1:56: Yes, there is. The force (thrust) produced by a turbofan engine can be determined by the equation: F = m_e v_e - m_o v_o + (P_e -P_o) A where: F= force in Newtons m_e= exhaust mass flow (how much mass per unit time the engine is spitting out v_e= exhaust velocity m_o= intake mass flow v_o= intake velocity (dependent on IAS) P_e= exhaust pressure (the closer to ambient pressure, the better. The engine nozzle helps with this) P_o= ambient pressure A = exhaust cross sectional area From there, we can set an arbitrary distance across which the force is applied to get work (so long as the arbitrary distance is the same for the F-14 and CCX, its irrelevent): W=fd Power is defined as work done over time. Therefore, if we set an arbitrary (but equal) length of time (i.e. one second,) we can get power: P=w/t And of course, PWR is defined as power over weight: PWR=P/m So the full expanded equation is: PWR = (((m_e v_e - m_o v_o + (P_e -P_o) A) d) / t) / m Calculating mass flow rate is a simple prospect: m_e,o = p * v * a Without being able to directly measure the velocity of both the intake and exhaust gases, or measure the exhaust area for each combination of throttle setting and altitude, its not possible to determine the F-14's TWR; there isn't enough information. But it is physically possible. For the car, its a simple case of dividing its power by its mass. Its PWR is about 0.254.
When I was at RAF Abingdon we had a race between a Sepecat Jaguar and a Jaguar Le Mans winning car driven by Martin Brundle. It was embarrassingly one sided!
I remember that a german motorcycle magazine actually did something like that in the 80ies, a yamaha turbo bike versus an alpha jet. As far as I recall the alpha jet won by catching up to the bike on the last few dozen meters.
Cap, yah did it wrong for the jets. Should have been “car travels 1 mile along the runway, before turning around and heading for the finish line, while the Jet is to take off, climb for a MILE(not 10,000ft), perform a half Cuban turn and dive back to pass the start point at a height of 100ft (30m); and all without going supersonic.
He's about 5k above ASL as-is and an additional 5k is an approximate additional mile when he's initiating his turn at that altitude and will still be traveling up as he's turning back over towards the ground.
@@kill3stdayz910 correct. If he’s trying replicate the Top Gear Euro fighter typhoon challenge. Spool up, full afterburner, release brakes, rotate, enter vertical climb until he’s ~1 mile off the deck, then immediately begin half Cuban turn reversing direction back towards finish. And get someone that can handle the tomcat to fly the challenge, both the F-14B/D can accelerate in a vertical climb right after they rotate.
It’s also something even the F-14A, perhaps with a little less fuel load than in the test(shes got big tanks) should be able to do with ease despite the underpowered engines. None of the tests in this video involving the tomcat looked right. Especially true as it was a ‘B’ model and at that fuel load shouldn’t have needed half the distance used to go vertical. A very similar maneuver was performed for the shaw of Iran when deciding between the f14 and f15. The tomcats low level agility and superior performance won the contract along with standing on her tail on takeoff climbing vertically. Probably only carried enough fuel to complete a short demonstration hop. So stripped down to the bare essentials in order to squeeze every ounce of performance out of her but still.
Sorry but not equal, the Tomcat is traveling a lot further. If you notice it travels nearly a mile before going vertical, the return journey not so much. So to sum up the aircraft have to travel both in horizontal and vertical, but the vertical is over two miles alone.
Actually you can make a rough estimate of lbs. thrust to hp. Being 1 horsepower is the ability to move 550 lbs. vertically 1 foot in 1 second. It can roughly estimated that 60,000 lbs. thrust equates to about 11,000 hp
@@emmata98 Hi Patrick. I understand what you are saying. And they are different aspects of the same thing, power. I first started wondering seeing hi-po jet fighters take off from a standing start, knowing their rough weight. Like a Thunderbirds F-16 you know isn't loaded down with armament and other combat equipment. So you could figure out weight and time start to lift-off you can do rough calculation of horsepower knowing take-off speed. So I came-up with this idea of taking what a horsepower was and dividing that into lbs. thrust. One is static and one is over time so I move the decimal. They both seem to come out relatively close. I suppose the other way would be to use wattage, 747 = 1 hp. I know it's not science but it does give reasonably agreeable numbers. So there ya go.
