Su flight model please
-
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? -
Great stuff molnibalage… should help immensely with getting the data right and as close to RL as possible.
-
With some hour of work I can apply with some extrapolation the RL data on AL-31 concerning Mil and ful AB thrust. Only problem the RPM 70 thrust curves… AB characteristics and full mil. thurst are not similar therefore it is hard to judge what sould be set at 70 RPM. If we do not have data we cannot do anything just assuming or copy a the char. (not values just basic behvior) or s similar engine. The 70 RPM curve erquired to define the thrust between 70-100 RPM.
The specific fuel consumtion is a more harder issue because 70-100 RPM has effect on it and we have only the full mil. data.
-
well all those boys from ED forums and the perfect family of SU-xx none can help on this? I’m sure they are out there somewhere but as the real f-16 manuals they circulate under the table… So we must go to the dark side…
-
Final back online, f*ing ISPs, long story with no happy ending yet :dhorse:
Finished reworking thrust tables, CMS programs now working.
Currently looking at the drag tables which seem to be shared with many other FMs.
There are no radical changes but I’m enjoying flying the SU-30 a bit more now.
……Shad
-
Shadow looking briefly at the .dat file you provided can you point me to your source for your power figures I think I see an issue but to be sure I’ll test myself before questioning the data
Cheers
-
Shadow looking briefly at the .dat file you provided can you point me to your source for your power figures I think I see an issue but to be sure I’ll test myself before questioning the data
Cheers
I used the thrust tables supplied by Arty with reference to improvements/current specs for the Su-30mkk/mki.
Then extraplated curves for 10/20/30/36/50k ft.I did think about just changing the ALTITUDE BREAKPOINTS, but decided to stick with converting as it was easy then to reference against other similar FMs eg F-15, F14, EF-2000 etc.
Current fuel flow is directly related to thrust developed. My only concern is the large step in fuel consumtion at low AB noze settings that provide not thrust benifit. Need better info for that.
…Shad
Edit If you see any radical errors let us know.
-
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?Have done so and operational range seem to be reasonable, 1600 miles (3000km) at above 33kft.
And less the 500 miles with full AB…Shad
-
you have a missing installed thrust value? and engine type not present in the in the config provided.
Talk more on ts later today mate
Cheers -
you have a missing installed thrust value? and engine type not present in the in the config provided.
Talk more on ts later today mate
CheersAre you refering to the 70k feet entries for full mill ??
Theres no “engine type” entry ??? -
-
F-18c uses Advanced Flight Moddel
Migs Su EF etc use the “old” standard FM
……Shad
-
Those lines doesn’t do anything, it’s just notes.
-
This I did know mAX thanks for pointing it out.
-
I used the thrust tables supplied by Arty with reference to improvements/current specs for the Su-30mkk/mki.
Edit If you see any radical errors let us know.I do not know what method / aspect was choosen to extapolate the curves where was no data available.
Alt 10000
13260 12750 12750 13005 13515 14025 14407.5 14662.5 14662.5 14000 13000 10000 90000Ninety thousand…? I know at 10k feet Su-27 never reach M2.5.
I not not understand how you interpolated the available RL curves into original alt breakpoints. Why didn’t you change the alt breakpoint according to RL data an let exe interpolate the between the RL thrust curves?
-
Your values comparing with RL data with some exrapolation to 0 speed.
At sea level your thrust is a bit above the RL curve.
On 6,09 km your thrust is bigger than on 5 km in RL.
On 10,97 km your thrust is bigger than on 11 km in RL. Not too much just a little bit.
I recommend to use as breapoint the RL altitude data. Set as many mach breakpoint as many required to linearization. With Excal is not too hard issue to copy the RL curve. On lower alt of cource the speed limited by air density and drag. Where RL curves ends I recommend to use constant thrust, the last available data.
-
Here is an Excel table.
http://www.mediafire.com/?vtftvf9pnqzqvx8
I made the RPM 100 (mil thrust) data and as a template Full AB is almost done, one or two more data line should be added.
For AB thrust I have no idea where should be the 0 level. In this table this value is 80000 feet, the last altitude breakpoint. -
I do not know what method / aspect was choosen to extapolate the curves where was no data available.
Alt 10000
13260 12750 12750 13005 13515 14025 14407.5 14662.5 14662.5 14000 13000 10000 90000Ninety thousand…? I know at 10k feet Su-27 never reach M2.5.
I not not understand how you interpolated the available RL curves into original alt breakpoints. Why didn’t you change the alt breakpoint according to RL data an let exe interpolate the between the RL thrust curves?
Minor typo in a area of no consequence, but thanks for spoting it.
Most of what I did was graphical as exact numbers are are of disputable importance in this situation where Thrust data for most other Airframes Stand Flight Models are allso above rated output. Compare MKK new to old @ Mil thrust 18615/18474.8 & AB 39525/38663.3
Yes I have used factor for increased performance above AL-31f rated figures. Remember the MKK is a Chinese export version.
Even look at the F-16 AFM Thrust data eg Mil 31000lb @ sea level/mach1.2 , & AB of 42000.0 lb ???More on that latter, I got to go fly, there waiting on me ……Shad