Review
Strike Fighters:
Project 1, Patched
by James
"Hornit" Campisi
Strike
Fighters Project One was announced quite a while ago, and
quickly became what I like to call the "Great Jet hope".
At first it seemed a bit of an enigma, but as time moved on
we came to realize that it was to fill a longstanding void
in simulations. Here was a sim to portray the glamorous era
of the fighter pilot. The 60's and 70's! The F-4 phantom,
the F-104 Starfighter, and the ubiquitous MiG series of aircraft.
While holding our imagination with these fantastic aircraft
it also offered the promise of true air to air combat without
the frustrations of attempting to learn the intricacies of
more modern aircraft and the weapons systems which they include.
As most of us know, sims like Janes F-18 and Falcon 4.0 require
serious study and huge investment of time in order to enjoy
them. SFP-1 looked to bring the "fun" back into
simulation while captivating us with aircraft which have become
nothing short of legendary in mankind's pursuit of flight
and air combat.
SFP-1 has nothing short of a what I would call a checkered
and colorful history even though it's still a fresh product
on retail shelves. I'm not going to go into the sordid details
of the "Wal-Mart" release and the ensuing flurry
of activity surrounding that. I'm pretty sure that if your
reading this you are well aware of what happened. I could
do a whole article on that subject alone! Thats not my job
here. What I will do is review the sim as it stands, several
months after release and one patch.
Most everyone reading this knows about
or owns EAW, European Air War. Its a classic in the true sense
of the word. It's one of the defining flight simulations and
has stood the test of time. One of it's prime developers was
Tsuyoshi Kawahito. We all know him as "TK" for short.
TK is obviously very passionate about flight sims. His attention
to detail and dedication to combat simulations is proven.
A quick glance at his resume also includes Jane's Longbow
II, another classic in the rotary wing arena, and one of my
all time favorites by the way! TK heads Third Wire Productions
and they are responsible for this effort along with Strategy
First as the publisher here in the U.S.
Before we go on, I asked our own Andy
Bush to give us a good summary of how he feels the F-104 and
F-4 handle since he has extensive stick time with both aircraft.
Here are his thoughts:
Overview
The question is one of how do the
F-104 and the F-4 fly in the sim as compared to real life.
Well, folks
that can be a tricky question depending on
what we are talking about. Heres why.
We begin by considering just what
the average simmer expects to see when he flys the two aircraft.
What is he looking for in the way of performance, and what
is he using as measuring stick? The fact of the matter is
that few if any of the simming crowd have any experience at
all in these jets. Oh sure
they may have heard things
they
may have read things
but, let me tell you from personal
experience, what folks have often heard or read is misstated
at best and is complete hooey at worst!
So
what is it that the typical
simmer expects to see in these two jets? High speeds? Yes.
Good acceleration? Yes again. Hmmm
Im running out
of ideas! Other than these two characteristics, what do you
want to see? As an answer, lets start by telling you
what I see.
Think of a flight model as a bell
curve. Add to this that the curve looks at both speed and
behavior under G. Most of the curve is within the region that
goes from the "flaps up" speed to the maximum speed
and
from one G to the onset of the stall. The outside boundaries
include slow speed performance and acceleration when unloaded
on the left side to stall/departure characteristics on the
right side.
As a general statement, the Strike
Fighters F-104 and F-4 do reasonably well in the center portion
of their flight envelopes. The jets fly as fast as their real
life counterparts did, and they fly as high as well. If that
were all they we were interested in, then things would be
grand. But, that is not the case
because it is in the
two outside portions of the flight model bell curve that things
go astray. There are three major areas of concern
roll
performance, slow speed/drag performance, and high speed/accelerated
stall performance. Lets look at this by taking a typical
flight from takeoff to landing.
Ground Operations and Takeoff/ Acceleration
To Cruise Speeds
Ground operations with these two fighters
is much the same as with the A-4 and F-100. The jets are responsive
to throttle input. Ground steering is done using the rudder,
and care must be taken that you limit your taxi speeds to
avoid high-speed turns that take you off into the "boondocks"!
Takeoff performance is acceptable.
We have to remember that these aircraft could be loaded with
a wide range of external stores. Both takeoff weights and
drag values could, and did, vary considerably. When I fly
these sims, my objective is just to get airborne
so,
as long as the takeoff performance is anywhere close to what
I would expect in real life, then Im happy. SF presents
no significant problems in this area of the flight model.
General Flight Characteristics
This area discusses what we can expect
to see in the "heart of the envelope" part of the
flight model. Two items come immediately to mind
pitch
and roll performance.
Pitch performance is over-modeled
in SF. Now, thats a bold statement! Just what do we
mean by that?
What we mean is that it is possible
to exceed the pitch performance of the real life aircraft
by a considerable margin. The problem here is not under-performance
or over-performance. It is, instead, the pitch response that
you get from the typical flight stick movement. In this sim,
these jets can reach pitch rates and G levels that were unattainable
in real life. Why? Because in real life, the pilot would not
deliberately over-G his plane to the extent that the sim pilot
can in SF. In this regard, SF is not too different from other
sims. We need something that limits the simmers ability
to command unrealistic pitch and G rates. Blackouts just dont
cut the mustard. The simple fact is that no real life F-104
or F-4 pilot would yank back on the stick to command a 10
G pitch up. Some other pitch rate constraint is needed other
than the blackout effect. Until we get such a feature, well
likely continue to fly our sim aircraft in an unrealistic
manner.
