Subsonic

Energy-
Maneuverability
Diagrams for Selected
DCS: World Aircraft

Contact Light | Revised: November 2022

1
Subsonic Energy-Maneuverability Diagrams for Selected DCS: World Aircraft is
published as a reference for the for the DCS Dogfighters flight simulation
community. This document will be updated as as new flight model updates,
configuration changes, and aircraft are released. Updates to this document may
be found on the DCS Dogfighters Discord. Questions may be directed to Contact
Light on Discord.

The diagrams and flight models shown are based entirely on DCS: World flight
models. No comment is made on the real-world performance of these aircraft. No
non-public information was used in the creation of this document.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

License. You may share this and adapt this work for any purpose, even
commercial, but you must provide appropriate attribution of the original work to
Contact Light.

2022 Contact Light

2
About
This document presents energy-maneuverability diagrams based on DCS: World ight models for ghter aircraft
commonly used on the DCS Dog ghters server. These models were derived from data collected in ight tests
meant to extract the subsonic lift, drag, and thrust characteristics of each aircraft as a function of speed and
angle of attack. These diagrams may be used to compare the turn, climb, and acceleration of the aircraft shown.

Changes

• New tests for AV-8B, MB-339A, JF-17, MiG-19P, and MiG-21bis; and updates for nine other aircraft
• Improved modeling techniques to reduce errors introduced by Tacview speed and acceleration calculations
• Enhancements to chart readability and labeling
• Aircraft weights and con gurations for popular aircraft have been carefully checked against mission les to
match DCS Dog ghters guns-only con gurations and fuel states

• Updates to limit load and G calculation. G contours now account for angle of attack and re ect load factors
measured through aircraft normal axis rather than total transverse acceleration.

• Added “observed sustained turn rates” based on a windowed least-squares estimate of maximum
sustained G as a function of calibrated airspeed

3
fi
fi
fi
fi
fl
fl
fi
fl
fi
 Aircraft Manifest
New aircraft and updated tests highlighted in bold
Aircraft Test Date Type Aircraft Test Date Type
A-10CII 2022-07-05 Subsonic Jet MB-339A 2022-10-28 Subsonic Jet
AV8BNA 2022-11-15 Subsonic Jet MiG-15bis 2022-08-23 Subsonic Jet
C-101CC 2022-07-05 Subsonic Jet MiG-19P 2022-09-26 Supersonic Jet
F-14B 2022-11-15 Supersonic Jet MiG-21bis 2022-09-23 Supersonic Jet
F-15C 2022-10-05 Supersonic Jet MiG-29S 2022-11-14 Supersonic Jet
F-16C 2022-11-14 Supersonic Jet Mirage F1CE 2022-11-12 Supersonic Jet
F-5E 2022-07-05 Supersonic Jet Mosquito FB VI 2022-07-02 Piston
F-86F 2022-08-10 Subsonic Jet P-51D 2022-07-05 Piston
F/A-18C 2022-11-13 Supersonic Jet Spit re Mk. IX 2022-07-05 Piston
I-16 2022-07-05 Piston Su-27 2022-11-14 Supersonic Jet
JF-17 2022-09-27 Supersonic Jet Su-33 2022-07-26 Supersonic Jet
M2000C 2022-11-23 Supersonic Jet

4
fi
 Energy Maneuverability Diagrams
An energy-maneuverability (EM) diagram concisely
summarizes how quickly an aircraft can change its speed,
altitude, and heading throughout its performance envelope. It
shows the following variables for a given combination of speed
and horizontal turn rate:

• Angle of attack Maximum

instantaneous turn
• Turn radius performance Maximum
(corner speed) sustained turn
• Load factor (G) rate
Minimum
Load limit
• Speci c excess power (Ps) sustained
(maximum G)
turn radius
Speci c excess power (Ps) is the rate of change of total
mechanical energy per unit weight. It can be expressed in
terms of equivalent climb rate and also re ects acceleration. Ps Lift limit
increases with thrust and speed and decreases with drag and (stall)
weight.

