Jump to content

Fastest jet on MSFS?


Recommended Posts

That’s easy, they didn’t want to encourage the conspiracy theory of “chemtrails to poison us”.

 

Lmao

Hahaha!! [emoji1]

Good one!

Why on earth would anyone fly "fighters" in this SIM anyway. [emoji6]

 

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contrails/vapour trails are not always visible, they depend on the atmospheric conditions to be just right to produce them.

 

And what F-22 only does 1,000 mph? They are Mach 2-class aircraft with reheat! And are/were capable of Mach 1.8 at military power and 50,000 feet...

What height were you talking about?

Source?

 

Mine was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor and that shows a limit of 800 knots/921 mph at sea level...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...Why on earth would anyone fly "fighters" in this SIM anyway. [emoji6]

 

Because MS Flight Simulator. Most fighters spend most of their existence training anyways.

Gigabyte GA-X99 Gaming G1, i7-5960X, Noctua NH-D14, Crucial Ballistix Elite 64Gb, Nvidia GTX Titan X, Creative ZxR, Ableconn PEXM2-130, WD Black SN750 250Gb & 2Tb NVMe/Gold 10Tb HDD, Sony BDU-X10S BD-ROM, PC Power & Cooling 1200w, Cosmos C700M, Noctua iPPC 140mm x6, Logitech M570/K800, WinX64 7 Ultimate/10 Pro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought I heard recently of a Blackbird SR-71 project for MSFS, that should be good for Mach 3+ at 80k agl

 

I know I've heard of at least one Concorde project too, those cruise at Mach 2+

 

Someone released F-104 Starfighter development screenshots too, that's pretty fast fighter.

 

Haven't seen anything announced, but F-4 Phantoms have speed too, Operation Sageburner did insane speeds for a record, at 50ft agl. Similarly, though not announced, I think eventually someone will make a B-58 Hustler for MSFS, and it too was a speed demon at low level and high levels.

 

 

Back in FS9 days, I flew the Blackbird a fair bit on long flights, and found that my computer could only keep up by loading ground textures in a small circle directly below the jet, as it was just too fast covering ground for the hard drive to keep loading fast enough and render it fully! But it was fun doing such fast and long distance flights, then plunge down for a long descent to a rainy runway in England at Lakenheath ... I did missions to Kola peninsula, missions across the Med, to Egypt and Damascus, missions to China and Vietnam from Kadena in Japan... basically I did a bit of research about real missions that were unclassified, and built flights that resembled them, or from fictional situations.

 

One flight I hadn't paid enough attention to fuel remaining... and suddenly realised I probably did not have enough fuel to land... so when throttling back to descend, I brought them to idle, then shut one engine down... restarted that engine at maybe 7000ft for final approach, still on idle, trying to glide it in like a Space Shuttle. Fun times!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what F-22 only does 1,000 mph? They are Mach 2-class aircraft with reheat! And are/were capable of Mach 1.8 at military power and 50,000 feet...

What height were you talking about?

Source?

 

Mine was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor and that shows a limit of 800 knots/921 mph at sea level...

 

1000-921=79

my bad on overstating 79 mph:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why on earth would anyone fly "fighters" in this SIM anyway.

They're just another plane. If you want to do bigtime sightseeing, like checking out the west coast of Mexico, or if you want to see the Rockies from way up high a modern fighter is the way to go.

 

I bought the Eurofighter, simply because it was the cheapest at $15.00. It is tough to land, It would be helpful if there were a way to assign the speedbrakes to a switch or key, things get quite busy about the time you need them.

 

I got the Eurofighter up to 1,285 kts IAS which is 1,479 mph at sea level and over 2,000 mph at 60,000 ft, but mph isn't the way speed is viewed by a pilot, Jets use mach number.

http://www.tscm.com/mach-as.pdf

i7-10700K, ASUS Prime Z490-P motherboard, 32 gig, GTX 1080 Ti, 1TB M2 drive, Thrustmaster T16000M, Logitech Rudder Pedals , xbox controller.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also why can't you break the sound barrier. Seems like Ms FSX you could? No vapor trail at 32,000 ft also

 

Why can't you break the sound barrier? Others have in a few planes. Keep in mind most aircraft don't have the thrust/drag to exceed the speed of sound in level flight anyway, and most would see the airframe break up fairly quick as well if they did.

 

I do know that a handful of airliners have exceeded the speed of sound, that were not designed for it. Obviouly the Tu-144 and Concorde were made to cruise fast like that, but I'm pretty sure I heard of a B-747 briefly exceeding Mach, accidentally during an emergency (rapid descent?). Also, I heard a Convair airliner and also DC-8 did the same. I think the DC-8 did Mach during an experimental flight, on purpose, as a sales point to show how tough the jet was.

 

Boeing test pilot Tex Johnston did a barrel roll in front of thousands of people, including potential buyers, to show the B-707 was a capable plane! There is footage on youtube of that famous barrel roll, it took place over Lake Washington, Seattle, Washington, I think during SeaFair, a boating festival that includes a wild boat race with unlimited Hydroplanes that have INSANE power and speed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're just another plane. If you want to do bigtime sightseeing, like checking out the west coast of Mexico, or if you want to see the Rockies from way up high a modern fighter is the way to go.

