F-84E

[[I.B.]-=ViRUS=-]

Даная тема предназначена для сбора ошибок, связанных с F-84E.

[[I.B.]-=ViRUS=-]

Please post any issues connected to F-84E here.

[Dash,Polder]

Master Arm split ON and OFF toggle commands are messed up in the F-84, the Master Arm ON switch turns guns off but leaves radar, the sights, and the rest of it's controlled items on, while the Master Arm OFF toggle turns all items on.  The same set up works correctly in the Mustang, turning cam, guns, and sight off with OFF and on with ON Master Arm.  

[GeorgeVB]

РЛЭ к самолётам серии F-84
https://usaf-sig.org/index.php/references/downloads/4-technical-orders/38-type-specific/115-f-84-republic

[GeorgeVB]

Надеюсь, что автор не сочтёт анализ РЛЭ оффтопом, да и сравнение РЛЭ с моделью самолёта тоже может указать на ошибки 🙂

РЛЭ для самолёта F-84D, но у него такой же двигатель, как у F-84E, и схожие характеристики.

Расчёт топлива в полёте по РЛЭ со стр. 51 (как я такой расчёт понял):

Предположим, что самолёт без подвесного оборудования (1) летит на высоте 15 000 футов (2), поддерживая обороты 85% (3) с приборной скоростью 310 миль/час (4). Миля американская, 1609 м. Такая скорость соответствует истинной скорости 385 миль/час (5), и для снижения с такой высоты до уровня моря потребуется 25 миль (6).

При наличии в баках 300 галлонов топлива (7) самолёт пролетит 450 миль (8), но если немедленно начать набор на 100% (7700 об/мин) и набрать оптимальную высоту 40 000 футов (9) то, поддерживая 96% оборотов можно будет пролететь 710 миль (10)

Если что не так – поправьте! В принципе, РЛЭ и всё с ним связанное можно под спойлер убрать, или поместить в какую-то подтему 🙂

Edited June 26 by GeorgeVB

[NevA]

Возникла непонятка с моделированием прицела A-1 CM на F-84 (ну и на модификации Сейбра с этим прицелом, соответственно), а именно - кнопка электрического  арретирования на руд. Сейчас кнопка работает, фактически, как переключатель - вкл\выкл, однако, в мануале к F-86A, в разделе про использование прицела A-1 CM, написано: "The sight is caged electricaly when the caging button on the trottle grip is held depressed". Формально, реализация нормальная - просто игра держит кнопку нажатой за нас, но это создаёт и некоторые неудобства - в пылу боя легко забыть включено электрическое арретирование или нет и нужно смотреть на кнопку на руд. Если бы кнопка была реализована так, как описано в мануале (подпружиненная кнопка), этой проблемы бы не возникало - держишь назначенную кнопку нажатой и уверен, что прицел арретирован, отпустил в нужный момент - прицел разарретирован.

Edited June 29 by NevA

[Dash,Polder]

Tend to agree with that, a temporary spring loaded button, how could a button like that be pulled out physically without having to look or even take off ones gloves by appearance alone.  The design and positioning says it was so. 

[Rails]

FM issues are as follows from my testing...

I've noticed are the aircraft doesn't seem to respond at all to elevator trim at high speed. Seems like after 50% nose down it doesn't do anything and the aircraft still wants to pitch up. (After much testing I found with my force feedback it's not giving a nose down response with trim above 400-410 mph. The stick is slowing starting to come back to center giving a nose up feeling. If I drop below this speed it'll start giving a nose down feeling to the stick again. Not sure if this is how it should be with it's flight data, but it's what I'm getting. It might be reacting fine with non force feedback sticks as well? I feel like I should still have some trim authority at high speed considering the manual is stating it's necessary when reaching critical mach.)

The stall seems wrong as well, from the manual it should stall straight ahead with no tendency to roll off(I have been flying with tip tanks on and this roll off is in line with the manual. Without tip tanks the roll off is still there in a 2g turn or even a high speed turn, it rolls off opposite of what the tip tanks make it do). 

Reaching critical mach the aircraft should pitch up not down. (Performed multiple dive test and the aircraft just goes into a mach tuck and never pitches up like manual states.)

The speed brake should be giving a pitch up moment, aircraft is pitching down when the speed brake is deployed.

I've also noticed the elevator response seems way to sensitive given it's a mechanical push rod system. It feels like the elevators are boosted like the ailerons, they should feel heavy at low altitudes and lighter as altitude is increased per the manual. This is making the aircraft feel unstable when lining up for a ground attack run or approach for landing, the nose is never settling.