@@lencac7952 you then measure acceleration, not hp, wutch are vastly different, especially since the Königsegg measures it at the flyweel, nit tyres as it should be.
You need air speed to get propulsive power from thrust. Edit: you can roughly estimate net flow energization from thrust, but that's not a useful number.
Hey Reapers admits all these horrible things happening all over the world thanks for making the content yall do. Helps take the stress off please keep kicking ass.
can you do a u2 spy plane landing with the chase car ( calling out the altitude to touchdown)? I have seen it many times before in my travels with the RAF.
It's a really silly comparison since the two machines are taking different courses (even if they're on the same track for a few seconds). It's like saying, "I can walk the length of the runway and back faster than an F22 on the same runway can fly from LA to NYC. I must be faster than an F22."
I'm pretty sure this is just a fun little test and it's not to empirically state which is faster, just faster in this particular drag race style setup. However, the CCX is hilariously inaccurate compared to the real thing. It does not take hundreds of feet to turn.
Pre-watch comments: I’ve seen these before at air shows (although not a Koneg) and usually the plane is initially slower with the car out accelerating the jet, but the car only wins if the race is kept short.
I remember an episode of Top Gear where they put a Bugatti Veyron vs. an RAF Typhoon.... awesome stuff. Actually sounds like an idea for a skill competition @Grim Reapers 😁
well.... the Veyron was faster and had brakes. Even airbrakes. And i just loved when the jet thundered over Hammond in the end. A game simply can't reproduce that.
Get all your guys together. Pick two captains. Captains take turns picking sides. One side is MiG 15s, the other half is Sabers. Guns only. Last team with a flying vehicle wins. Alternate version, WarBirds Mustangs versus Messersmidts or whatever
Fun video, but there’s a problem… you’re testing in nevada at 4500ft AMSL, and so air density is lower which has a significant impact on engine performance.. you might want to consider redoing the test at sea-level (or higher air density in general) and see if the results stay the same..
Hard to do because the air wolf chopper was never portrayed properly - in the opening dialog of the air wolf movie/pilot, it’s described as being like a chopper at lower speeds but capable of locking its rotor and using the fuselage as a lifting body while using the ramjets for supersonic speed. So the real air wolf would have been closer to the choppers in the Arnie movie “the sixth day” which could lock their rotors and turn into jets. You could never test this kind of speed I. DCS with a chopper because lift is achieved by the rotor spinning this means there is a speed of the chopper at which the retreating rotor blade is technically stationary, and at mach it would actually be traveling backwards - but a chopper becomes unstable with retreating blade stall long before reaching these speeds, and this is the limit on chopper max velocities.
The car would have a thrust:weight way better but becomes power limited at about 150km/h the tomcat maintained the thrust:weight pretty much regardless of speed.
A mile is 5280 feet. Because you said you were at 4,500 feet, you only needed to go to 9700 odd feet. Start coming back down waaaay before that and just touch the 9700 mark. However, Nevada is mostly in the 2 or 3 thousand feet of altitude range and Henderson field in Vegas is 2200 or so. The plane has already done the horizontal mile and now it has to do a vertical mile? why? It's a jet. Let it be better. Use that better as a cudgel and end the opposition with finality.
This begs to question, does DCS have boats that you could race?? I'm thinking something small like a Cyclone-class patrol craft or perhaps a cigar boat?? As for automobiles, how about a Jeep race? Or HMMV race? or similar light armored vehicles?? To spice it up, you could have someone trying to blast targets towed behind them?
Do this race but the jet only has to go high enough to loop out but has to go through both gates on the way back like the car. Would be cool to see what changes.
Hahahaha 😂 Just gotta love this episode! Since am Swedish and "Koenigg-o-fil" i just would love to you see you tried The Regera ond the new Jesko both with almost twice the power as the old CCX😎👍🏻
2:30 - sorry Cap, but internal combustion engines (ICB) are incredibly inefficient (even modern engines). Taking into account friction, heat loss, etc., approx. 70% of the power generated by the ICB is lost by the time it reaches the wheels.
"It's slower than it should be", he says, as he flies without a damn canopy... gee, I wonder why there's there's bunch of extra drag when you don't have a canopy. I don't even get why raising the canopy is something you want to do.
If I am doing this right, the F-14 is travelling twice as far as the car, car goes 2 miles but the plane travels horizontally almost to the first set of cones then goes up and down 2 miles then has to travel horizontally another mile....
