The Basics:

Well, lets get one thing straight right away. This game is NOT realistic at all, in spite of the press release that implies otherwise. Initially I hoped that Novalogic had really pulled a fast one on us and gotten a good flight model and accurate radar modes modeled. I took them at their word and was making preparations to test their "authentic flight model".

When I fired up F-16 (and after my initial WOW's) I put their claims to some testing. I had called and spoken to a Novalogic rep and had asked him which F-16 Block they were modeling. He said it was the Block 50 so I knew they were simulating the F110-GE-129 motor, which produces 29,000 pounds of thrust at full afterburner. Both the Block 50 and Block 52 are VERY powerful jets capable of sustained 9G turns as one Block 50 pilot put it to me a few weeks ago, "till she runs out of fuel".

Even before I took off, I noticed that Novalogic has a button to manually control the flaps. Well, in the MiG-29 that's fine and dandy but in the F-16, the FBW computer controls the flaps and thus there is no way for the pilot to lower or extend them "manually" in the plane. So I "manually" raised them and began my takeoff. To my absolute horror, could not take off without them! Hmmmm… not looking too good so far in the "authentic" department.

After I realized that the plane would not take off without the flaps, I lowered them and zoomed off into the sky. By this time my speed (in full afterburner) was near 300 knots and when I took off my speed quickly climbed above the limit set on the real F-16 of 300 knots before sustaining gear damage. Well, I raised the gear around 350 knots with no problem and took note of this discrepancy. In addition, when pushing my throttle from idle thrust to full afterburner, it took 5 seconds just to get the afterburners to spool. Much too long! After doing some basic flight maneuvers, I noticed some real problems here too so I will only cover the major disparities.

First off, the plane pulls to many degrees per second. The real F-16 can pull ~26 degrees per second at its max corner speed. This F-16 looked to be pulling about 50 degrees per second (d/s). In addition, it didn't seem to matter if I was going 350 knots or 700 knots. I was going to pull 50+ d/s until I hit about 250 knots and then I was going to only be pulling about 20-25 d/s.

Second, if I pitch down when I fly the real simulator (20 degrees or so and when carrying 2 AMRAAMS on stations 1 and 9 and 2 AIM-9's on stations 2 and 8 and a centerline fuel tank), I can pulled a sustained 9G turn and easily hold my corner airspeed.

When I pulled the same maneuver in F-16 MRF (with 2 AMRAAMS and 2 Aim-9's and all other stations empty), my airspeed bled like a dying pig. So I fired off all my missiles and again built my airspeed to 500 knots and pitched down 60 degrees this time and pulled back hard on the stick. My G load hit 10 and again my airspeed went from about 500 to 200 in less than 3 seconds.

Click to continue . . .

Next, I tried a simple stall. I pitched up 90 degrees and allowed the speed to bleed off at 12,000 feet while holding a 90-degree pitch. When my plane hit ~100 knots, I was expecting the nose to come roaring over and swing me back down (straight down) and instead the nose became "locked" at 90 degrees high and my plane actually started falling backwards, picking up speed. Shoot, even my speed indicator was displaying how fast my plane was falling backwards.

When I hit 5,000 feet with my plane still locked on it's tail falling backwards, I figured, what the heck and threw my throttle into full afterburner. As most of you know, without air coming into the intake, the engine cannot spool and will stall out. BUT, hehehe.. not here! The engine spooled right up and boom! Instant elevator action!

I am not even going to get started on the radar modeling. I'm not sure what they were doing in this department. Clearly, they have made this modeling extremely easy. Looks like they made the radar display more like the F-22 that the F-16C but since I have not flown the F-22 simulator like I have the F-16C; I don't want to speculate too much.

Many of you may be repeating to yourselves, "DUH, this is a game from Novalogic and they always claim their simulations are authentic but we never believe them." Here's my thinking; after reading the quote from the press release, I feel it's time to start holding companies to their word. If I am a consumer walking into a local computer store, and see five F-16 games on the shelves and all of them claim they are "authentic" how is the consumer supposed to know which game is REALLY accurate and which ones are just CLAIMING to be accurate?

Unless you have some previous experience with a certain game company and "know better", the average consumer is going to pick one and assume the game is accurate as described on the box. As simulations are becoming more complex, my feeling is that the time has come for more accurate (authentic) descriptions to accompany the games that are not accurate (authentic). Consumers have a right to not be misled by labels on games just as labels on clothes or any other product we purchase do not mislead us.

Hardcore Testing

My actual flight-testing (as I described above) had not even begun yet! Even so, I decided to proceed and find out how accurately Novalogic had modeled weight and drag. As all of you know, both of these components are very important to how the aircraft handles while in flight. The more induced or parasitic drag produced, the faster the airframe will bleed speed and drop energy. The more weight an aircraft carries the longer it takes to get in the air and like drag, the faster it loses energy. Both components are enemies to a pilot when performing BFM or when attempting to evade SAMS or AAA.

Go to Part III