As an interim fix, we can only ask
the simmer to pay attention to back stick inputs
the
jets have G meters
use them to control excessive pitch
rates. Remember, these two jets had a G limit of about 7 Gs.
So, if you want to fly these jets correctly, use the G meter
to get a feel for how hard you can pull on the pole. An over-G
in real life was a big deal...a potential showstopper if the
limit was busted too badly since the jet was likely busted
too.
Roll performance is the next problem
area. Roll inertia refers to the planes tendency to
resist the initiation of a roll
and its tendency to continue
a roll when the aileron is neutralized. Initial roll rate
is good. These jets roll at rates that approximate real life.
No problem there. The problem comes in when we want to stop
the roll.
Both of these jets exhibit too much
roll inertia. This simply means that they continue to roll
when the aileron input is taken out (neutralized). In real
life, these aircraft tended to stop rolling quickly, particularly
if a little opposite aileron was used to counter the roll.
This flight model feature was necessary to achieve the ability
to point the jet quickly at a target. The roll axis needed
to be easily controlled. Not so in this sim. Both jets will
over-shoot the roll out point unless the aileron input is
taken out early in the roll. The tendency to continue rolling
is likened to a pendulum effect
once the roll is established,
the roll will try to resist an attempt to stop it. The result
is typically an over-banked attitude that the pilot must then
correct. This is both irritating and a waste of time when
time is often critical. The only correction for the simmer
is to moderate roll inputs so that the pendulum effect is
minimized.
Slow Speed Performance
Lets look at two things here.
One is drag
how these jets either hold their energy or
lose it. The other is the actual response to flight control
inputs at slow speed. First the drag issue.
In one G flight, drag is significantly
under-modeled in the F-104 and F-4. Simply put, these jets
dont want to slow down. This is the case clean or dirty
(speed brake, gear, and flaps down). When you come in for
a landing, you must allow extra time and distance to get these
jets down to your approach speeds. In our opinion, the rate
of deceleration is only about a third of what would be expected
in real life. Once configured, the power setting needed to
hold the approach speed is much lower than would be expected
almost
idle in some configurations.
The second issue of slow speed performance
is the response of the jet to control input. To more accurately
discuss this subject, we should substitute the term "high
AOA" for "slow speed". The F-4 in real life
was very sensitive to rudder input at high AOA. In fact, in
the non-slatted versions (C, D, and "hard wing"
E models), the rudder, not the aileron, was the primary roll
control at high AOA. The reason was that the aileron under
high AOA contributed too much adverse yaw. The F-4, being
a swept wing aircraft, responded to rudder input with a roll
at high AOA, and this is powerfully modeled in the sim. Push
the rudder in at high AOA and youll get a good roll
rate. Thats the good news.
The bad news is that the same roll
inertia that was present in aileron rolls is again present
in rudder rolls. It is easy to overshoot the roll out point
when using rudder to roll the F-4, and if the rudder is not
carefully used, it can easily progress into an out-of-control
situation.
Rudder as currently modeled in the
F-104 is incorrect. The aircraft rolls when rudder is applied
unfortunately,
the roll is opposite the direction of rudder input. Not good!
Hopefully this error will be fixed in future patches. Rudder
effectiveness in the real life F-104 was relatively inconsequential
as compared to the F-104. It would not roll the aircraft to
any degree at high AOA. The F-104 was rolled with aileron,
plain and simple.
Stall and Departure Characteristics
The F-104 and F-4 had completely different
stall and departure characteristics in real life. In the sim,
they are basically the same.
In real life, the F-104 experienced
a phenomena known as a "pitch up" when flown at
too high of an AOA. This pitch up occurred before a traditional
stall. Pitch up is not modeled in SF. Because of this, high
AOA maneuvering is very unrealistic in the F-104. The sim
pilot can fly the F-104 into pitch attitudes and conditions
that the real life pilot would have never reached. The SF
F-104 can be hauled around with relative abandon.
The F-4 stall and departure characteristics
are modeled much better than the F-104. If pushed too far,
the jet will begin an uncommanded roll and may enter a spin
if forward stick is not used to break the stall. Departures
in the real jet were very unpredictable, and their nature
was dependent on entry speed. High speed and high G/AOA departures
could be very violent. The SF F-4 models this to a limited
degree, but the overall effect is a reasonable replication
of real life.
In both aircraft, flaps are effective
when maneuvering at slow speeds, just as was the case in real
life. Flap limiting speeds are recognized when lowering the
flaps, but once down, the flap limiting speed can be exceeded
without any apparent damage.
Summary
The flight models of both aircraft
provide a moderately challenging replication of real life
jet flying. While some specific errors do detract from a realistic
depiction of real world performance, the overall effect is
a scalable flight model that enhances gameplay and player
enjoyment without being so demanding that discouragement results.
Go To Page 2
Click here
to go to top of this page.
Copyright 2009, SimHQ.com. All Rights Reserved. Contact the webmaster.
|