-
Posts
983 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Robin_Hood
-
Radio presets channels 19 & 20 not working
Robin_Hood replied to Robin_Hood's topic in Resolved Bugs
A little bump, just in case it has been unnoticed. The problem is still here in 1.5.3, don't know about other versions (but I didn't see it mentionned in patch notes either). Not particularily high priority, as there are still 18 channels to use, but just so you know it's there ;) -
When entering coordinates into INS is possible, it will be great indeed for this. However, AI JTACs give MGRS coordinates ; I don't know if there is any way to change that. As for releasing without target designation, it might not be possible in the future (I am not sure), because GBUs are released in CCRP, and although right now they are released manually by pickle, when fully implemented they should release automatically at the computed release point. Therefore I am not sure it will be possible at all to release a GBU without target designation (notwithstanding the fact that releasing on a designation is much more precise, which helps even a guided bomb). Concerning AFAC, I have not made many tests, but the very few I did were wholly unsuccessfull.
-
The A-10C has ECM, which is still at the very basic electronic warfare modeling level
-
Maybe i'll help, during recent testing (to try the no-crash GBU dropping in 1.5.3), I have had trouble having JTACs lasing also (they give Type 3 control, No mark). I have finally managed to have it working by replacing the unarmed HMMWV by a TOW-armed HMMWV, and that guy (placed in the same position) did agree to lase. So, this might be a thing to try ;)
-
I'm all for french accents. After all, french people are not particularly known for their perfectly accentless English :P
-
I think radar antenna left and right are not present in the Mirage 2000C (they may be leftovers from FC3). AFAIK, the antenna azimuth moves left or right with by TDC movement (scan zone is centered on the TDC).
-
Depending on the situation, a French fighter pilot might very well actually speak English, since it is the langage of NATO. Especially speaking with a JTAC or AWACS.
-
Yes, it is important to understand that PFM and AFM are internal Eagle Dynamics designations (Belsimtek also use them but they are close partners to ED). SFM is also an ED-designation, but it is available to third parties. EFM is any third-party flight model plugged into DCS. It does not presuppose anything on the accuracy of the flight model. Of course, most if not all third parties strive towards a PFM-level flight model. Whether they succed or not is anyone's guess, bar an official word from Eagle Dynamics.
-
Ok, I don't really know about the TPM. Anyway, apparently it isn't really a big issue if you can't have partial flaps
-
Just to say, I don't know about flap usage in the F-86F, but in any case you definietely do not need a separate switch position for flaps neutral. IIRC, flaps up and flaps down only operate the flaps as long as you press the switch ; when you let go, the flaps stop where they are. Same as the airbrakes. EDIT: confirmed As per the F-86F -1, there is at least one situation that requires partial flaps : when carrying certain ordnance the flaps should not be lowered more than 20°. But I think the ordnance in question is not available for the F-86F in DCS World.
-
Air brakes: are they supposed to be "On/OFF" only?
Robin_Hood replied to Dexter092's topic in M-2000
This is true of other aircraft as well, not only Deltas. A famous example is the Sabre Dance video, where an F-100 is trapped in this situation, too low to get our of the trap ; it does not end well. Concerning the saying, I think the confusion may be that the very phrasing can be somewhat imprecise. It is not that "Throttle is what controls altitude and Stick is what controls airspeed", but more that "You should control altitude (better, sink rate / glide path) with the throttle and airspeed (better, AoA) with the stick". This way it does not imply that throttle has no effect on airspeed, it simply tells that the primary means of controling AoA is the stick and the primary means of controlling glide path is the throttle. I am not sure how it is on the Mirage, but some FBW aircraft do in fact maintain (at low airspeeds) AoA for stick position (instead of, usually, Gs at higher airspeeds). In this case, you are very much setting your AoA with the stick and then adjust the throttle so that your glide path is right. -
I noticed that the preset channels 19 and 20 on both radios (UHF and V/UHF) do not work properly. They do not tune to the frequency selected in the Mission Editor, but to what appears to be random frequencies (like 389.02). The frequencies change when the mission is restarted.
-
I'm pretty sure Hummingbird did his testing in 2.0, as he says he has "re-tested" the turn rate and it is "still" wrong. Hmm, this seems way off, not only of the Fighter symposium chart, but of the BMS one as well, which says about 5.8 G with a heavier aircraft. Obviously the FM is still very much WIP. I cannot test myself because I do not have 2.0, so I could only test the older 1.5 behaviour. I also noticed that the Mirage vs F-16 comparison you gave (hadn't seen them anywhere, thank you!) give a rather lower turn rate than the Fighter symposium chart in what seems to be roughly the same conditions (11°/s sustained vs 12.5°/s) ; internal fuel is not given though. Once again, I am not assuming anything on the trustworthiness of various sources, I am trying to look at every available source before making an opinion, since we do not have official Dassault or Armée de l'Air sanctionned charts (or from any country that operates the Mirage 2000C). I still think it is easier for everybody if we strive to tests the charts in the same conditions they show (loadout, fuel, altitude, atmospheric conditions, etc...).