I'm sorry, but I'm a car guy too, and modeling a car in DCS would be like modeling a plane in the Formula 1 game. The brakes, downforce, and turning rate of the CCX is just way, way off. Fun nonetheless, thank you.
Tonight on Top Grim - Cap does a burn out, RC does an Afterburn and Hammond crashes in a burning wreckage.
cap spins in f-22
And Car Ejects the "Driver" out.
lol
Grim Reapers meat Top Gear and Top Gun
Top Grim.... I like that, it should be (or become) a thing 😁👍
I never realized how massive the f-14 is when compared to a car.
Here is real life comparison in the traffic: ruclips.net/video/4QnuzsB5hG8/видео.html
Very interesting video from a very experienced test pilot.
@Mike Williams yes? and? the F-14 is massive compared to other 4th generation fighters such as the F-16. its a beast.
@Robert S And Heavy bombers are just massive and A-10s are huge... There is even a photo of the A-10s gun out of the plan dwarfing a classivc VW bug.
Big as a bomber.
@Mike Williams Look at the F-5, bigger doesn't mean better, and that's certainly the case with combat aircraft
When the F-14 was behind as you approached the finish line you missed a great opportunity to strafe him with your 20 mm cannon.
ah yes
😂 I always wished the pilot would fire at the car for the fun of it.
Oh yeah, Top Gear vibes.
My first thought too.....
ruclips.net/video/tIcimB13bk0/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/luH-rOYixY8/видео.html
Me too this is definitely something that top gear would do
@@dylansykes3676 They did do it. ruclips.net/video/7NZ9X9A2efA/видео.html
Euro Fighter v. Bugatti
Fun stuff!! Request: Race wheeled helicopters on the ground, Blackhawk, Apache, KA-50!
oooOOO
Cap at 9:28 had me rolling. "This is literally what DCS is made for" I agree. Amazing video. RC seems sleepy, and I feel him.
The HUD in the car is hilarious. Wonder if it also has an RWR that detects speed traps.
yes!
@@grimreapers Never get a speeding ticket if you remember your HARMs!
The newest CCXR has the latest in jamming technology! no more pesky speed traps! Be the envy of major goverments!
“My race will be on the ground because I’m a car” 😆 that made me laugh more than it should have
It's true.
@@grimreapers it is indeed.
The stig made a damn good attempt setting a new altitude record with ccx
I think we need a comparison on the carrier deck.
agree
How about a race where every lap requires a touch-and-go on a carrier deck?
1:56: Yes, there is.
The force (thrust) produced by a turbofan engine can be determined by the equation:
F = m_e v_e - m_o v_o + (P_e -P_o) A
where:
F= force in Newtons
m_e= exhaust mass flow (how much mass per unit time the engine is spitting out
v_e= exhaust velocity
m_o= intake mass flow
v_o= intake velocity (dependent on IAS)
P_e= exhaust pressure (the closer to ambient pressure, the better. The engine nozzle helps with this)
P_o= ambient pressure
A = exhaust cross sectional area
From there, we can set an arbitrary distance across which the force is applied to get work (so long as the arbitrary distance is the same for the F-14 and CCX, its irrelevent):
W=fd
Power is defined as work done over time. Therefore, if we set an arbitrary (but equal) length of time (i.e. one second,) we can get power:
P=w/t
And of course, PWR is defined as power over weight:
PWR=P/m
So the full expanded equation is:
PWR = (((m_e v_e - m_o v_o + (P_e -P_o) A) d) / t) / m
Calculating mass flow rate is a simple prospect:
m_e,o = p * v * a
Without being able to directly measure the velocity of both the intake and exhaust gases, or measure the exhaust area for each combination of throttle setting and altitude, its not possible to determine the F-14's TWR; there isn't enough information. But it is physically possible.
For the car, its a simple case of dividing its power by its mass. Its PWR is about 0.254.
ooOO :)
Sorry guys this been done recently and many years ago on Top Gear with RAF jets for real
For vertical races the tomcat is doing 2 + root 2 miles. the car just 2. No wonder the panes losing!