In general, the more energy an aircraft has, the more options it

has for maneuvering. An aircraft that can build a high energy
margin relative to its opponent can exchange this energy in an
attack. Maximum climb

5
fi
fi
fl
 How This Works
These diagrams are based on estimates of Tests Performed
subsonic thrust, lift, and drag characteristics
based on ight tests performed in DCS for a
standard day and xed fuel setting. • Sustained turns at various speeds between
powered stall and Mach 0.8 (or maximum
speed) at 1,000 ft
The ight data is saved to Tacview and
exported to CSV, where it is analyzed in • Level acceleration at maximum power from idle
Python. Using the aircraft’s normal and stall to Mach 0.8 (or maximum speed) at 1,000
longitudinal acceleration at various speeds ft. Follow with climb or Immelman to 10,000 ft
and angles of attack, I can estimate a model or higher.
of the lift curve, drag polar, and thrust.
• Split-S at idle thrust at constant subsonic Mach
number from 10,000 ft or higher
I can then use this model to predict the
aircraft’s lift and drag at di erent • Level idle deceleration to stall at 1,000 ft
combinations of speed and horizontal turn
rate. This is how the EM diagram is • Maximum performance turn above corner
generated. speed until minimum sustained turn radius
achieved

6
fl
fl
fi
ff
 Theory
Drag is given by the following expression:
An aircraft’s performance in symmetric ight is determined by four forces: lift,
drag, thrust, and weight. A jet engine’s thrust is given by a simpli ed linear 1 2
D = ρ(h, T0, p0)vTASCD(CL, M)S
function of Mach number and altitude. 2
An even-degree Legendre polynomial is used to estimate the drag polar, or the
T = T0δ + TM δM relationship between the coe cient of lift and the coe cient of drag.

( CLmax )
T0 (the sea-level static thrust) and TM (variation of thrust with Mach number M) are 2
CL − CL0
CD(CL) = CD0 + K2(CL − CL0) + K4P4
unknown constants. is the ratio of pressure at altitude to standard sea level
pressure.
The coe cient of lift, coe cient of drag, and thrust are estimated
An aircraft’s acceleration transverse to its wind-velocity vector is given by the simultaneously based on data collected in Tacview. Typical results are shown
sum of lift and the component of thrust perpendicular to the the air stream. on the next page.
1 Symbols
2
N⊥W = ρ(h, T0, p0)vTAS CL(α, M)S + T sin α T Thrust Ny Normal load factor
2 T0 Static thrust at sea level Nx Longitudinal load factor
This acceleration may be measured directly by combining normal and TM Variation of thrust with Mach Es Speci c energy
longitudinal load factors obtained from Tacview. In the real world, this may be δ Ratio of ambient pressure to standard P
s Speci c excess power
measured by accelerometers. A piecewise linear function is used to estimate CL M Mach number g Acceleration of gravity
as a function of angle of attack for all subsonic speeds. α Angle of attack
ρ Ambient air density D Drag
N⊥ = Ny cos α + Nx sin α vTAS True airspeed CD Coe cient of drag
The aircraft’s acceleration in along is velocity vector is termed speci c excess CL Coe cient of lift CD0 Zero-lift drag coe cient
thrust and is determined by the vector sum of thrust and drag. The product of S Wing area K2 Quadratic drag coe cient
speci c excess thrust and speed gives the rate of change in speci c energy, or h Altitude K4 Quartic drag coe cient
speci c excess power. N⊥ Crosswind load factor P4(x) 4th-order Legendre polynomial
W Aircraft weight CLmax Maximum coe cient of lift
v·
vg [ ]
dEs · T cos α − D
Ps = =h+ = vTAS
dt W
7
ffi
ffi
fi
fi
fi
fi
ffi
ffi
ffi
ffi
ffi
𝝳
ffi
ffi
fl
ffi
fi
fi
fi
Example Solutions
F-16C F/A-18C

8
 Caveats
• This document only focuses on energy • Variable geometry and automatic high-lift devices
maneuverability, or an aircraft’s ability to change are generally handled by assuming these
its altitude and velocity vector quickly. Other con guration changes depend only on angle of
measures of ghter agility, such as pitch rate, roll attack. However, even this approach does not
rate, or combat cycle time are not explored. work with models of certain aircraft like the AV-8B
and F-14B. These charts must be interpreted
• These diagrams are only applicable to the ight carefully.
models in DCS. No comment is made on the real-
world performance of these aircraft. • Piston-engine aircraft are di cult to model with
this approach due to propeller drag contributions
• The fuel/weight settings apply only to at idle and the challenge of modeling propeller
mobettameta’s DCS Dog ghters server, which are e ciency at di erent speeds. It’s tougher to
tuned for about 6 minutes of ght time at separate thrust and drag for these.
maximum power based on user feedback.
• This document will be updated roughly quarterly
• This approach attempts to describe the entire with additional aircraft, including the F-100 and
range of performance at speeds below Mach 0.8 the F-4. Future iterations may include altitude-
with a single set of coe cients. This approach is Mach diagrams exploring the full subsonic and
less reliable when approaching transonic speeds, supersonic envelope of these aircraft.
particularly for aircraft with low wing sweep.

9
ffi
fi
fi
ff
ffi
fi
ffi
fi
fl
 Summary Data
De nitions
• Maximum instantaneous turn rate is the highest
turn rate achievable by an aircraft. It occurs at
maximum G and normally can only be held in a
dive.

