|
Feature: Falcon Flight Model Evolution
Back To Page 2
Original,
SP3 and SP4 F-16 Comparison
Here is a diagram that shows the evolution of the default
F-16 from the original, through SP3 to SP4:

In this set of curves, I haven't shown
the CAT 1 limit for the F-16 for the reasons explained earlier
and also because the CAT 1 limiter hasn't been employed consistently
through each version. Even so, this overlay does give an insight
into the way the data has changed, and the effect that has
had on the sustained and instantaneous turning ability of
each of the default F-16s. The important thing to notice from
this set of overlays is that the SP3 F16's zero Ps curve (shown
in brown) was a major departure from the original (green)
curve. Notice that both the original green and current blue
zero Ps curves fall off dramatically below corner velocity,
while the SP3 zero Ps curve did not. That of course resulted
in dramatically different handling characteristics. The original
Ps = 0 curve behavior was, when compared with the real F-16
EM diagram, closer to that of the real F-16's zero Ps curve
and so the SP3 flight model was, I believe, a step backwards.
Hardly surprising then, that the SP4
zero Ps curve (shown in blue) is much closer now to the original
green curve, particularly below corner speed... You might
be getting the feeling that we have been riding our flight
models around in circles, if you can forgive the pun. The
point is that, in terms of the low speed sustained turning
ability, the current default flight model has now taken positive
steps back to where it started. The shape of the current Ps
= 0 curve, as with the original, now demands proper energy
management. Remember, I mentioned the dramatic effect on aircraft
handling characteristics? Well, you can now no longer simply
hold full aft stick, as you could with the SP3 flight model,
and expect to get good results. In SP3 you could simply hold
full aft stick to achieve the best sustained turn rate, and
while that certainly made it easier to fly, it removed the
skill required in learning to hold just the right amount of
back pressure to achieve the flight conditions for the best
sustained turn rate. With SP3, everyone became a good stick
overnight. So fortunately, the SP4 flight model has corrected
this behavior and it is now as it should be, once again. There
is of course, room here for more detailed discussion of the
development of the various Falcon 4.0 flight models, and possibly
some EM comparisons to the real F-16, but that would be more
appropriate for another article. The point to take away from
all of this is that the Falcon 4.0 flight models are evolving,
and they are getting better. The work of the guys involved
in developing the flight models is difficult, and thankless,
and generally the good work they are doing, in my opinion
does not get the recognition or appreciation it deserves,
but I digress, let's get back to the fun stuff.
MiG-29 v F-16
So what about the MiG-29 v F-16 within
visual range engagement? Here is a Sea Level EM diagram overlay
from the original game...

These two aircraft were clearly closely
matched, with just enough of an edge to the F-16, in terms
of its low speed sustained turning ability, to make it a tough
fight, but close enough so that if the player made a mistake,
the Artificial Intelligence could take advantage and clean
up. It was tough, because you can see from this diagram that
the MiG-29 still had an instantaneous turn rate advantage,
but the fight was always a lot of fun, because you could win.
Go
To Page 4
Click
here to go to top of this page.
Copyright 2008, SimHQ.com. All Rights Reserved. Contact the webmaster.
|