Tom's Cat
-
While doing GFX, one thing I’ve learned quickly was … save often, better save often and incrementally.
Ohh and don’t forget to backup your work on another data medium periodically.
(would be a shame if you would lost your work due to a HDD failure)There’ll be some skinage here …but an Apple device ate my entire windows installation
Cheers,
LS -
Interesting point with the gross weight only effect on the flight characteristics.
As far as I can tell the only ppl that ever got the glove vanes to work properly are the Iranians and it probably took them around 30 years:)
All for making the cat the number 3 blue aircraft of BMS:)) I mean its quite simple what do we need let me see…figure out the FMs, finish the 3D pits, get a new model, skin it, maybe tweak the avionics a bit aaaaand DONE :eek:
Let’s roll.
I’m with ya
I was about to wait till tomorrow, but this can’t wait. I did some math, and calculated the differences between the the thrust values given in the FM look-up tables and the installed thrust values i found over the net. Turkeydriver, i think i know where the 17000 pounds static installed thrust value comes from. It’s in the very first flight manual if i am not mistaken, the one that came out in the 70’s. When i tweaked the table values with my calculations (both for military and wet thrust) i decided to run one simple sea level test. I loaded my wolf pack (thanks Stingray) with the sparrows and winders, set my fuel at 60% internal fuel (and a bit extra for the takeoff)……i launched from the Enterprise…
…
and after a while…
there it was, mach 1.14 flat!
Just like the good book said.
I know i should have probably ran the tests all the way up to 35000ft but i thought your guys would want to hear it
It’s after midnight here, so i gotta go to bed or i’m risking of being late for work, but as soon as possible i’ll start all the tests again, to see if my tweaks messed up the Ps curves and if so by how much.FM work has officially begun
Good night everyone and safe flying! -
Today’s update:
Flight tests at sea level:
Dash speed without stores mach 1.28 flat….again by the book.
My greatest fear was that the increase in thrust will mess up the sustained g load break points, but it didn’t, it just brought them from withing 0.3 g to withing 0.1g from the expected values. The stall speeds still needs work though. Is the Vcas min value in the BFM an indicator of the minimum level speed? If no one knows i will just have to experiment with it.Dash tests at 5, 10, 15 and 20k are less satisfactory though. Unlike the sea level values where i had the static installed thrust per engine and the maximum dynamic thrust at mach 0.9-1 to to work with and adjust the current values, my adjustments to the above altitude break points were more guess work and i tired to be conservative. As a result my results were still bellow the expected values.
5kft mach 1.21 out of 1.25
10kft mach 1.29 out of 1.40
15kft mach 1.36 out of 1.52
20kft mach 1.49 out of 1.64
I will try to adjust the high mach thrust to fit the given dash per altitude and then extrapolate the mid section values. -
Great news Mike!
Are you using the A/B model performance manual as a reference or do yo have new material specific to the D?
Pepe
-
Great news Mike!
Are you using the A/B model performance manual as a reference or do yo have new material specific to the D?
Pepe
Mostly the A model. I spent the last 3 days trying to iterate the mach/thrust tables in FM. It was easy at sea level as we knew the maximum static and dynamic thrust value for the TF30’s. However it was mostly guess work and repeated trials at all other altitudes. I don’t think the default A could even break mach 2 at any altitude in combat A-A configuration. Anyway i think i finally got it relatively right (withing 0.02-0.03mach for dash at altitude), so if anyone wants i can give you a FM file for you to test. Only the dash has been adjusted though, testing and calibrating the acceleration times will require weeks and right now i just started working on the basic lift coefficients, using ref tables from Grumman and NASA flight tests. I just hope i can translate those well into the AFM. My original plan was to give you both files when i finish the CL adjustments and only then start working on the acceleration. Did anyone manage to find out what determines the stall speed in the FM files?
EDIT: on the B/D issue, all we have is the flight manual dash speeds for different loadouts. No acceleration values. The aerodynamic properties of the plane should be the same, except for the digital flight controls that limit the AoA at 25 or 20 degrees at all times (i’m not sure which it was, but i think i have the data on disk somewhere). I have already experimented on A’s AFM in attempt to make the nose pointing ability more authentic. One thing the A was known for, was it’s ability to bleed off energy excessively and lacking the raw thrust to make up for it.
EDIT2: did some CL tweaks in the AFM to more closely match the Grumman ratios. I did not dare insert new break points so just modified on the existing ones. After the tests this is what i got:
2.9 out of 3g inst break at mach 0.28
4.7 out of 5g at mach 0.38
6.2 out of 6.5 at mach 0.45
compare these with the original values from previous tests. I think i figured out how the tables work
now to just adjust the buffet and AoA limiters. -
That’s some serious progress my man! Kudos!
Might have to rename the thread: ‘Building Tom’s Cat’
-
Thanks mate! I’ll have some excess free time this week, so might accelerate on the FM work. I just have one question, is the mach indicator value in Falcon a true mach or indicated mach number? Cause comparing the acceleration times i got some odd results. And looking at the performance charts makes it even worse
-
It should normally be indicated but I know there are some changes to the HUD between the Viper and other AC so you might wanna check the BMS manual…
-
I did some checks between the indicated air speed and the mach values at different altitudes and it seams to be indicated.
-
-
I’d just like to point out that the artist of the above shot is Siregar3D and you can find his works over at DeviantArt. Below is a WIP shot of the finished model without textures and with Ambient Occlusion lightning. I’ve seen many (if not all) F-14(D) 3D models on the net and this has got to be simply the best model ever made and I have a hard time to even find one tiny detail that doesn’t look right - especially in the areas of canopy front/nose/glove vane and fuselage area around the engine intakes where most F-14 models fail in some regard.
Siregar3D, baby! A truly talented artist and a Tomcat loveeer
3 million Polys…
-
:eek:
-
AWESOME 3D model !!!
Nikos. -
The artist said on the site it took him over one year and he didn’t even touch the pit :D. It is absolutely incredible work…
Tomcat forever, Baby!
-
I have never seen such a beautiful model before… Omg that is just crazy… :shock:
-
-
lol only? wow needs killer machine to load it.
I saw his rig in a picture on his site, it looks like a piece of military equipment :D.
@ original poster of the ‘Dark Knight’ pic:
Thanks for the bump, I got the message. I’m on it…Mogwai on 550W helping me stay focused
Meanwhile Grumman’s masterpiece alive, well and in good company in June 2013…
-
C9
-
I’m in Berlin atm and in these occupied lands the video you posted is not available and I dont have a proxy solution atm either. Sure it looks great judging by the title.
Keep it up!
-
Back at it…
Check back soon!