F-14D Cockpit
-
Where you found this? I doubt this. Why? I peacetime twin engine fighters do not fly dofights. If one engine have to be shut down or malfunctioned, the pilot flyo home and not perform simulated air combat… Do you play football with a borken leg…? This seems to me a very big UL…
The acceleration capability of F-14A is almost the same as MiG-21bisz if the red jet uses the “special thrust” mode. In Vietnam north forces caputred at least one F-5. During the tests in USSR the Soviets was shocked that even the most advanced MiG-21 was inferior in dogfight comparing with F-5…
Top Gun joke……
-
I can show u a video if you don’t trust me…
-
Go ahead.
-
It took me a bit to find it, but I think this is the engagement he was talking about.
-
However, I recommend you to see the whole documentary. It’s a very good movie. Great pilots, big tasks, large aircraft, mirrored flying (requires very, very precise piloting), bronze musclemen on a sunny beach,sexy white uniforms, clean US toilets …. it was a great experience for me, seeing this in 1990 in a movie theater…
Even though I would correct some technical details. Adversary AC in fact was a new Soviet MIG-28, not a Tiger. The plane was still highly classified at the time of filming (1986), ie not yet assigned the NATO designation. I can make briefly comparison.
As most of you know, the F-5 doesn’t have the thrust-to-weight ratio that the MiG-28 has. And, it doesn’t bleed energy below 300 knots like the MiG-28. However, the MiG-28 does have a problem with its inverted flight tanks. It won’t do a negative G push over. The latest intelligence tells us that the most it will do is one negative.
But according to some top US NAVY pilots, this data underestimates the possibility of the MiG-28 aircraft.
They happened to see a MiG-28 do a 4G negative dive.
take it easy … I like your serious, technically oriented postst. Keep it up and back to the topic now.
-
However, I recommend you to see the whole documentary. It’s a very good movie. Great pilots, big tasks, large aircraft, mirrored flying (requires very, very precise piloting), bronze musclemen on a sunny beach,sexy white uniforms, clean US toilets …. it was a great experience for me, seeing this in 1990 in a movie theater…
Even though I would correct some technical details. Adversary AC in fact was a new Soviet MIG-28, not a Tiger. The plane was still highly classified at the time of filming (1986), ie not yet assigned the NATO designation. I can make briefly comparison.
As most of you know, the F-5 doesn’t have the thrust-to-weight ratio that the MiG-28 has. And, it doesn’t bleed energy below 300 knots like the MiG-28. However, the MiG-28 does have a problem with its inverted flight tanks. It won’t do a negative G push over. The latest intelligence tells us that the most it will do is one negative.
But according to some top US NAVY pilots, this data underestimates the possibility of the MiG-28 aircraft.
They happened to see a MiG-28 do a 4G negative dive.
take it easy … I like your serious, technically oriented postst. Keep it up and back to the topic now.
Lukas you killed me! :drink:
Molni, when comparing those two birds (14 and 15) it only makes sense to do it at the times when they were both in the air. And if we are to discuss them from a dog-fighting POV, (as in getting up close and personal, guns or winders), then the F-15 was never a stellar example. The only edge it has against the Turkey it’s it’s vertical capability. But the big bird just can’t turn (at least not more then a half circle) without bleeding off too much energy. Think of the Eagle as the P-47 of WW2. If you can dive and climb on your opponents then you are doing right. The Tomcat can on the other hand turn it’s minimum radius until it runs out of fuel (and it’s pretty tight even compared with the light birds), the big problem with the A was the lack of thrust you might need in a tight spot and lack of vertical performance. The Eagle still has the edge in T/W even against the B/D models, but no nearly by a decisive margin to not risk a bullet in the funnel if the pilot risks going up.
Now, if you like to discuss the transonic performance and BVR capabilities, the Eagle was always stellar there. It has always been optimized to perform best above 400 knots. No ACM stays above 400kn for long though…
-
No ACM stays above 400kn for long though.
???
Why…?
-
???
Why…?
multiple reasons, most of them connected to very nature of air combat maneuvering….
a single hard turn would bleed your energy, if the leader breaks and the trailer doesn’t, the trailer overshoots. if thet both break, they both slow down.
then you have pilot reaction time. when up close and doing 400+ a slight change of course by the leader can cause the trailer to lose sight of the target.
another factor is the tendency for planes to constantly lose altitude during ACM. the defender breaks to shake the attacker, then dives to regain energy. at some point this downward spiral can no longer be maintained and you have to watch the deck. doing 400+kn bellow 1000ft and pulling high G’s can be hazardous to your health or will require extra attention to ground details.
even going vertical can bring your airspeed below 300 during a climb or Imelman. if you both do it, then you both come out of the climb slower.there is actually a whole book written on this stuff (probably more then one book actually); if your bird is best optimized for transonic, then you remain transonic as often as possible, and try to stay the hell out of dog fighting situations. you either disengage or try to pick off the slower tuners through dives and stiffing actions…
-
a single hard turn would bleed your energy, if the leader breaks and the trailer doesn’t, the trailer overshoots. if thet both break, they both slow down.
