USA TOUR Event | SAT DECEMBER 17TH 18:00 - 21:00 UTC

[IAHM-COL]

I am flying the Sukhoi 37, version of the FGUK
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/SU-37/tree/fguk

[IAHM-COL]

The pilot to feed the dog and the dog to bite the pilot if he touches any buttons ...

LMAO

[OPFOR77]

@jwocky there's a switch to turn off the afterburner, right-forward side of the cockpit.

[Richard]

0.95 is usually around the point at which the transonic effects (mainly drag) starts to take effects (for the craft that model this). 0.92 is probably the highest I'd cruise subsonic in an F-15; so 0.9 is probably a much more reasonable cruise.

0.95 would also be quite turbulent and a smidgen uncomfortable as well (if we could feel that sort of thing)....

[KB7]

So the plane I've been working on in the last few days is the Aero L-159, which was apparently flown by someone in a previous USA Tour as it was sitting in my folder for filing USA tour planes (maybe the Eurofighters leg?) Anyway, the L-159 is not a modern front-line dogfighter but does have a cannon and Sidewinder loadout configuration and is an actual warplane in addition to a trainer.

The problem is that it is a true subsonic plane. Testing this evening showed that putting the pedal to the metal I can only get a maximum .88 Mach at FL360, and with that I only have a remaining 107 min / 857.6 nmi range after climbout. That's without external tanks, but I hate leaving a plane at 100% throttle during cruise, anyway. Yet I've been working on instrumentizing the cockpit to something resembling reality and have really liked flying it so far. It will get a true glass cockpit. Not to mention I've been working on it and will upload my revisions when I'm done with her.

(I decided against the F-18. Might consider switching to the F-16 if I can instrumentize my version of it - I haven't seen a version of it with instruments. Really don't want to go to the F-14 and although I'm considering a Czech airplane I've kind of ruled out other Russian craft, though I may yet give the Sukhoi a chance.)

So, the reason for this screed.... as I consider my choices I think I still really want to fly this plane. So one option I'm considering is a considerably earlier takeoff and flying route. I could then plan for an arrival at destination in time to then spin up a KC-10 tanker somewhere before or after the halfway point (maybe even 33% and 66% of route if the logistics work out) and provide refuel duty along the route if anyone wants/needs it. I could also and/or spin up OpenRadar at the destination if that would be helpful/desirable. Or, I could just plan my route to leave early but try to work it out that I'm arriving at the approximate arrival time as everyone else.

Thoughts?

[IAHM-COL]

I say ATCing a bunch of fighters is less desireable. We may want to spin down from really high and almost land with cork-crew maneuvers or something.

I say calculate your departure so we catch you up at or around 100 nm to landing and then you depart first, and land last

We arent going that much fast anyways: think maybe with Richard comments above we decide cruising at 0.92 Ma. (many of these planes can go much faster but we'll fly subsonically to accomodate the larger number of alternative aircraft.)
So if you go 0.88 Ma it is really within the envelope there.

I do recall someone used an Aero L159 on the tour. I know I used the L39 on the trainer, but I think someone else brought the L159. I'll check the trainer's thread.

[LesterBoffo]

I'd really like to fly a first or second generation jet or slower, modern trainers like the BAE Hawk,or the Russian-Italian Yakolev-130. All of my testing shows that my most obvious choices are going to be limited to about 0.79~0.83 mach and at >80% throttle in level cruise.

I'm going to be landing a lot to refuel.

[IAHM-COL]

@lesbof
The generation (age and speed and capabilities) of the chosen Jet Fighter is OK.
If you get a very slow craft, it seems you can be good company for KB7 (read above)

But the aircraft (to be a participant) must be a fighter. Not a trainer.
We already completed a Jet "Trainer" leg before

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic. ... it=trainer

In other words, I strongly advise you discount both the BAE Hawk and the Yak130 from consideration.

[LesterBoffo]

@lesbof
The generation (age and speed and capabilities) of the chosen Jet Fighter is OK.
If you get a very slow craft, it seems you can be good company for KB7 (read above)

But the aircraft (to be a participant) must be a fighter. Not a trainer.
We already completed a Jet "Trainer" leg before

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic. ... it=trainer

In other words, I strongly advise you discount both the BAE Hawk and the Yak130 from consideration.

If the plane in question was also used in other countries with weapon hardpoints despite it's being trainer?

One of the best planes I have for this event was the DH108 Swallow experimental DeHavilland built 3 of. Good cruise speed and fuel use. But definitely not a production fighter, even though it was slated to fly as an interceptor to compliment the Vampire.

[IAHM-COL]

Since _you say_ the DH108 was used as interceptor, and was loaded with weaponry in operations, I say its fine

Never heard of it bfore
Gotme-googling now

I remembered the Dehavilland Comet DH106, which is a very classic and cool airliner (due to the close nomenclature)