I've also noticed the max range rheostat for the gunsight radar doesn't seem to move when you set it to different distance, and the auto bomb and rocket switches for the radar gunsight aren't working. Not sure if they are fully modeled yet or not?

I also think the drag is not high enough for the speed brake or the aircraft is not modeled with enough drag. Need to perform more testing though.

Edited July 9 by Rails
Did more testing and found further results in red.

[WarmWombat]

I tried a free flight from startup in the F-84 last night, and I suspect the startup sequence is broken. Shortly after the engine starts, it shuts itself off again, but the engine sound keeps running. Applying throttle generates no thrust (the axis is picking up correctly and showing movement in the UI). Pressing E to restart the engine has no effect.

I then tried a flight from the runway with the engine started. Flight was normal, landed and tried to do an engine shutdown. It appears to shut the engine down, but the engine sounds are still running. Pressing E to start up has no effect here as well.

[LuftManu]

8 minutes ago, WarmWombat said:

I tried a free flight from startup in the F-84 last night, and I suspect the startup sequence is broken. Shortly after the engine starts, it shuts itself off again, but the engine sound keeps running. Applying throttle generates no thrust (the axis is picking up correctly and showing movement in the UI). Pressing E to restart the engine has no effect.

I then tried a flight from the runway with the engine started. Flight was normal, landed and tried to do an engine shutdown. It appears to shut the engine down, but the engine sounds are still running. Pressing E to start up has no effect here as well.

Hello! Currently the startup is not working. You need the RPM helper on during startup.
It's reported already! 🙂

 

[AndreiTomescu]

I don't think it's a bug, it's just my fault: can't find how to operate the upper left switch that controls the gunsight aiming regrading guns/bombs // rockets different types.

I've looked in the plane chart, also.

I think i'm getting the ropes with this radar controlled gunsight (almost) , that i find awesome, but that switch eluded me.

Pls help& thank you.

[GeorgeVB]

The pitch axis of the stick in the cockpit moves with a jerk. I set the different axes of my joystick, but the jerk of the lever in the cockpit when moving the stick from the neutral position forward is present for all axes. Other planes don't have such a sudden stick movement. Has there ever been such a problem? I have a VPC CDT-AEROMAX Flightstick, and its movement is very smooth.

[Leifr]

3 hours ago, AndreiTomescu said:

I don't think it's a bug, it's just my fault: can't find how to operate the upper left switch that controls the gunsight aiming regrading guns/bombs // rockets different types.

I've looked in the plane chart, also.

I think i'm getting the ropes with this radar controlled gunsight (almost) , that i find awesome, but that switch eluded me.

Pls help& thank you.

It isn't functional yet unfortunately, it really needs to be.

 

57 minutes ago, GeorgeVB said:

The pitch axis of the stick in the cockpit moves with a jerk. I set the different axes of my joystick, but the jerk of the lever in the cockpit when moving the stick from the neutral position forward is present for all axes. Other planes don't have such a sudden stick movement. Has there ever been such a problem? I have a VPC CDT-AEROMAX Flightstick, and its movement is very smooth.

Yes, I've noticed that too. The F-84 is incredibly sensitive on pitch, and will quite violently nose-up with the most slender of movements.

[AndreiTomescu]

13 minutes ago, Leifr said:

The F-84 is incredibly sensitive on pitch, and will quite violently nose-up with the most slender of movements.

true. noticed that also. thought it's just like this, thou. also noticed that the higher and faster i go, this behaviour decreases

[GrumpyGnome]

@WarmWombat

Take a few seconds to get out of the cockpit. Then climb back in and fire the bird up. 

[Czech693]

You also need the RPM limiter on to use E to shut the engine off.

[K4tzenfr3und]

A checklist for the Thunderjet - for simulator use only 🙂

F84E - Thunderjet Checklist - Early Access.pdfF84E - Thunderjet Checklist - Early Access.pdfF84E - Thunderjet Checklist - Early Access.pdf

[Rails]

When you get a flap rods jammed message you can still move the flaps up and down.

[WWGeezer]

I was working up start up procedures for this aircraft but found once I hit engine start, moving the throttle up from 0% did not advance the throttle percentage unless you had turned on the "Helper Throttle RPM Limiter".   

If that is turned on and you push the engine start button it automatically slides the throttle to 0% and after the engine starts the message "Throttle Pawl Locked" comes on and than your throttle works.

Is there some button push I am missing to get the throttle to engage or do you always have to enable this "helper" to get it to work?