F-15As and F-16As was able to perform 5G sustained turn with 60% fuel and 4 AIM-9s at 10k. F-15 was able to perform with full AB a 4G half circle turn during climbing from 20k to 28k without loosing speed, actually up to 25k slightly accelerate the Eagle… The Ps diagrams very this. On 10k F-16 is able to perform 8G susatined turn with the mentioned config. I doubt that F-14 can do…
another factor is the tendency for planes to constantly lose altitude during ACM.
Why if you have enough thrust not to loose…? You can have as wonderful aerodynamic concept, without thrust… F-15 & F-16 simply have better t/w ratio and vica versa. MiG-21bis can have higher t/w ration as 1:1, but even this stat. in 1:1 dogfight F-16 beats it. (I have one comparison Ps diagram about in one case about these AC.)
You can find here some Ps diagram of F-15s.
http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/ -
F-15As and F-16As was able to perform 5G sustained turn with 60% fuel and 4 AIM-9s at 10k. F-15 was able to perform with full AB a 4G half circle turn during climbing from 20k to 28k without loosing speed, actually up to 25k slightly accelerate the Eagle… The Ps diagrams very this. On 10k F-16 is able to perform 8G susatined turn with the mentioned config. I doubt that F-14 can do…
At what air speed and what is the turning radius? G’s count only when compared to the radius and the turn rate. High rate, big rad and you favor 2 circle, low rate and small rad and you can always turn inside your enemy. usually you can’t have both, not in DACT anyways.
Why if you have enough thrust not to loose…? You can have as wonderful aerodynamic concept, without thrust… F-15 & F-16 simply have better t/w ratio and vica versa. MiG-21bis can have higher t/w ration as 1:1, but even this stat. in 1:1 dogfight F-16 beats it. (I have one comparison Ps diagram about in one case about these AC.)
You can find here some Ps diagram of F-15s.
http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/in ACM, you usually go nose low cause it’s faster then accelerating under your own power or you want to add that extra G in your turn, or you want the add to the thrust. either way, if you don’t use it, don’t expect your enemy will play the same ball
My data on F-14 energy/angles diagrams is limited, as in all these years i have found only one and according to it at 5G’s the F-14A can sustain 22.5 degrees per second in a 1500ft radius turn (around 490m). It’s maximum sustained G is 7.5 and it turns at 28 degrees per second in a 1000ft radius (around 330m). However the diagram does not say at what altitude. Knowing the F-14 troublesome engines this is probably below 10000ft. The plane is in combat A-A combat configuration (50% fuel, 4 AIM-7 and 4 AIM-9).
EDIT: i forgot to mention, the 5G turn is at mach 0.5 (about 330knots), the 7.5G is at 0.4 (around 260-267kn)
-
It would be good if somebody could tune the FM for the Tomcat. It feels already quite different to the F-16 but the current model at low speeds doesn’t really work that well. I have no idea how difficult this would be to do…no experience at all…but a good first step would be to collect all the information we can… Could you share your sources? In the NATOPS there are A LOT of charts that talk about AoA… If somebody is interested PM me… A super accurate FM would be good but difficult to achieve so I would suggest to get takeoff/landing/stall speeds right first…Anybody would know where to start?
On the TODO list before release:
- fix texture problems identified by Wavey Dave
- remodel cockpit frame and canopy, as current one is not proportionate to the rest of the pit (as per crazytoms comments). Sundevil will help me out with this so expect amazing results!!
-critical details to some instruments (ADI)
-model and texture throttle base
After this and if nothing else pops up…second beta, open this time will be release…but with limited functionality and many thing not working. But no panic, I will not leave it there and continue to improve bit by bit…
Some of the bar instruments by the left and right knee panels are already working (not on video)
Did you guys notice the new sounds?? I think they are cool!!
Take care!
Pepe
-
At what air speed and what is the turning radius?
M0.9.
If F-14 would be far good in ACM USAF never wanted F-15… When tried to navalise the F-15 conception the result alway close to F-14, an AC which is inferior in ACM because of AIM-54 capability + requested range (CAP time.)