-
Perhaps because the flight model is still WIP, or RAZBAM are not basing it exclusively on these charts. Go to your test altitude, around your desired Mach number, then begin a turn (trying to keep the same altitude) at max afterburner. You have to adjust you angle of bank and pull to stay level with a constant speed. If you're losing speed, release the stick forward a bit, if you're gaining speed, pull a little more, all the while checking your altitude or rate of climb to stay level. When you have managed to keep a constant speed at a constant altitude, you will be in a sustained turn. Check your G-indicator, now, it should be stable and will indicates your sustained G. Note that you can deduce turn rate from G and True Airspeed (or Tacview can show it to you). Ok, so yet again you are extrapolating sea level performance from a 15 000 ft chart? Why in the world would you not simply make your tests at 15 000 ft? Even if it may be slightly harder to do (would it really?), it would be a sound basis for comparison. BTW, the manual charts for 15 000 ft give only about 5.8 G, for 10.6 tons vs 9.5 admittedly, but without Magics I think (Drag Index = 0). Do they agree, and if not which is more correct, I cannot tell.
-
The charts given in the manual give a maximum of about 8.5G @ M0.9 at sea level. Much more than 6.6G, but far from the "(easily) 9+" you mention. And that is for a clean aircraft. Just asking what is your source ? It may be there are several sources out there that don't necessarily agree with one another.
-
Turn radius matters most in one-circle (or nose to nose) geometry (including flat scissors), while turn rate is more important in two-circle (nose to tail) geometry. It is good to know when you need which. The problem with minimizing turn radius is that it makes you slow (unless maybe you are using the out-of-plane maneuvering for that), because best turn radius speed is lower than best turn rate. The thing about air combat is to know the strenghts of your airplane compared to your opponent.* The fact that the flight model is still WIP complicates the matter a little, since some good/bad points you find now may not stay the same in the future. *: never ever get into thinking of your aircraft's strenghts and weaknesses in absolute terms. It is very much dependant on the relative capabilities of your opponent. But before going into all that, the thing is, the OP says he loses sight. Well, there is a reason why the number 1 priority in air combat is keeping sight (i.e. it is not only necessary byt also very difficult). Some additional considerations for not losing sight (some may not be a good idea depending on the situation) : - stay rather close to the bogey (typically with nose to nose turns ; not advisable if your opponent has a better turn radius) - stay lower than the bogey, you might see him better with the sky as the background (very unfortunate, since this puts you at a disadvantage - but possibly less so than losing sight) - use the radar to pick him back up - not that good, since it makes you spend head down, and even then you may not pick him Of course, you should consider the bogey's aircraft size : you will have a harder time keeping sight of an F-5 than a Su-27.
-
Yes, the point is that the F-104 is not that bad in a sustained turn. Now, obviously, considering his disadvantage in instantaneous turn rate, I wouldn't want to get in a turning fight with the MiG as the latter could simply extend and use his better ITR. PS: I checked, and the Ps curves are indeed ft/s (which can be a measure of energy). I was a bit surprised to see Ps curves for a F-104, as I thought the E-M theory was developped rather after that aircraft's prime
-
The numbers associated to each curve show, AFAIK, a measure of energy/speed gain (I am not sure what units it uses, though). The 0 curve is the sustained turn rate, where the energy stays constant (ie. you can sustain the turn because you gain exactly as much energy as you bleed). The negative number indicate energy loss, and are non-sustainable turns (you bleed too much energy for your thrust to compensate), and so represent instantaneous turn performance - the higher curve being max instantaneous turn rate, as limited by lift and maximum load factor). And the positive curves are, obviously, energy-generating turns, where you gain speed. Those are sustainable, but not optimal ; they can be useful to regain energy for exemple. Interesting indeed that the max sustained turn rate performance is similar in those two aircraft. Would be nice to know the MiG-21 variant, though.
-
This is weird, because I and others have been getting hypoxia in the F-86 several time since the time it was released. I don't know why you didn't experience it, but it was already modeled in previous versions.
-
Currently we may have the S-3 in tanker version. Last I checked it worked (refueling the Su-33). I also hope we will get probe & drogue KC-135, French and USAF (for the upcoming F/A-18C) and other US Navy planes.
-
I actually disagree somewhat with your initial statement ; not that I think the nav lights are realistic by day, but I think by night it is much worse. You can't see nav lights beyond something like 1 km, which defeats the whole purpose of lights. There has been some work on lights over the years, and I still hope for more in the future.
-
NAV mode “RETURN” without airfield designator
Robin_Hood replied to wernst's topic in Su-27 for DCS World
I have said this time and time again, but there is a way (although quite imperfect) to know which airfield is currently selected. 1°) Note that when in LNDG mode (not RTN mode), the course indicator on the HSI shows the runway heading 2°) Know that every runway currrently in DCS has a unique heading. It is possible to make a list of all the runway headings 3°) Compare the course shown by the HSI to a list of runway headings, and deduce which airfield is selected 4°) In case of confusion (if several runways have close headings), use distance and direction as discriminating factors. -
I have just come across a rather peculiar behaviour with the mission editor in the latest patch (I didn't notice anything wrong in the previous 1.5 version). When creating a new mission and adding countries to the coalitions, the new countries don't appear in the list when I want to use them (for an aircraft). They do appear in the mission briefing, though. Weirdly enough, I had it working once (country appeared immediately), but immediately afterwards I tried adding other countries (including the very same one), and again, it didn't work. Saving the coalitions list and restarting the game seems to work, though it is not very convenient. I wonder if others can confirm this behaviour?
-
The thing with air combat is that a slight advantage will generally be less of a factor than pilot skill, tactics and situation (whereas really big advantages can be much more of a factor). Which is why the fight will probably be really fun :thumbup: