Originally Posted by A1B
do you have a source to where they didn't use current data? I'm sure the test pilots did sustained turns early in the piece and would have that data well before that sim was done, in the time line of sim results released...publicly releasing the down grading of sustained turn etc is another matter. both the release and testimony was in 2012.
Do you really still think that the BVR Combat Simulation that the LER claims were based solely on sustained turn after so many people have tried to explain to you? I have never said that "they have it wrong." I said that the full data were not available when the trials were run and that the data will have changed after 2012. The modelling is affected hugely by small changes in those data. Let me give you an example of the modelling involved and then you will quickly be able to determine which data were available and which had to be based on well-informed assumptions.
Installed engine thrust and fuel burn; airframe lift, drag, mass and obscuration; 3D, multiband RCS (including weapons bay door cycling for launch/release); radar probability of detection, tracking algorithms, eclipsing, co-channel interference; IRST detection, weather, signal degradation, target characteristics; datalink connectivity (basic model); missile seeker model, gimbal limits, radar scan volume coverage for support, target obscuration and manoeuvre (including target g), sun/glint, exhaust plume obscuration, boost/sustain dynamics, navigation law, MBC, aerodynamic performance, fusing.........
Each of those characteristics requires an huge number of data. The entire dataset for even a simple trial runs to over 200 pages of small print.
You may be able to work out which parts of that lot are affected by changes to sustained turn rate and which parts were not precisely known when the simulation was conducted.
What have Typhoon and F-15 pilots said to you that is so different to that?