-
It would be good if somebody could tune the FM for the Tomcat. It feels already quite different to the F-16 but the current model at low speeds doesn’t really work that well. I have no idea how difficult this would be to do…no experience at all…but a good first step would be to collect all the information we can… Could you share your sources? In the NATOPS there are A LOT of charts that talk about AoA… If somebody is interested PM me… A super accurate FM would be good but difficult to achieve so I would suggest to get takeoff/landing/stall speeds right first…Anybody would know where to start?
On the TODO list before release:
- fix texture problems identified by Wavey Dave
- remodel cockpit frame and canopy, as current one is not proportionate to the rest of the pit (as per crazytoms comments). Sundevil will help me out with this so expect amazing results!!
-critical details to some instruments (ADI)
-model and texture throttle base
After this and if nothing else pops up…second beta, open this time will be release…but with limited functionality and many thing not working. But no panic, I will not leave it there and continue to improve bit by bit…
Some of the bar instruments by the left and right knee panels are already working (not on video)
Did you guys notice the new sounds?? I think they are cool!!
Take care!
Pepe
I haven’t been actively pursuing and researching the threads on this subject, but the overall feel i believe is that as an F-16 based sim, a great majority of the community feels that the FM’s of the other birds are an extremely low priority if at all. Maybe there is a dedicated Tomcat community hiding out there but i have not found them yet. I don’t have the NATOPS manuals, but over the years i did stumble on some NASA high AoA studies and a single energy diagram. If anyone can use them i would gladly share. I’m sure someone out there had the Fleet Defender FM as well….(supposedly it is the most accurate FM for the Tomcat up to this day).
M0.9.
If F-14 would be far good in ACM USAF never wanted F-15… When tried to navalise the F-15 conception the result alway close to F-14, an AC which is inferior in ACM because of AIM-54 capability + requested range (CAP time.)
Dogfighting at 600 knots? Good luck with that.
I think the major reason behind our disagreement is the definition of ACM (dogfighting). And probably the doctrine behind aircraft design. USAF frowns upon WVR engagements and this doctrine is reflected upon their preferred choice of AC. Compare the F-17 and F/A-18 with the F-16. The 17 and the 18s have better nose-high authority, tighter turn radius, better turn rates at lower speeds and yet the AF chose the 16, because it’s better T/W and transonic performance. The motto of the AF is clearly never turn with the enemy. If you can get them on the first pass then do it, but never ever get bogged down in an exhausting maneuvering fight. The same design philosophy is reflected in the big birds (the F-14 and F-15), although the F-14 performance came as a side product of it’s airfoil and VG wing. Now, don’t get me wrong, i am not saying the F-14 is the best dogfighter of all times, but for its time and size, the GE F110-400 powered birds, could hold their own against any contemporary foe and definitely out turn many (if not most) of them. -
It would be good if somebody could tune the FM for the Tomcat. It feels already quite different to the F-16 but the current model at low speeds doesn’t really work that well. I have no idea how difficult this would be to do…no experience at all…but a good first step would be to collect all the information we can… Could you share your sources? In the NATOPS there are A LOT of charts that talk about AoA… If somebody is interested PM me… A super accurate FM would be good but difficult to achieve so I would suggest to get takeoff/landing/stall speeds right first…Anybody would know where to start?
If I’m not wrong that should be mav-jp stuff! try to pm him…
-
Dogfighting at 600 knots? Good luck with that.
Why…? We know from BMS4 that Glock is not an issue… Or not…? What do you think, why both F-15 and F-16 have the quickest turn rate about 440-460 CAS…? Why was optimized F-15 wing for M0.9…? You can have as thing turn radius as you wish, because missiles since '80s are able to follow even the smallest turn radius, but if you are fast you have much better chance for defeat with quick turn. Bigger speed + quicker turn = more rapidly collapsed DLZ…
-
Why…? We know from BMS4 that Glock is not an issue… Or not…? What do you think, why both F-15 and F-16 have the quickest turn rate about 440-460 CAS…? Why was optimized F-15 wing for M0.9…? You can have as thing turn radius as you wish, because missiles since '80s are able to follow even the smallest turn radius, but if you are fast you have much better chance for defeat with quick turn. Bigger speed + quicker turn = more rapidly collapsed DLZ…
I really don’t like us highjacking the thread….but, here you go. Two planes enter the merge at 600 knots, that is close to 310m/s. Closure is 1200knots or 610m/s. When both birds fly by each other, just one second will separate them by 610m, 2 seconds 1220m…do you really think you can maintain visual contact with a small agile target, when both of you are pushing 600 knots? The missiles are fine and yes optimized to be fired at 450+ kts, but if i recall we are talking ACM here. If you launch your missiles and unload away from the engagement, i don’t think it would qualify as a dogfight at all
And just to make sure we are talking about the same thing:
“A dogfight, or dog fight, is a form of aerial combat between fighter aircraft; in particular, combat of maneuver at short range, where each side is aware of the others presence.” -
At high alt at lower TAS means so low CAS that “dogfight” term turns into a joke. What turn radius what you have if M.65 means only 270 CAS…? on 25k feet…? At 30k feet, 350 CAS = M0.9 = 535 TAS and your thrust more lower. At high alt if you do not fly fast, you do not turn…
If you go lower, you can go a bit lower with speed, but IMHO go below M0.7 as long as you fly in a muiti target engagement is very, very dangerous, especially with F-14. If you have lost your kintetic energy it requires long time to build up again. I mentioned that speed = defense. You can change to alt, you can collapse rapidly the DLZ. F-15 still has much better t/w ratio at all alt, so even count that both AC lost their speed, the acceleration of Eagle is better… Not mentioning the stall issues of TF30… (Yes, early F100-PW-100 was also problematic.)
