I'm sorry... Skate, are you saying that the FM of an aircraft in DCS somehow **AFFECTS** the avionics of that aircraft???

The Linking Between the PFM and PSM of the A-10C is not the Same as the Linking between the AFM+ and SSM of the A-10A is what I'm saying.

PFm. PSm, AFM+, SSM ???

Professional Flight Model


Professional System Model


Improved Advanced Flight Model


Simple System Model ("FC3 level")

thanks, these acronyms are great to confuse people like me.

I'm confused now. First, you say PFM parameters are linked to the systems....

in the A-10C, there are aspects of the PFM that are influenced by the Cockpit Systems and Coding
(Flaps, Fuel Pumps, etc etc etc)

in the A-10A those systems are not modeled extensively like they are in the A-10C, and likely involved different system call backs in the binaries for states of some things in the AFM.

The TF34-GE-2 which was used on the S-3 Viking is physically different than the TF34-GE-100A which is fitted to the A-10A and A-10C. The fan diameter, bypass ratio, compression ratio, Maximum Nf (N1), Maximum Ng (N2), thrust, ITT, and other parameters are all different.

The graphs presented are not from the TF34-GE-100A. If they were, they would reflect an ITT limit of 865. Moreover, the graph shown clearly shows a 60 second limitation on maximum thrust operation. No such time limitation exists for the A-10A or A-10C with either TF34-GE-100 or -100A engines.

The data for the -2 engine is not applicable to the -100A.

Since we're at it, how close are the A performance charts in the available in the free -1 to the A-10C? If I'm not mistaken, the C is mainly an avionics upgrade, with the airframe itself seeing very few changes. Is a thorough read of the -1 useful in operating DCS' A-10C?

Also, just out of curiosity, why the skip from A to C? Was a B model planned and scratched halfway through?

B Model was the Rare Dual Seat Trainer.

A was Analog Cockpit,

C was Glass Cockpit

Incorrect the B model was never a trainer but a Night Attack/All Weather (NAW) variant that the USAF didn't purchase.

Is the C a NAW aircraft?

Thanks for posting it here. The quoted graph is not from the -100A engine installed on the A-10. The lower ITT limit and the time limitation on MAX thrust operation are giveaways.

Not all weather.

So...is it some weather then? Blustery days perhaps?




The Jedi Master

Thanks.

oopz, yeah, my mistake, I was literally reading about it right before it was asked, lol.

i got trainers on the brain.

There is one other variable here that I was dwelling on last night, you know how easy and smooth it is to get things done with the military right? Like say making a movie such as top gun, the producers wouldn’t have jumped through many hoops would they? Lol, Perhaps ED had to bend the FM ever so slightly because of some brass sitting in an office somewhere? The software was designed for training the suite not the engine and flight model. Yes I know the A10 is not some major top secret F22 aircraft, but who knows with so much brass to deal with what very small restriction may have been imposed on the FM. It may explain why some will not listen as much as we would hope to the well informed A10 nut bags around here, as they may not be able to get it real close even if they can already. Anyway I may just be dwelling again way too much.

Very simple answer if that's the case. All ED has to do is say that is why it's modeled the way it is and people wouldn't question it as a bug (at least I wouldn't).



Care to explain what an "A10 nut bag" is?