Katmandu

Did you ever manage to get a working replay with the F-14? In a simple single player mission of course - e.g. take off, turn round, land. I 've made a test some months back and wonder if IronMike's tips and general game updates since my tests (below) have made any difference. Would be great if that is the case as the F-14 is such a beaut.

I'm trying to replicate the some of Harrier record breaking flights. The book describes GR5 which is our AV-8B with Pegasus 11-61 engine but diff avionics and weapons. Usefully, their plane was also instrumented, not F-15 Streak Eagle-like with most things stripped to reduce weight. They did take the pylons off (500kg?) though, I could only somewhat compensate by reducing the fuel load. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gZCeDgAAQBAJ&lpg=PA80&ots=k7t_D8Tp9j&dq=harrier "time to climb"&pg=PA80#v=onepage&q&f=false I'm using the below flight profile and aiming for their benchmark times: My current best attempt to 6000m is about 75 seconds; 9000m - about 106 seconds. I've set air temp at 26C (as per text - high 20s), flying from Kutaisi so about sea level start, 600lbs of fuel (not 1200 from the book so as to compensate for the pylons weight). Could I do much better?

Если кажется что легко, пробуйте повторить контроль над пилотажем авиа шоу как здесь (маневры с элементами вертикального взлета начинаются на 9:50):

Не баг, но нехватка фичи. Покрышки вертолета не прогибаются под весом, а также не хватает пары градусов отрицательного развала задних колес - опять же под весом. Эти две мелочи здорово передают тяжесть машины. Еще фотки развала из реала:

Can confirm that automatic Air to Air Refuel is broken in the beginning of Mission 3. Or Mission 2 - if we don't include Mission0 with babel tower. DCS Beta 2.8.0.33006 Still absolutely love the Campaign though - a masterpiece!

Если нравится какой-либо аппарат в ДКС - внешний вид или история, или еще что угодно. То можно брать не оглядываясь - это будет лучшая реализация этого аппарата. Не было симулятора где было или есть лучше. Тоже самое с Хэрриером. Он мега крут, и, если нравится его реальный прототип, тогда можно брать смело, без всяких пробных периодов.

ГС2 на Вин10 работает нормально, на днях поставил. 6гигов всего, вместе с модами - были ж времена и вроде недавно!

Not as concrete as I would've liked ("in VR, virtual head moved full back, I can/can't see both vertical bars of the HUD together with the speed and alt numbers" would have been clearer), but ok (maybe?? ). Question (sort of) answered - thanks! Good point about the age difference, could be one explaining factor on the difference in design compared to the HUDs of the F-16, Su-27 etc. Although "MUCH smaller HUD" needs a reference. Would be a good second reason for the difference if true Needs reference also. No source=no knowledge

Is that from the default seating position or with the virtual head moved back to the headrest (with LCtrl+LShift+Numpad/ )?

That's a fair point But so is mine These are all compromises, including the DED projection's (Bingo fuel flow numbers used for refuel etc? Correct me if I'm wrong, I've not flown the 16 for a while). So the F-16's design compromise was to include the air combat essential info at all seating positions, and other info for other positions - my interpretation. maybe the F-15's compromises were thought about differently of course, but would be good to know.

I know Just thinking logically again, perhaps the G's in the videos where not as hard or not as prolonged. Plus fresh pilots, less fatigue etc. A lot lot less is cut off though, just compare the F-16 pic with the first F-15 pic. With binocular vision there would be no cut off at all with the F-16. But again, the pilot doesn't not lose HUD info in the F-16 - not when he is at head rest, not when he's moved his head forwards (win-win). Full picture always. With what you are proposing, the picture is full when in normal cruise mode, but truncated when at headrest (win-lose).

I'll restate my motivation just in case. The current options for TrackIR F-15C fliers are: 1. Make do with the mostly truncated HUD when at seat rest of the F-15, but with good looking non distorted canopy frame. 2. Enjoy the full HUD, but with distorted canopy frame. Of course, if the HUD setting is correct, then I am NOT suggesting to reset it to please the TrackIR users! but, if it is not correct and should be more like the F-16 etc, then this conversation is not splitting hairs about a purely academic matter, but has practical benefits - if it's a bug and if it's corrected.

Here it is from a real fighter pilot: "The idea when you pull G's is you set your head on the headrest... because the helmet with cueing systems weigh 15 pounds times 9, when you get that, you're talking over 100 pounds of force, and you try to pick it off the seat ... you can tear tendons- which I did, that's what happened to me..." @16:00 Secondly, if the entire HUD picture is visible and you move your head towards the HUD, you are not losing any of that picture. So, if we are talking about logic, then it seems logical to set up the HUD picture for the furthest point - the headrest. As one moves closer, all of the HUD info is still there and nothing is lost. As is the case in the F-16, Su-27 etc - see my very first post. All the time - certainly not, but why design a HUD to lose info during some brief, yet common and crucially important seconds when the headrest IS used? Thanks for that! I know exactly what you mean as I also flew with VR a couple of years back Please remmber to move your virtual head back with (Ctrl + Shift + numpad/ ) (this is different to the usual zoom/FOV adjustments) as this is the crux of the matter

Yes, but as I said above, the little time pilot spends doing high g with the head back on the headrest is also the time when he/she needs the absolute maximum SA. To me the F-16 HUD appears very similar size wise because I understand the F-15 cockpit to be much roomier. Su-27 HUD is also very similar in size to the F-15. FA-18 is flared, so hard to say, but also similar - to my eyes, again. Would be curious to see their actual dimensions. I should do. But the nagging doubts would still not go away - ED did not make it from scratch, mistakes could have carried over, different philosophy as not a fighter...

