Su flight model please
-
Ha max that was the first thing I tried.
Just checked my spelling/format,Im such a dumb ase, I edited the Su-30mkk-copy.dat :oops:
Thanks……Shad
-
If any on is interested in trying a modded Su-30mkk/mki flight model please post.
Found a few inconsistences in thrust tables ect as well as bringing it up to published specs.
Still doing study on drag tables ectEWS programs functional, F-16 pit so its flyable for the average joe.
A good multirole for “REDonBLUE” campaigns.
Let me know ……Shad
-
In first step better HP and rack config is required to at least got a better drag by weapons.
Do you have any thrust char data about AL-31 engine…?
-
u mean this:?
http://www.leteckemotory.cz/motory/al-31/ -
I will try to find who is able to translate this.
-
Hi gents, are you guys thinking of adding a SU-37 or SU-33 FM at some point I like this discussion Sukhoi SU series nice A/C’s!
Cheers,
:drink:
-
Top of left graph look like full mil thrust curves I plotted from existing FM, & so will be helpfull….Thanks
Top of right graph resemble AB thrust curves etc etc etc.Bottom of both may be Drag/Thrust ratios.
Yep some translation would be cool.
Im still searching for reliable data.
Thanks…Shad
PS; Those charts will be of great help, again thanks. As performance curves are really all I need for the thrust tables.
Absolute values can be easly adjusted as long as I keep the relationships. -
In first step better HP and rack config is required to at least got a better drag by weapons….
Weapon drag will be a fair peice of work. Looking at clean skin for now.
Do you have any thrust char data about AL-31 engine…?
Still havent found any well documented &/or comparitive tables.
Cheers……Shad
Edit, the more I study Artys link/chart the more confident I am as to the changes I have allready tested.
-
I will try to find who is able to translate this.
google: Height velocity characteristics of AL-31F on the maximum mode and full afterburner
-
The left side shows the max. mil thrust depending on Mach number and altitude. (upped part) Thrust is in kN. Bottom part shows the specific fuel consumtion, but I cannot recognize the unit. I had a contact but it taks a time to get a reply. Right side is the same, but it shows the max. AB thrust.
One aspect. You can use the same scaling factor for RPM-thrust char. that you can see for F-15 or F-16. If you do not have data you have to use something similar…
The problem for modeling the effect of RPM on specific fuel consumption. In dat files you can see some data.
_nEngines 2
typeAC 3
typeEngine 2fuelGaugeMultiplier 10
fuelFlowFactorNormal 0.69
fuelFlowFactorAb 2.17
minFuelFlow 860_I do not know how is defined the RPM - consumption char. (linear by which factor…?)
I do not now how calculated the effect of altitude on fuel flow.Does type of engine have effect on characteristics…? Does Falcon use inbuilt, pre defined spec. consumption curves which can be weighted with factors?
I do not know what defines the flow factor. In DB you can find also a fuel flow modifier value. Which one is used?
Quite a dark area for me the whole fuel flow-thurst-RPM-speed area. As I can judge most of AC fuel flow is far from RL values. Most of AC can fly very far at very high altitude comparing with RL ferry or combat range.
It seems to me harder to set a correct fuel flow than thrust curves. It is not easy to transform curves…
-
Yes Thrust values are easy to work with, but have not yet been able to find fule flow characteristics.
In flight testing against F-16, F15 & EF2000.
Cheers…away for a week…Shad
-
Don’t want to digress too much from the technical data side of this thread…
Raphael, Coco and Shad took up the Typhoon, F15 and Su-30Mkk respectively. We did some very basic testing at different altitudes… angels 10,20 and 30.
Now keep in mind this is with Shad’s latest tweek of thrust to weight ratio for the Su-30Mkk and the FM for the F15 may not be as accurate as in RL. ( very rough testing )
Takeoff at full burn was fairly equal between the three jets. At 10,000ft the F15 had better acceleration than the Su-30Mkk from mach .99 to 1.38 and continuing to aprox. 1.5 mach.
At 20,000ft the F15 out performed the Su30 but not as radically as at 10,000ft. At 30,000 and higher, the Su30 came into it’s own and was out accelerating and out climbing the F15.Shad’s current .dat tweek has the Su30 out performed at lower levels but above angels 30 the Su30 starts to show its true potential.
We look forward to an accurate and “fair” FM for the Su30Mkk and I’m sure it will prove a worthy adversary to the NATO forces in BMS.As for Raphael and the Typhoon testing… as Shad and I would fly level and at a certain speed, Raphael would zoom past us and go vetical, then pull in behind us and lock us up… All in good fun!
It was a blast testing and having some fun at the same time. Let me know when you want to go up again Shad! -
At 30,000 and higher, the Su30 came into it’s own and was out accelerating and out climbing the F15.
Are we speaking about TVC equipped Su-30’s? Because performance of P-42 vs. Steak Eagle suggest opposite behavior. Russians never tried to set up new climb record above 15 km that has required an additional acceleation phase at 32-36 k alt, if you check the filghts of SE. This suggest me supersonic drag / supersonic thrust char. of F100-PW-100 + F-15 was better even the modified AL-31 with increased thrust + Su-27 airframe.
(The P-42 inlet was fixed and removed the controls, it was optimized to “power climb”.)
-
Yes Thrust values are easy to work with, but have not yet been able to find fule flow characteristics.
In flight testing against F-16, F15 & EF2000.
Cheers…away for a week…Shad
Even you find exact data only a very few people know how is defined the fuel consumption in Falcon. I can see data but I do not know how they are used.
As you can see the data that you have shown is not engouh for even for thrust char, you have to use simplified aspect and some assumptions…
-
Even you find exact data only a very few people know how is defined the fuel consumption in Falcon. I can see data but I do not know how they are used…
As it will never be a AFM fuel flow is not a big issue yet.
As you can see the data that you have shown is not engouh for even for thrust char, you have to use simplified aspect and some assumptions…
Have not yet had the time to intergrate/use the above thrust tables. I think it will be more then enough.
Moving house today, back in a week.
Cheers–----Shad -
Have not yet had the time to intergrate/use the above thrust tables. I think it will be more then enough.
Will you do it?
-
Moving house today, back in a week.
Your back must hurt unless you live in one of these:
:rofl:
RAM22
-
molnibalage,
Don’t think Shad is after a precise modeling of the SU, just something that will be a bit closer to a flying adversary against the NATO jets as the SU30Mkk was limited to mach 1.07 at any altitude.
Also, to compare the SU30 to the F15 in BMS is futile for the F15 modeling is also “bunk” so there is no true “yardstick” to measure by. We can only go with the resources we have.
-
Will you do it?
Yes I will !!! That was why I was thankfull for the charts in the first place.
-
Just a quick comparsion. It is an interesting issues how you extrapolate the thurst curves at low speed where data is not available and how many breakpoint is applied. The altitude breakpoint are not the same, but not a big thing to change.
Excel table, if you wish to use.
http://www.mediafire.com/?loc8nc03jef0e1dWhen the new thrust is done it is possible to examine the fuel flow with different thrust and speed and compare with RL data.
I have never tweaked engine data but maybe I will try if I found time. Do you plan to make a comparsion in different situations?