• Maximum sustained turn rate is the highest turn

rate an aircraft can attain without changing speed
or altitude. This metric determines the winner of a
two-circle ow. For many high-thrust jets, this turn
rate is at the limit load (maximum G).

• Minimum sustained turn radius is the smallest

horizontal turn radius that can be maintained at
maximum power. This metric determines the
winner of a one-circle ow. It is usually no more
than 10% larger than minimum instantaneous turn
radius.

• Maximum climb rate is the maximum steady rate of

climb available to an aircraft. It is closely related to
longitudinal acceleration and re ects how well an
aircraft can mender in the vertical plane in a ght.
Note: See individual aircraft pages for known problems with
performance models. 10
fi
fl
fl
fl
fi
 Comparing Energy Maneuverability
at a Glance
30
Sustained turns
Red exclusive
Blue exclusive
Fights between aircraft with signi cant
performance di erences often boil down to
Turn rate Red has higher Ps
º/s
a contest of turn performance vs. climb
ΔPs =0
performance. These are best captured by
Blue has higher Ps
thrust-to-weight ratio (T/W) and wing
0
0 1
loading (the ratio of weight to wing area).
Mach number
• Sea level, DCS Dog ghters server fuel settings and The aircraft with a higher T/W should
con guration (5.5 minutes at maximum power) leverage its superior acceleration and climb
• Ps not evaluated for M > 0.8 performance. This means it should favor
• F-14B results not valid for M > 0.6 due to wing sweep
two-circle ows, climbs, dives, extensions,
• Ps di erences only evaluated in mutual envelope
overlap pitchbacks, and lag pursuit.

The aircraft with a wing loading advantage

is assumed to be better in a horizontal
turning ght at lower speed. It should favor
one-circle ows, scissors, yo-yos, and lead
pursuit.

This diagram illustrates the di erence in

envelopes, sustained turn rate, and speci c
excess power between selected pairs of
aircraft. It shows whether an aircraft can
build energy margins in a turning ght or if it
11 is more comfortable in the vertical plane.
fi
ff
fi
fl
fl
ff
fi
ff
fi
fi
fi
Comparing Turn Performance at a Glance
The sustained turn rates shown here are
based on direct observations of turn rate
rather than model predictions. On the
individual aircraft pages later in this
Instantaneous turn document, these will correspond to the
performance orange “observed” curves. When in doubt,
envelope
trust the observed rates over the modeled
rates.

Sustained turn
performance

12
Relative Turn/Climb Tradeoff
These charts slice the EM diagrams along selected G contours. They illustrate how a bandit’s energy may be drained or
how its climb ability may be restricted by pulling moderate sustained G. For example, an F-15C will develop an anergy
advantage over an F-16C if both aircraft are pulling 5 G below 350 knots, but an F-16 that stays above 350 knots can
build an energy advantage over an F-15C. Similarly, an F-15 pulling 5 G above 400 knots can build energy margins over
a Mirage 2000 at the same speed and load factor.

1G 5G

13
Supersonic Jets
 F/A-18C
Wingspan 37 ft / 11 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
1.3
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 78 lb/sqft
SEE NOTES
Test Date 2022-11-13

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Tight turn radius, high climb rates, and high sustained
turn rate make this a versatile dog ghter. This
aircraft’s normal limit load factor is 7.5 G, but this
chart has been extended to 10 G to allow for the G-
limiter override (paddle). Maximum observed
sustained turn rate around 420 KCAS di ers from
model prediction at 500+ KCAS.
15
fi
fi
ff
 F-16C
Wingspan 33 ft / 10 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
1.3
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 90 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-11-14

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Dominant energy ghter, but disadvantaged in
instantaneous turn performance. High fuel fraction
may mean better relative turn performance later in the
ght. G-limiter schedule is not re ected in the upper
part of this diagram and maximum instantaneous
performance may be lower than indicated.
16
fi
fi
fi
fl
 F-15C
Wingspan 43 ft / 13 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
1.3
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 65 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-10-05

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Excellent instantaneous turn performance, climb, and
acceleration, but limited sustained turn performance
compared with ghters of its generation.

17
fi
fi
 F-14B
Wingspan (upswept) 64 ft / 20 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.9
(M = 0.5) SEE NOTES
Wing Loading 96 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-11-15

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Flight model only valid below Mach 0.6 due to wing
sweep schedule. Future versions will resolve these
issues. Best sustained turn observed at 350 KCAS.
Observed maximum Ps > 600 ft/s.

