fausete

Hi, we commit our changes in the regular updates, which aren't necessarily at the end of the month. Due to a miscommunication problem our changelog hasn't been published this time, this will be corrected soon.

We will have a think about how to best procede about it (especially regarding the FFB case). Having tested the real system, I have the feeling that it is an integral part of how the aircraft behaves, as it is physically impossible to make quick large inputs.

I will take a look at the trim test when I can. But regarding the 1 second from side to side, can you publish a trk or video showing it taking more than 1 second? Because I can't reproduce it at all, both looking at the code or testing it with slowed down time, I see that it takes exactly 1 second to go from side to side.

Hi @Robin885, I'm not sure the video you posted is proof of a bug, as the maneuvers that can be seen are reproduceable on our aircraft (although it does take some adjusting to not having the stick moving at the same rate as your physical stick). For example, you can see the pilot overshooting the position he's aiming for by about 5-10º each time and then correcting, which is to be expected especially taking into account there is no dampening device in roll in this aircraft, and is a similar behaviour as what can be achieved in our simulator. Just to show this is not something we invented: we tested a pressurised F1 system and we could never get the stick in roll to go fully from left to right in less than 1 and a half seconds (more in pitch), this matches what can be seen in some videos (such as the following one). In the simulator the max velocity of the stick in roll is limited to 1 second from side to side, as we assumed that a pilot would probably be stronger, have more leverage due to the harness and have more adrenaline than we did when performing the tests. That being said, we will consult our SMEs on the matter and might consider a small adjustment based on playability reasons.

Hi, this is not a bug, rather a design feature. In the real aircraft, a force proportional and opposite to the stick displacement velocity is applied to the stick. So, no matter how much force is applied to the stick, there will always be a sort maximum displacement speed on it. Taking this into account in the simulation is very important for a feeling as close as the real aircraft as possible. The best way to represent this in-game is to include a maximum displacement speed for the stick, that way, small corrections are unaffected (as would be the case in real life) while drastic, instantaneous movements are impossible.

@Loukuins thanks for the contribution, you are very much correct with everything. Basically the feeling of the aircraft is much more dependent on how the control system is modelled than what is usually assumed. As you said, modelling the force retribution system (ARTHUR and dashpot) is not easy, especially for non-FFB sticks. Also, having the AMEDEE means that less curve might be needed in comparison with other modules but it's something each user should still configure according to their needs and preferences.

Hi, just to add something more: on top of the stick speed limitation, the AMEDEE curve (internal pitch curve) was increased, which probably has had a significant effect on the 'feeling' of the aircraft. Another factor that some of you have pointed out and we have noticed a lot is that, often, changes to controls or handling are perceived as the performance being decreased or the aircraft being 'nerfed'. This is probably because it takes time to adjust to the new behaviour and applying the old muscle memory actions doesn't result in the same outcomes.

Hi, so there are some adjustments coming to the pitch behaviour in the next update that might make it a bit more to your liking. Just to be clear, the performance of the aircraft (acceleration, turn rate...) is still the same as it was before the update and has been unchanged for a good while.

Hi, First of all I have to apologise because that description in the changelog is quite inaccurate. The real addition is a maximum stick displacement speed, which means that smaller corrections (and therefore fine/precise control) are completely unaffected. This is a real feature of the aircraft, which we confirmed with SMEs and by testing a real pressurised system. Simply put, the fastest the speed of the stick, the greatest the reaction force, and thus, in practice a sort of 'maximum flight stick displacement speed' is present. With a regular joystick, adding this maximum displacement speed limitation makes the aircraft control match its real counterpart much more closely than not having it. From the top of my head, other modules like the F-4 or the MiG-29 also have similar implementations (don't fully quote me on this as I would have to retest it to be sure).

Hi, we are preparing a proper update about this. In the meantime I can confirm we are working on the F-104 already and at good pace. Some members of the team are dedicating most of their time to the 104 while some others are still more focused on the F1M.

Hi, we have the suspicion that the AMEDEE (the internal curve of the pitch system) is excessive in this new update and we are working on toning it down, but we don't think that this non-linearity is a bug.

Hi, The C was unable to use the Exocet for sure and was also unable to self-lase, so I'm not sure it would carry the AS-30L, as far as I know we have no source stating it, but it might be possible.

Keep in mind that we are working with our SMEs to adjust some of the FM/controls changes for the next update.

Hi again, The roll with AUF-2 is fixed now and there have been other adjustments to rudder roll authority. @303_Kermit I have been performing turn rate tests and, as I said before, no changes have been made to the performance of the aircraft in this patch (or for a long while, in fact). The situation you describe (8 Gs at 0.95 M) is outside the flight envelope of the F1, but if I extrapolate, it would correspond to a turn rate of 12-13º/s and a loss of 10000-15000 ft/min to be able to sustain the turn, which would mean loosing about 900 m of energy throughout the 180º turn. In case of maintaining altitude, it is equivalent to loosing about 133 m/s of airspeed, which puts you in a range in which the sustained G loading is indeed about 4.25-4.5 G (about 3.75 in your case with the high lift devices off). Obviously this is not a fully accurate description because you won't maintain exactly the same turn rate throughout but still it serves as a good example. In general, my theory is that what is happening is that the changes in pitch behaviour (mainly as a consequence of changes in the internal logic of the pitch controls) will take some time to get used to and this is what is causing what you are noticing. Try turning the "Add further pitch stick input until real stick limit" special menu option off to see if you notice an improvement, also, don't turn the high lift devices off, there is literally no gain in any situation whatsoever from not having the slats deploy when they should.

Hi, I'll review the roll issue but performance is unchanged, the same turns are possible now as they were before.

Thanks for your messages, we will continue investigating the differences between versions.

Hi, what you describe partially contradicts our sources. The C has a fix red light on top (the formation light) and a blinking red light on the bottom (the anticollision light, linked to the navigation light control). You are correct in that the CT and CR had a white strobe added. So, from our point of view, the light logic is correct as is for the flyable versions. Can you explain a bit more about the argnatostrobelight you were mentioning, are you using it for the AI CT/CR?

Hi, thanks for the report, it is a bug indeed. It has been corrected internally. PS: For a temporary fix for SP (single player) add the following lines to line 420 of Payloads.lua in DCS\CoreMods\aircraft\Mirage-F1: add_Bomb(Pylons_Common, id_CLB4_400LD, 4) add_Bomb(Pylons_Common, id_CLB4_400HD, 4)

Hi @kontiuka, this is correct. Rudder roll authority was unintendedly reduced significantly in one of the previous updates and has been restored now.

Hi, thanks for the report. We will review all this but keep in mind that light logics were different between models and we believe even changed with time in some models.

Hi, we are unable to reproduce. Please attach a TRK.

Hi, We are aware of those and will work to solve them. Some of these (for example, the threat bands that can or can't be detected or the CW coming only from a SAM launch) require work-arounds to be able to represent them in the sim but our intention is to eventually have them modelled too eventually. All this to say that we are aware of the reported issues and will solve them but they are not quick fixes that can be implemented swiftly.

No problem, it happens!

Hi, I thought you had sorted it out by changing the Rhino settings: "Hey, while I was out to record a track for you, I played around with the Rhino settings and actually got it sorted out. I had to much gain on the „constant“ force and so spring and FFB basically fought each other or engaged in some kind of feedback loop. Long story short - I messed up the settings for my Stick and the F1 was completely innocent. Thank you anyway. You gave me the right idea."

Thanks for the compliments! We keep working on improving the module and finishing the final variant.