[Leifr]

On 6/26/2026 at 4:34 AM, Dash,Polder said:

Master Arm split ON and OFF toggle commands are messed up in the F-84, the Master Arm ON switch turns guns off but leaves radar, the sights, and the rest of it's controlled items on, while the Master Arm OFF toggle turns all items on.  The same set up works correctly in the Mustang, turning cam, guns, and sight off with OFF and on with ON Master Arm.  

Hi Dash! 

Yes, it is a little conflicting when one considers the name of the keybind functions as well. Master Arm ON and Master Arm OFF would be better served as a single revolving toggle option (in keybinds) for aircraft such as the F-84 with a three way toggle switch. If you press Master Arm OFF it turns all systems and guns on, and then press again to correctly turn everything off (middle toggle position). If you press Master Arm ON, it simply turns on the gun camera and sights.

[migmadmarine]

Historical doctrine question here, but looking at photos of the F-80 and F-84 in Korea, it seems like they pretty much always used tanks on the outboard station, which makes decent sense to me. But what were the written regs or doctrine on this? Were there many recorded instances of flying shorter sorties and using the outboard stations for bombs/rockets? Similarly, on ground attack missions were tanks to be dropped every time they ran dry, or retained unless the need for heavy maneuvers or air combat arose? 

[Gunfreak]

4 hours ago, migmadmarine said:

Historical doctrine question here, but looking at photos of the F-80 and F-84 in Korea, it seems like they pretty much always used tanks on the outboard station, which makes decent sense to me. But what were the written regs or doctrine on this? Were there many recorded instances of flying shorter sorties and using the outboard stations for bombs/rockets? Similarly, on ground attack missions were tanks to be dropped every time they ran dry, or retained unless the need for heavy maneuvers or air combat arose? 

From what I've read the F84 was more stable with wing tanks l much like the F104 would be)  and they generally always flew with then for that reason.

I don't think they would drop them during ground attack. As the aircraft was more stable with and it didn't hamper preformance that much. 

I'm guessing only in air to air would the F84 drop tanks(and yes they to escorted bombers at certain times in Korea) 

 

[migmadmarine]

Are you conflating the 84 and 80 there? I think the 84 wasn't able to jettison the tip tanks in flight to my knowledge. 

[MajorMagee]

1950: The Peacetime Deficit

• Actual Production Rate: ~200 to 500 tanks per month globally.
• The Reality: When the war began in June 1950, domestic manufacturing of external fuel tanks was virtually nonexistent due to a post-WWII defense drawdown. The F-84 wings deployed to Korea rapidly exhausted existing peacetime reserves within the first 60 days, forcing the U.S. Air Force to scramble to establish brand-new manufacturing contracts.

1951: The Logistics Bottleneck

• Actual Production Rate: Ramped up from 1,500 to roughly 4,000 tanks per month by late winter.
• The Reality: Republic Aviation and subcontracted automotive manufacturers faced crippling aluminum shortages. Despite hitting a 4,000-per-month threshold, this was a drop in the bucket compared to the FEAF's consumption. In mid-1951, F-84 operations faced near-grounding crisis levels, forcing theater commanders to ration sorties because theater consumption was hovering around 8,000+ tanks monthly.

1952: The Stamped-Steel Pivot

• Actual Production Rate: Exploded to 10,000+ tanks per month by mid-1952.
• The Reality: This was the year the crisis was solved. The Department of Defense expanded production contracts beyond aircraft builders to heavy consumer appliance and industrial stamping plants. By modifying the design to utilize stamped low-grade steel, factories in the U.S. were finally able to achieve the true mass-production volumes required.

1953: Overseas Local Procurement

• Actual Production Rate: Stabilized at 12,000 to 15,000 tanks per month until the July armistice.
• The Reality: To bypass the grueling logistical lag of shipping thousands of hollow, bulky metal tanks across the Pacific Ocean, the U.S. began heavily utilizing local procurement. They contracted reconstructed Japanese manufacturing plants to build the heavy wingtip and under-wing drop tanks directly in theater. This eliminated the shipping bottleneck and finally allowed supply to safely exceed the daily combat drop rate until the end of the conflict.

[LukeFF]

15 hours ago, migmadmarine said:

Historical doctrine question here, but looking at photos of the F-80 and F-84 in Korea, it seems like they pretty much always used tanks on the outboard station, which makes decent sense to me. But what were the written regs or doctrine on this? Were there many recorded instances of flying shorter sorties and using the outboard stations for bombs/rockets? Similarly, on ground attack missions were tanks to be dropped every time they ran dry, or retained unless the need for heavy maneuvers or air combat arose? 

F-80s would carry bombs on the outboard pylons if the target was close enough.