18
fi
 F-14B (flaps)
Wingspan (upswept) 64 ft / 20 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.9
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 96 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-09-06

Solution Con dence Low

Notes
Lowering the landing aps on an F-14B above 250
KCAS will cause damage and leave the wings
permanently unswept, but does grant bene ts to low-
speed turn performance. The additional drag from the
aps leaves the F-14 unable to climb or extend as
quickly.

19
fl
fi
fl
fi
 F-5E
Wingspan 27 ft / 8 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.8
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 75 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-07-05

Solution Con dence High

Notes

20
fi
 M2000C
Wingspan 30 ft / 9 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
1.0
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 47 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-11-23

Solution Con dence High

Notes

21
fi
 JF-17
Wingspan 31 ft / 9 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
1.0
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 68 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-09-27

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Diagram does not capture 6 G limit above Mach 0.85.

22
fi
 Mirage F1CE
Wingspan 28 ft / 9 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.8
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 82 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-11-12

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Combat aps not included in this test

23
fl
fi
 MiG-19P
Wingspan 29 ft / 9 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.5
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 53 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-09-26

Solution Con dence Low

Notes
Low wing loading o set by low maximum coe cient
of lift, resulting in wide minimum turn radius.

24
fi
ff
ffi
 MiG-21bis
Wingspan 20 ft / 7 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.7
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 72 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-09-23

Solution Con dence Low

Notes

25
fi
 MiG-29S
Wingspan 37 ft / 11 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
1.2
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 80 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-11-14

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Similar to F-16C, but better sustained turn
performance at high speed. Vulnerable in one-circle
ows.

26
fl
fi
 Su-27
Wingspan 48 ft / 15 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.9
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 73 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-11-14

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Excellent overall turn performance

27
fi
 Su-33
Wingspan 48 ft / 15 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.9
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 73 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-07-26

Solution Con dence High

Notes

28
fi
Subsonic Jets
 F-86F
Wingspan 37 ft / 11 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.4
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 38 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-08-10

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Low thrust-to-weight ratio is compensated by low
wing loading and high lift-to-drag ratio ((L/D)max ≈ 14)
throughout its envelope. Maximum-performance turns
come with a minimum loss of energy.

30
fi
 MiG-15bis
Wingspan 33 ft / 10 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.5
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 44 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-08-23

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Low wing loading and high lift-to-drag ratio give
exceptional sustained turn performance at low speed,
but with limited margins. G-LOC onset at 7 G.
Sluggish roll rate due to mechanical aileron linkages.

31
fi
 AV8-B NA
Wingspan 30 ft / 9 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.8
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 72 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-11-15 SEE NOTES

Solution Con dence Medium

Notes
No thrust vectoring shown. This aircraft’s aps are
automatically scheduled based on both airspeed and
angle of attack. The techniques used for this chart
can only handle variation with angle of attack. This
means this chart is only valid above 200 KCAS. The
AV-8B can achieve a 1200 ft minimum turn radius
below this speed.
32
fi
fl
 MB-339A
Wingspan 26 ft / 11 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.4
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 36 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-10-28

Solution Con dence High

Notes
Not currently on server. Low wing loading and high lift-to-
drag ratio give exceptional sustained turn performance at
low speed and turn radius competitive with F/A-18C.
Current ight model has structural failure at exactly 8.0 G
regardless of weight.

33
fl
fi
 A-10C II
Wingspan 57 ft / 18 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.3
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 65 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-07-05

Solution Con dence Medium

Notes
A fun novelty in a dog ght, particularly against
opponents with wider turn radii. Tactics in this aircraft
begin with forcing overshoots.

34
fi
fi
 C-101CC
Wingspan 34 ft / 11 m

Thrust-to-Weight Ratio
0.2
(M = 0.5)
Wing Loading 55 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-07-05

Solution Con dence Medium

Notes
Surprisingly poor turn performance for its airframe.
Compressor stalls at moderate angles of attack.

35
fi
Piston-Engine Aircraft
P-51D

Wingspan 36 ft / 11 m

Wing Loading 41 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-07-05

Solution Con dence Low

Notes

37
fi
Spitfire Mk IX

Wingspan 36 ft / 11 m

Wing Loading 33 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-07-05

Solution Con dence Low

Notes
Arguably the best turn ghter in DCS

38
fi
fi
I-16

Wingspan 30 ft / 9 m

Wing Loading 25 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-07-05

Solution Con dence Low

Notes
Tightest turn radius for an armed aircraft in DCS

39
fi
Mosquito FB VI

Wingspan 54 ft / 16 m

Wing Loading 44 lb/sqft

Test Date 2022-07-02

Solution Con dence Low

Notes
Poor dog ght performance, but suitable opponent for
the A-10 and trainer aircraft.

40
fi
fi