Logically, and looking at the other fighters in my first post pics, the head on the headrest position must feel right, as that's where the important stuff happens. This could be the answer, I do not have a VR set to check atm. The way to test in VR would be to move the virtual head towards the headrest (CTRL+ Shift+numpad/) , check the HUD coverage, then close one eye and check the HUD coverage once more. The A-10 potentially may have a different design philosophy as it's not a fighter, less need to be on the headrest. But it is also an earlier DCS module, so it may share a bug with the F-15...

It's been a while since I sold my VR, and it would be an interesting thing to check - how much of the HUD is visible if you press your virtual head back towards the headrest. Could you check it perhaps? Distortion is certainly not an issue in VR, I remember that much from my time with Oculus

The F-16 fits almost compltely, it is easy to imagine that once binucular vision is in effect the HUD would be fully visible. However, I think you are confused by FOV and virtual head position. They are two different things. See below- same head position (away from the headrest), but different FOV. In both cases the HUD indication coverage is identical in how much indication is visible. Only the size of the indication is larger with the smaller FOV (i.e. zoomed in) second pic. But they both show HUD speed and altitude scales - unlike the first pic in my original post.

I've made that allowance in my screenshot, the position is such that when I turn pilots virtual head 90deg, the view does not go flush against the headrest, but is a realistic distance from it. in any case, even adding another extra head width on top does not address the issue of limited HUD view. A point worth making, but, the plane is made for combat and high g. Then pilot's head is against the headrest and his/her situational awareness would be hampered - as far as the HUD goes. This logic has additional evidence from the other fighters (see their pics above, also with head on the headrest), both US and Russian, which give the pilot a much better HUD picture with head rested against the headrest. Other planes are much better in this regard, see my pics of the F-16, F-18 and Su-27 above. Same parameters - i.e. head against headrest.

In DCS, only the central portion of the F-15C HUD is visible when we shift the virtual head all the way back, to the seat headrest (Ctrl + Shift + numpad/ ) (this is different to the usual zoom/FOV adjustments) - a normal position for the pilot. Is this how it is in the real life? Even if one was to shut one of the eyes to counter the the binocular vision? There were some F-15 pilots/techs "Ask Me Anything" topics at some point, wonder if these people are still around... If the problem is real, it would be nice to address it for the next iteration of FC3 - Modern Air Combat (MAC). This is in contrast to other planes such as the F-16C, F/A-18C, A/V-8B, Su-27 -all of them provide near full HUD picture with the pilot head fully back, against the headrest (Ctrl + Shift + numpad/ ). This problem currently is mitigated in DCS by moving the virtual head towards the HUD (Ctrl+Shift+numpad*), this provides the full view of its indication, but at a cost of ugly optical distortion. Compare the below with the thin undistorted canopy frames of the F/A-18 and Su-27 above. Also, pilots head is now good distance away from the headrest - a strange design decision for an air superiority jet where high g loads are the norm. Also note that, despite different zoom levels, the same area of HUD indication is visible - both vertical scales (Speed and Alt) are in view in the zoomed out AND zoomed in pics. Just to reiterate that the point here is the head position and not zoom.

Я не заметил проблем с яркостью. Версия 2.8 , 4К настройки все макс, MSAA x2, SSAA off, тени не плоские, гамма 1.8. Просадки фпс по сравнению с последним 2.7 не заметил. 8700K RTX3080 Единственный царапающий глаз баг 2.8 - полосатые облака на горизонте на 7:23, 9.08 и тд.

Да можно и на клаве летать или на танцевальном коврике. Вопрс был про "который бы максимально близко подходил для управления вертолетом КА-50", а здесь все четко и безоговорочно - джой с ффб ближе чем без.

У Ганфайтера нет force feedback и "максимально близко подходил для управления вертолетом КА-50" - это не про него. MSFFB2 или бутичный вариант из видео выше - это как раз максимально. Ибо триммер вертолета просит ффб.

Will it include the Dead Sea? Few landmarks are as iconic as it: EDIT: YES it will!!! Can't wait for this map!

Или, бюджетный вариант, б\у MSFFB2

В Instant Action миссиях на Кавказе частота напарника (127) не совпадает с пресетами радио (305), хотя голос Вагса говорит использовать напарника.