When I was at RAF Abingdon we had a race between a Sepecat Jaguar and a Jaguar Le Mans winning car driven by Martin Brundle. It was embarrassingly one sided!
cool
I love the car alerting him for bingo fuel in the CCX at 12:55 haha
Thanks for the funny compilation between Car and Jet, Also you got me in the "Spinning Raptor"🤣
Some say his head is a solar panel for a drumming machine and that he has a birthmark in the shape of an F-18, all we know is...he's called The Cap
lol good Lord... x
The brakes are obviously really poorly modelled in the CCX. Even from 200+ mph it should stop very quickly.
I think it's actually a plane with plane brakes, just has a car 3d model.
@@grimreapers Can it fly?
I remember that a german motorcycle magazine actually did something like that in the 80ies, a yamaha turbo bike versus an alpha jet. As far as I recall the alpha jet won by catching up to the bike on the last few dozen meters.
Same thing happened in Top Gear when a mclarren raced an F-35
A top fuel funny car would be funny to see, doubt they have a model in DCS for that.
A gripen comparison would be appropriate considering that Koeningsegg uses the logo from a Swedish airforce squadron (the ghost)
Your experimental content is what keeps me coming back every day!
Cap, yah did it wrong for the jets. Should have been “car travels 1 mile along the runway, before turning around and heading for the finish line, while the Jet is to take off, climb for a MILE(not 10,000ft), perform a half Cuban turn and dive back to pass the start point at a height of 100ft (30m); and all without going supersonic.
He's about 5k above ASL as-is and an additional 5k is an approximate additional mile when he's initiating his turn at that altitude and will still be traveling up as he's turning back over towards the ground.
@@jamison884 He's saying the jet should have immediately climbed instead of travelling the runway then up.
@@kill3stdayz910 correct. If he’s trying replicate the Top Gear Euro fighter typhoon challenge. Spool up, full afterburner, release brakes, rotate, enter vertical climb until he’s ~1 mile off the deck, then immediately begin half Cuban turn reversing direction back towards finish.
And get someone that can handle the tomcat to fly the challenge, both the F-14B/D can accelerate in a vertical climb right after they rotate.
It’s also something even the F-14A, perhaps with a little less fuel load than in the test(shes got big tanks) should be able to do with ease despite the underpowered engines. None of the tests in this video involving the tomcat looked right. Especially true as it was a ‘B’ model and at that fuel load shouldn’t have needed half the distance used to go vertical.
A very similar maneuver was performed for the shaw of Iran when deciding between the f14 and f15. The tomcats low level agility and superior performance won the contract along with standing on her tail on takeoff climbing vertically. Probably only carried enough fuel to complete a short demonstration hop. So stripped down to the bare essentials in order to squeeze every ounce of performance out of her but still.
This was a fun one. Should do this again, but collab with Failrace, putting Alex up against Kortana. Just a fun idea on my end haha
I think leaving the canopy open in the F-15 probably slowed you down a bit . . .
Sorry but not equal, the Tomcat is traveling a lot further. If you notice it travels nearly a mile before going vertical, the return journey not so much. So to sum up the aircraft have to travel both in horizontal and vertical, but the vertical is over two miles alone.
Yes fair point.
2:41response to possible outcome. Priceless
Oooh this is gonna be a FUN video to watch
the heat haze from the CCX's 'engines'
lol
The content I never thought I needed. What about jets v a moderately price car? Supercars v S400 IADS?
WONDERFUL suggestions. isn't it "reasonably" priced car?
Well, im now sure the CCX is the slowest in the vertical.
Turns out, RC was correct with his predictions
hmmmm. yes...
Actually you can make a rough estimate of lbs. thrust to hp. Being 1 horsepower is the ability to move 550 lbs. vertically 1 foot in 1 second. It can roughly estimated that 60,000 lbs. thrust equates to about 11,000 hp
Nah, those are physically different units, so you really can't compare that.
@@emmata98 Hi Patrick. I understand what you are saying. And they are different aspects of the same thing, power. I first started wondering seeing hi-po jet fighters take off from a standing start, knowing their rough weight. Like a Thunderbirds F-16 you know isn't loaded down with armament and other combat equipment. So you could figure out weight and time start to lift-off you can do rough calculation of horsepower knowing take-off speed. So I came-up with this idea of taking what a horsepower was and dividing that into lbs. thrust. One is static and one is over time so I move the decimal. They both seem to come out relatively close. I suppose the other way would be to use wattage, 747 = 1 hp.
I know it's not science but it does give reasonably agreeable numbers. So there ya go.