I never be able to undestand people who try proving how great dogfigter was F-14. Maybe it was better as F-4, but not F-15. As I have mentioned the very experienced pilots of IAF literally laughed on the dogfight capabilites of F-14.
-
Getting back to pit building. Pepe, I found this salvage dataplate on an auction site. I thought you’d like to a see a very worn one from a vintage aircraft in case you wanted an older/well used look for the one in your pit.
-
At high alt at lower TAS means so low CAS that “dogfight” term turns into a joke. What turn radius what you have if M.65 means only 270 CAS…? on 25k feet…? At 30k feet, 350 CAS = M0.9 = 535 TAS and your thrust more lower. At high alt if you do not fly fast, you do not turn…
Which means you do not dogfight. I understand that mate. I am not arguing the F-14 high altitude performance here, i’m arguing the dogfighting capability.
If you go lower, you can go a bit lower with speed, but IMHO go below M0.7 as long as you fly in a muiti target engagement is very, very dangerous, especially with F-14. If you have lost your kintetic energy it requires long time to build up again. I mentioned that speed = defense. You can change to alt, you can collapse rapidly the DLZ. F-15 still has much better t/w ratio at all alt, so even count that both AC lost their speed, the acceleration of Eagle is better… Not mentioning the stall issues of TF30… (Yes, early F100-PW-100 was also problematic.)
Dangerous? Of course it is, why do you think pilots are discouraged from doing it? I am not trying to argue the doctrine of avoiding dogfights as not valid, i am arguing the capability of the AC to do it. T/W gives you the energy, turning rates and radius five you the angles. Both are equally valid as a choice of tactics. Let me answer you with a question? Was the P-47 a good dogfighter?
I never be able to undestand people who try proving how great dogfigter was F-14. Maybe it was better as F-4, but not F-15. As I have mentioned the very experienced pilots of IAF literally laughed on the dogfight capabilites of F-14.
I will have to ask what do you think by great? It surely is better up-close and personal (dogfighting) then the F-15, but then again F-15 never was especially good at it either. If you ask me is the Tomcat a truly “great” dogfighter, then the answer is no. It is too big for one. Its roll rates at higher energy states are sub par. It also does not allow rudder inputs at AoA greater then 30 degrees…. But it can still point its nose better then any eagle, it can turn inside the Eagle, it can turn at a higher or similar rate then the Eagle. So the only advantage the Eagle has, is T/W. In the mid 90’s even that wasn’t that much better. What use is your speed if you can’t point your armaments and nose at the target? 2 uses: you can chose weather to engage and you may be able to chose when to disengage…maybe.
As for your comment about the IAF pilots…well sorry mate, for every pilot you quote laughing at a plane, i can find you at least one that glorifies it.
P.S. do you want to continue this in PM? We are starting to annoy the other members here
-
Was the P-47 a good dogfighter?
Not, but had the power for vertical manoeuvres.
You cannot deny that F-14 emtpy weight is about 7+ ton higher as F-15… Weight is counted for during climbing, turning, everywhere. You can have as low wing load as you can, but for turning, you need thurst.
F-14 with GE engine have the chance to deal with older Soviet fighters, MiG-21bis, MiG-23MF - but against MiG-29, Su-27 and MiG-23MLD its capability if they were close to each other, the Tomcat is not superio, and neighter equal…
it can turn inside the Eagle,
Pls. explain the physic of this staement. If both AC can hold the same speed with same turn radius, means the same turn rate. How can turn inside the F-15 the Tomcat if F-15 all time have better Ps…? It can have the trust for keeping a tigth turn, its sustained turn radius also comparable to F-14.
As I see you made the same mistakes as many “novice” Hungarian on many forums. I’m not sure but you maybe do not understand connection between turn radius, turn rate, max. G, and Ps.
Yes, we can do it in PM.