Jump to content

Rainmaker

Members
  • Posts

    1017
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Rainmaker

  • Birthday 06/16/1981

Personal Information

  • Interests
    Sims

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I would tend to believe it isnt. There are aircraft that operate in this way, the -15E comes to mind. Also an MD/Boeing design. Believe the A-10 does as well. The designation can be independent from the bomb computing.
  2. The CFTs add a little over 9K in total fuel. Typical min for a full load with CFTs is 22.5K
  3. Well…that sounds like one of the most obscure things one would find on the internet. In terms of simulation though, it really doesn't matter. Going from a MPDP/CC to the ADCP didnt greatly change anything out of the gate. No new wizz-bang things that would be apparent to anyone in a one vs the other scenario.
  4. I speak F-15 very fluently, and have no idea what those terms are you used.
  5. Realistically, having it on or off shouldnt matter as far as the light is concerned. The detection probe is forward in the intake, and is just a probe that sits there and monitors ice buildup.
  6. I’m speaking of control authority and how CAS moves surfaces. Nothing to do with turn performance, etc. A FBW system interacts differently as there is no stick and surface direct interaction.
  7. Your viewing of the ‘real’ HUD image is distorted. The is a picture taken with the camera close to the HUD. That’s exactly what it’s supposed to do. HUD symbology will change with FOV in order to maintain focus. There is nothing wrong with the DCS implementation, you are misinterpreting what the real HUD looks like.
  8. This is pretty much interchangeable. Stick travel per G is still a thing in the actual aircraft as well. The feel springs are there so that the stick force increases as positional displacement increases.
  9. Cant speak for DCS as I havent messed around with the C enough lately, specially in the transonic area. But…with respect to the real thing, it is a real thing. The CAS system is built to maintain a loaded G per stick position. In certain envelope areas, it’s a lot easier to apply the stick you think will give you X, and the result being something different. The details of how that all happen and the why are well above my personal knowledge…just know that it is for sure an IRL thing. It’s commonly where the IRL over-G occurrences happen.
  10. Have you seen code before? It’s a pretty laborious task to take on.
  11. I would say that’s a pretty fair assessment. The updates to the other aircraft that have continued to happen haven’t coded themselves. When you have to lend support to fixing pop-up bugs and adding mew stuff to aircraft already released, the time and the people have to come from somewhere. ED has done much of the same with all their aircraft in development so no difference.
  12. Opposite. Range without bearing, unless you are dealing with large aircraft that have the onboard equipment.
  13. I may be proven wrong, but I have yet to see a case where a SME has disagreed with an EM diagram, and said it’s wrong. What I have seen is a lot of comments on parts of the envelope that are not in any covered by an EM chart. Loaded acceleration, non-level turns, role rates at particular alphas, etc, etc, etc. That is all Primarily a SME area, that sense/ability comes from performance /time in the real thing. The time spent inside the window of an EM diagram is basically nil...it’s all the other stuff that matters that an EM chart is never going to give you.
  14. If many understood the charts as well as they think they actually do, then they would understand that EM diagrams that are published in the flight manuals describe very limited/very targeted sliver of the actual flight model. They are max performance charts, done to specific profiles, etc. That’s it. You actually need SME support for about the other 99% of it because the charts in no way cover those aspects. A lot of you have seen SMEs comment on are those parts, which are not covered...but again, it’s the typical norm to come to a forum and see those who have never done the task challenge the opinions of those who ACTUALLY have. And fun fact: those charts CAN have inaccuracies.
×
×
  • Create New...