@@lencac7952 you then measure acceleration, not hp, wutch are vastly different, especially since the Königsegg measures it at the flyweel, nit tyres as it should be.
You need air speed to get propulsive power from thrust.
Edit: you can roughly estimate net flow energization from thrust, but that's not a useful number.
that's funny... don't remember the Koenigsegg CCX sounding like a Yak-52 =P
Amazing cars the Koenigsegg series
Epic as usual
Great video
Loving this! thought... Is 10,000 feet not nearly 2 vertical miles?
runway is 5000ft ASL
@@grimreapers That's a big 10-4 villymanillychillywilly.
this was a good one:)
Hey Reapers admits all these horrible things happening all over the world thanks for making the content yall do. Helps take the stress off please keep kicking ass.
Agree with your attitude.
Love it! Fun . Grand-Tour Style baby!
CAP’s supercar improvements, sunroof and drogue chute!
luxury extras: IRST and SCHLEM
agree
LOLzzz Jolly good show, Chaps!
can you do a u2 spy plane landing with the chase car ( calling out the altitude to touchdown)? I have seen it many times before in my travels with the RAF.
sure
Cap has Transcended into Grim Reapers Jeremy Clarkson. You love to see it. ❤️
Was inevitable.
It's a really silly comparison since the two machines are taking different courses (even if they're on the same track for a few seconds). It's like saying, "I can walk the length of the runway and back faster than an F22 on the same runway can fly from LA to NYC. I must be faster than an F22."
I'm pretty sure this is just a fun little test and it's not to empirically state which is faster, just faster in this particular drag race style setup. However, the CCX is hilariously inaccurate compared to the real thing. It does not take hundreds of feet to turn.
@@jamison884 Well yes fun, silly or not, is what GR is all about!
1st one to 20,000 feet wins!
Exponential is my favorite word
I love your tests and crazy antics! Better than a team of Wombats!
Pre-watch comments: I’ve seen these before at air shows (although not a Koneg) and usually the plane is initially slower with the car out accelerating the jet, but the car only wins if the race is kept short.
The car needs a handbrake modeled for the half way turn!
So fun to watch!
Want f16 version
This was so cool, when they dis that IRL with a Typhoon
It's so funny how Cap says aluminum. Funny Brits!
if you start turning over at 10000 you're gonna go way past it while turning over
you have to start pulling at 8000 and a bit
I remember an episode of Top Gear where they put a Bugatti Veyron vs. an RAF Typhoon.... awesome stuff.
Actually sounds like an idea for a skill competition @Grim Reapers 😁
Up you Top Gear...... Super Cap & the Reapers do it better. Love this.
well.... the Veyron was faster and had brakes. Even airbrakes.
And i just loved when the jet thundered over Hammond in the end. A game simply can't reproduce that.
when you say tuning was it mapping or building/modding you did?
I ran Emperor Tuning. I did remaps for 1989-2004 Nissan Silvias/Skylines/Pulsars etc.
Also reminds me of “Fast 9” when that Pontiac Fiero raced against a MIG-15.
RC needs to start burning the engine before releasing brakes and retract wings.
Get all your guys together. Pick two captains. Captains take turns picking sides. One side is MiG 15s, the other half is Sabers. Guns only. Last team with a flying vehicle wins. Alternate version, WarBirds Mustangs versus Messersmidts or whatever
Fun video, but there’s a problem… you’re testing in nevada at 4500ft AMSL, and so air density is lower which has a significant impact on engine performance.. you might want to consider redoing the test at sea-level (or higher air density in general) and see if the results stay the same..
why not the f-16?
Nice heat blur from the Konniggsegg lol
Remember that winwing technology is your ultimate hardware solution :) 160
BBC Top Gear did this with a Veyron vs Eurofighter
When you eject do you have control over the man? If you do it would be cool to do invasion tactics
Would love to see you fact check the specs for air wolf, 300knots at sea level to Mach 1+ at 65000ft in 9.6 seconds.
Hard to do because the air wolf chopper was never portrayed properly - in the opening dialog of the air wolf movie/pilot, it’s described as being like a chopper at lower speeds but capable of locking its rotor and using the fuselage as a lifting body while using the ramjets for supersonic speed. So the real air wolf would have been closer to the choppers in the Arnie movie “the sixth day” which could lock their rotors and turn into jets. You could never test this kind of speed I. DCS with a chopper because lift is achieved by the rotor spinning this means there is a speed of the chopper at which the retreating rotor blade is technically stationary, and at mach it would actually be traveling backwards - but a chopper becomes unstable with retreating blade stall long before reaching these speeds, and this is the limit on chopper max velocities.
ah yes, a hypercar in a combat simulator
It's combat alright, combat against physics to be going this fast hehe
The car would have a thrust:weight way better but becomes power limited at about 150km/h the tomcat maintained the thrust:weight pretty much regardless of speed.
The car is always faster at the start but then gets overtaken.
I wonder how a English Electric Lightning would do in a similar race.
How about using one of those rocket/jet cars that look like a missile vs a F-22 ?
Amazing idea!
5:02 what if the F-14 took the wings back?
agree
Could you recreate the cannon run and bombing scenes from TopGun 2 when you watch it? Saw the early access yesterday and thought of a DCS recreation
That CCX is way too fast. 0-200mph in 14 seconds? It should be over 20 seconds.
Maybe If it was an agera rs or something
What about a drag race between fighter jets? Have you done this yet?
Lots of drag racing in here: ruclips.net/p/PL3kOAM2N1YJdWdOqxZeFtibVLTmi1vpxS
Hear that Merlin in first gear the whole race.
lol
The Grim Reapers at there BEST XD
Damn I have a Porsche With Miami Blue color as well..Such a fun
A mile is 5280 feet. Because you said you were at 4,500 feet, you only needed to go to 9700 odd feet. Start coming back down waaaay before that and just touch the 9700 mark. However, Nevada is mostly in the 2 or 3 thousand feet of altitude range and Henderson field in Vegas is 2200 or so. The plane has already done the horizontal mile and now it has to do a vertical mile? why? It's a jet. Let it be better. Use that better as a cudgel and end the opposition with finality.
You borrowed this challenge concept from Top Gear UK, where Richard Hammond races a Eurofighter Typhoon in a Bugatti Veyron in the same format.
Correction: we stole it.
I say borrowed because you're not claiming to have originally thought up the concept yourself.
Top Gear did a similar test but they used the Euro Fighter but can't remember the car or who won?
This begs to question, does DCS have boats that you could race?? I'm thinking something small like a Cyclone-class patrol craft or perhaps a cigar boat??
As for automobiles, how about a Jeep race? Or HMMV race? or similar light armored vehicles?? To spice it up, you could have someone trying to blast targets towed behind them?
Cool
Fun watch.
It’s a great day!
Do this race but the jet only has to go high enough to loop out but has to go through both gates on the way back like the car. Would be cool to see what changes.
Heck ya
Did u have to add a wing to the KK?
RC should put his wings back.
agree
Was that car spoils from the campaign against the warlord?
Top gear did this with a euro fighter. The konensig barley lost.
Hahahaha 😂 Just gotta love this episode!
Since am Swedish and "Koenigg-o-fil" i just would love to you see you tried The Regera ond the new Jesko both with almost twice the power as the old CCX😎👍🏻
2:30 - sorry Cap, but internal combustion engines (ICB) are incredibly inefficient (even modern engines). Taking into account friction, heat loss, etc., approx. 70% of the power generated by the ICB is lost by the time it reaches the wheels.
Yes completely agree BUT my understanding is that even so, it is still more efficient than a jet engine. Would enjoy discussing this with you.
link for the supercar mod please?
ah yes, dcs world, the perfect game to simulate a Koenigsegg CCX
"It's slower than it should be", he says, as he flies without a damn canopy... gee, I wonder why there's there's bunch of extra drag when you don't have a canopy. I don't even get why raising the canopy is something you want to do.
If I am doing this right, the F-14 is travelling twice as far as the car, car goes 2 miles but the plane travels horizontally almost to the first set of cones then goes up and down 2 miles then has to travel horizontally another mile....
20th century edition. Spitfire vs morgan!
TopGear vibes!
I'm sorry, but I'm a car guy too, and modeling a car in DCS would be like modeling a plane in the Formula 1 game. The brakes, downforce, and turning rate of the CCX is just way, way off. Fun nonetheless, thank you.
Just got my WinWing payment email today. Looking forward to the upgrade!
Orion 2 HOTAS MAX
:)
Make a Drag race with Mig 29 , sukhoi 30 mki and Su-57 ...