 

I bought the Eurofighter, simply because it was the cheapest at $15.00. It is tough to land, It would be helpful if there were a way to assign the speedbrakes to a switch or key, things get quite busy about the time you need them.

 

I got the Eurofighter up to 1,285 kts IAS which is 1,479 mph at sea level and over 2,000 mph at 60,000 ft, but mph isn't the way speed is viewed by a pilot, Jets use mach number.

http://www.tscm.com/mach-as.pdf

 

Fair enough. My point was obviously that if you really want to learn "a fighter" and it's systems etc. you're better off another place, but it's only dollars? We'll i guess that's fair. Hard to land? That I don't believe. Guess I have to check that out myself. [emoji4]

 

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if you really want to learn "a fighter" and it's systems etc. you're better off another place, but it's only dollars?

I don't look at it as a "fighter", I see it as a very high performance airplane. I have no interest in its "systems". The performance difference between a Eurofighter and an F-15 or F-22 is trivial, so why pay double to get that type of aircraft?

i7-10700K, ASUS Prime Z490-P motherboard, 32 gig, GTX 1080 Ti, 1TB M2 drive, Thrustmaster T16000M, Logitech Rudder Pedals , xbox controller.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With my limited use of the F-14 in MSFS2020 I'd have to say the sim is not really designed for military aircraft, I seem to get that impression... Why have them in the sim someone asked.... Some of us love flying them, for me, I love ripping through mountains like the Rockies the Pyrenees and canyons, landings and takeoffs from aircraft carriers and flying from London to Paris whilst eating my bacon sandwich for supper..... They add and different and welcomed (this end anyway) perspective to the sim just like the helicopter has done.... end trans Edited by daspinall

ASRock X570 TAICHI Mother Board

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 3.79 GHz *Overclocked*

Corsair 240mm H100i ELITE CAPELLIX RGB Intel/AMD CPU Liquid Cooler

Corsair DOMINATOR PLATINUM RGB 64GB 3600MHz *Overclocked*

MSI NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB SUPRIM X Ampere.

1000W PSU. Samsung 870 EVO 2TB SSD. HP Reverb G2 + Oculus Quest 2

Samsung Odyssey G9 C49G95TSSR - QLED monitor - curved - 49" - 5120 x 1440 Dual Quad HD @ 240 Hz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One reason for fighter planes in FS, is that most "combat oriented flight sims" don't feature very large terrain maps... so if you want to fly in places that have interesting places, or of historical significance, MSFS or XP11 civil sims are your only choice.

 

Another reason is that most fighters have really awesome cockpit visibility, certainly FAR better than any airliner... so if you want to do some sightseeing, sometimes helicopters are best, other times a fighter with a nice bubble canopy is more appropriate. For example, flying through the Grand Canyon in southwestern USA. Even in the real world this has an impact, as there are Twin Otters flying the Grand Canyon, that have huge extra large windows for the visiting passengers...those are called Vistaliner Conversions, done by R.W. Martin Inc., Carlsbad, CA

 

https://www.twinotterworld.com/msn-524

 

https://www.vikingair.com/twin-otter-series-400/twin-otter-answers/older-twin-otters-had-optional-%E2%80%9Cvistaliner%E2%80%9D-upgrade-do

 

The other thing is, if you are flying through mountains, fighters have plenty of maneuverability to follow the valley easily.

 

That said... it takes a lot of effort to make a fighter in FS fly just like the real fighter, and usually that effort isn't put in, to the extent that it is in other sims. I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but most seem to just be a pretty model with some "go fast" flight characteristics and maybe an afterburner animation! Things like fuel burn rate in afterburner, ordnance weight, radar settings, approach speeds and high AOA performance may not come even remotely in the same region as the real plane though.

Edited by Herc79
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several reasons that it is difficult to find fighters that mirror the actual performance envelope of the actual aircraft. First, most artist are not also engineers. It seems to be a typical brain taxonomy that artistic talent is at the opposite end of the spectrum to the math and science brain. You get rare exceptions, but I don't ask a great singer to do chemistry research, and I would not want to attend the exhibit of most of the engineers I know.

So on to problem number 2. This is a new flight model, with a completely different way to create flight characteristics. You can't just convert a file from FSX or FS2000 and acquire any useful parameters. Most artists depend on some plugin air file generator. This may work great if you are building a Piper Apache, or even a DC-4, but it is WAY off for fighters. The reason is the design characteristics of fighters are very different than GA or commercial aviation aircraft. Both GA and airliners, try to achieve stability and ease of handling as performance goals. They don't value turn radius or maneuverability at all. They don't need high G performance. Fighters on the other hand, usually deliberately create unstable or ragge4d edge stability, and try to get maximum maneuverability and acceleration. The plug in programs are optimized for stable and comfortable. Even if the artist has a math friend plug in the data, the program will still create a very fast GA aircraft.

