I understand what you are trying to convey, but time and again, BMS has stated their stance about the direction they are moving and what they believe is the best approach for them. And that lies with the F-16, AND, what they want to work on, regardless of what “We” support. There is work going on with regard to the Hornet anyways.
Cheers,
C9
Yep…and that’s the one reason I don’t bother with the BMS “Hornet”. But it doesn’t stop me from thinking it might or could improve in the future. From what I read there are some other jets in the stable (Mirage?) that seem a bit more “mature” than I might have expected. And those folk seem to be more precise and to the point about pointing out discrepancies - which I can only feel is a help in the long run, regardless of how long that run might be…
…personally, I don’t think I’ll live long enough to see a really good Hornet sim done by anyone. But I can dream.
-
But it doesn’t stop me from thinking it might or could improve in the future.
It will. But to (maybe) have an F-18 to the same level than the current F-16, I think we can wait a least one decade or more …
…personally, I don’t think I’ll live long enough to see a really good Hornet sim done by anyone
F-18 Janes is still a great F-18 sim! :
F-18 VRS for FSX+TACPACK :
Otherwise, lets hope for SevenGs :
-
It will. But to (maybe) have an F-18 to the same level than the current F-16, I think we can wait a least one decade or more …
F-18 Janes is still a great F-18 sim! :
F-18 VRS for FSX+TACPACK :
Otherwise, lets hope for SevenGs :
God bro, BMS sure has me spoiled, when I look at even FSX, let alone Janes and SevenGs, I know I have something to be grateful for in BMS. Hope the BMS F-18 comes along, it’s a great addition to our sim for sure
-
I think that problem is mainly avionics. Coding avionics would required years and years and would probably conflict with F-16 systems. It would (I think) increase the number of bug to track and solve in a exponential way (fix the F-18, break the F-16, break the F-18 … etc …) It is already the case with F-16 and its variants.
From my POV, F-18 dedicated avionics is not for tomorrow … and not for after tomorrow either …
-
It will. But to (maybe) have an F-18 to the same level than the current F-16, I think we can wait a least one decade or more …
F-18 Janes is still a great F-18 sim! :
F-18 VRS for FSX+TACPACK :
Otherwise, lets hope for SevenGs :
I agree - the Jane’s one has a really good avionics model…but dated. And they used the same flight model that they used for their F-15 - which from what I’ve heard is a reall good F-15 flight model…but it’s supposed to be a Super Hornet.
VRS is also very good (but dated, like Jane’s), and so is the Legacy Hornet in FSX…but your only real “combat” option is MP with VRS+TACPACK. If you’re looking for a Super, VFS is really the best one so far…but I find how FSX behaves from a flying qualities standpoint to be strongly dependent on what controllers you are using - CH sucks, TM Warthog is far better. So you need some controllers with some heft to the control forces to make it feel “right”.
…I consider SevenG to be vaporware…but I admire the attempt.
-
I think that problem is mainly avionics. Coding avionics would required years and years and would probably conflict with F-16 systems. It would (I think) increase the number of bug to track and solve in a exponential way (fix the F-18, break the F-16, break the F-18 … etc …) It is already the case with F-16 and its variants.
From my POV, F-18 dedicated avionics is not for tomorrow … and not for after tomorrow either …
+1. To really get it “right” each aircraft in play requires its own specific flight and avionics models. Those are HUGE undertakings, so I’ll stick with my original thought - not in my lifetime.
-
I agree - the Jane’s one has a really good avionics model…but dated. And they used the same flight model that they used for their F-15 - which from what I’ve heard is a reall good F-15 flight model…but it’s supposed to be a Super Hornet.
Before I spot BMS, I had attempted several times to find modernized version of Jane’s F15, because it was the last good sim I had flown before leaving that apart for a long time. As far as I remember, and as much as I can imagine , flying this F15 was the same deeply true feeling I have with the F16 model in BMS. The 15 model feeling in BMS is light years away from it - but I can live with it, it’s not supposed to be good.
Can’t resist to finish my off-topic with a tribute to the work on the atmosphere.
PS: forgot Lock On… but well… didn’t go far with it… And also I may give too much credit to Jane’s FM, been long time and BMS F16 has become second nature, so I may judge the BMS F15 FM a bit unfairly.