SC Designs F-16 Fighting Falcons New thread

[Fulvio_61]

Can I afford a suggestion, Zsolt?

[Priller]

People,

This wonderful addon has been updated!

Changelog:
Emergency update after Sim Update 9 to ensure displays working correctly
CFT tanks disabled on F-16C and F-16D until new fuel_system can be implemented
Small correction to Thunderbirds wing textures ( USAF and stars and bars added )
New Asobo visual effects added for G vapour, contrails, Mach cone

Cheers,

Priller

[BananaBob]

I've installed the latest update but the HUD doesn't have numbers in it, just the green lines, anyone else? I tried reinstalling twice which tells me it might something I have installed?

[azflyboy]

If I remember right, one of the GPS mods (I think it's the PMS GTN750) was causing that if it wasn't updated to the newest version, so try disabling/updating any of those and see if that helps

[BananaBob]

If I remember right, one of the GPS mods (I think it's the PMS GTN750) was causing that if it wasn't updated to the newest version, so try disabling/updating any of those and see if that helps

That was it, took it out of community folder and all is good, thanks!

[ST0RM]

After a long break from MSFS, I updated and reinstalled the latest release of the F-16. What happened? A 5 degree climb to 10000ft at Mil power and I was only able to maintain 220kts. A clean Viper should easily accelerate through 350kts+ up to the mid-high teens of altitude. Again, level flight at 10k in full mil, the jet will only do 330kts. The only way to accelerate is in full burner. Landing, I saw way too much drag from the speed brakes. So much that I had to be in full mil to prevent stalling on approach. Any chances for some updates? Thanks

[DC1973]

After a long break from MSFS, I updated and reinstalled the latest release of the F-16. What happened? A 5 degree climb to 10000ft at Mil power and I was only able to maintain 220kts. A clean Viper should easily accelerate through 350kts+ up to the mid-high teens of altitude. Again, level flight at 10k in full mil, the jet will only do 330kts. The only way to accelerate is in full burner. Landing, I saw way too much drag from the speed brakes. So much that I had to be in full mil to prevent stalling on approach. Any chances for some updates? Thanks

Hi, this is correct behaviour. The SC Designs F-16s are used and tested by a serving F-16C pilot, and she says they're spot on. Turbofan engine thrust performance is dependent upon Mach number. A single-engine jet therefore only sees its performance at higher Mach number. I routinely take off in mil power to conserve fuel. Wait until airspeed exceeds 350 knots to find higher performance in dry power.

Updates based on our resident Viper pilot's recommendations include less drag at corner velocity and 9G, and a little less gear-down drag as Vipers always want to be fast on landing, hence the use of speedbrakes in the landing configuration.

[ST0RM]

Ok thanks. I've got time in a few AF F-16 sims and that wasn't my experience at all.

[DC1973]

Ok thanks. I've got time in a few AF F-16 sims and that wasn't my experience at all.

There are a huge number of factors that will influence performance in any aircraft - air temperature and density, fuel and ordnance load, altitude, dynamic thrust via Mach number etc etc. An aircraft flown in summer will often perform poorly compared to the same aircraft flown in winter, for instance, with MSFS being accurate enough to reflect this real life phenomenon. While no desktop simulator will ever be perfect in regard to aerodynamics, they can get reasonably close. The F-16 pilot we talk to said the clean F-16 was "perfect" and that we'd nailed it. With two tanks on, there was a little too much drag, but it wasn't far off. Most other comments were regarding fractions of a degree or accelerations of a few metres per-second per-second; tiny stuff basically.