Now problem number 3. This is the big one!! There is no SDK yet. Only the inner circle at Asobo and maybe a few at PMDG or such, really understand how the FS2020 parameters work. Certainly the guy that builds the free F-89 has no ideas how they work. Now that would be a comparatively easy airfile, but then go to a SU-30, and it is super complicated. Some modern fighters have thrust vectoring, computer aided stability, and movable flight surfaces. There are no handbooks to tell the airfile guy what will generate the math to model some of those.

Edited by plainsman
I7-9700K, RTX-2070, Asus Strix Z-390-H MB, 32gb G Skill 3000 CL15, Corsair Obsidian 750D case, WD Black 1tb M.2, Crucial CT500MX SSD, Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium PSU
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several reasons that it is difficult to find fighters that mirror the actual performance envelope of the actual aircraft. First, most artist are not also engineers. It seems to be a typical brain taxonomy that artistic talent is at the opposite end of the spectrum to the math and science brain. You get rare exceptions, but I don't ask a great singer to do chemistry research, and I would not want to attend the exhibit of most of the engineers I know.

So on to problem number 2. This is a new flight model, with a completely different way to create flight characteristics. You can't just convert a file from FSX or FS2000 and acquire any useful parameters. Most artists depend on some plugin air file generator. This may work great if you are building a Piper Apache, or even a DC-4, but it is WAY off for fighters. The reason is the design characteristics of fighters are very different than GA or commercial aviation aircraft. Both GA and airliners, try to achieve stability and ease of handling as performance goals. They don't value turn radius or maneuverability at all. They don't need high G performance. Fighters on the other hand, usually deliberately create unstable or ragge4d edge stability, and try to get maximum maneuverability and acceleration. The plug in programs are optimized for stable and comfortable. Even if the artist has a math friend plug in the data, the program will still create a very fast GA aircraft.

Now problem number 3. This is the big one!! There is no SDK yet. Only the inner circle at Asobo and maybe a few at PMDG or such, really understand how the FS2020 parameters work. Certainly the guy that builds the free F-89 has no ideas how they work. Now that would be a comparatively easy airfile, but then go to a SU-30, and it is super complicated. Some modern fighters have thrust vectoring, computer aided stability, and movable flight surfaces. There are no handbooks to tell the airfile guy what will generate the math to model some of those.

 

 

thanks, some good points, makes a whole lot of sense... F-14 s is pretty old school compared to modern jets and why I love it....

ASRock X570 TAICHI Mother Board

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 3.79 GHz *Overclocked*

Corsair 240mm H100i ELITE CAPELLIX RGB Intel/AMD CPU Liquid Cooler

Corsair DOMINATOR PLATINUM RGB 64GB 3600MHz *Overclocked*

MSI NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti 24GB SUPRIM X Ampere.

1000W PSU. Samsung 870 EVO 2TB SSD. HP Reverb G2 + Oculus Quest 2

Samsung Odyssey G9 C49G95TSSR - QLED monitor - curved - 49" - 5120 x 1440 Dual Quad HD @ 240 Hz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, snippety snip snip.

I'm not trying to diss MSFS, I got the deluxe version on day one, and I enjoy it.

From the latest posts it'd seem a free UFO would be the best option. [emoji4]

 

 

Oh, no doubt!

 

I think what were saying is that MOST of what you'd fly in FS probably flies very close to the real item... it's just that fighter jets seem to be difficult to program the dynamics for in FS, because they kind of are beasts that are quite different from nearly all other planes. If a good solid dev team is making a fighter that you love, take the jump and the good team will probably deliver a quality product.

 

It's the less or low experienced dev, trying to take on a fighter, with limited understanding of how fighters actually fly, and how to make it fly like the real fighter in MSFS, that's where you see "risk" in whether you get a fighter that even flies somewhat like a fighter, or if it just flies fast and "weird"!

 

As the core simulation improves, this may become easier for low experience devs to create a fairly reallistic flying fighter... maybe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not saying it is difficult, at least as to older fighters without the moveable surfaces and thrust vectoring, but it requires someone with enough knowledge of the inner workings of the program as well as a knowledge of how fighters should behave. Even some programs like AirWrench, enabled the air file generator to add instability and replicate turning and performance attributes for older programs such as FSX or FS2004. But those programs will only work, if you have enough data and information and the ability to understand what to input.
I7-9700K, RTX-2070, Asus Strix Z-390-H MB, 32gb G Skill 3000 CL15, Corsair Obsidian 750D case, WD Black 1tb M.2, Crucial CT500MX SSD, Seasonic Prime 750W Titanium PSU
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sfojimbo:

There is such a thing (as a UFO) it's called the drone.

Nope

Yep

The drone will travel at 10,000 miles per second and go to earth orbit altitudes; it has unlimited fuel and remains invisible all the while. If that isn't a UFO simulator, I don't know what would be.

i7-10700K, ASUS Prime Z490-P motherboard, 32 gig, GTX 1080 Ti, 1TB M2 drive, Thrustmaster T16000M, Logitech Rudder Pedals , xbox controller.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...