Fri13
-
Posts
8051 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Fri13
-
-
I'm pretty sure that the T-72 has gyro stabilisation only in elevation and that the gunner has to manually estimate lead for moving targets.
T-72 has 2-axis stabilization using 2E28M stabilization system (T-72B has 2E42-2). And it was best of the class until Germany developed Leopard 2. Many believes that T-72 stabilization is terrible or it can't fire from move. While the stabilization works very well but it has own small protection systems like it will lock the barrel (pipe) when the vertical movement comes too radical (over 7 degrees per second), to avoid it getting damaged by hitting the hull or if it hits trees etc. http://www.kotsch88.de/stabi-2e28m.htm
The T-72 can fire perfectly from move as well, some people claim that its gearbox would malfunction if firing 125mm from the move, while it is simply tactical reasons to gunner command twice the firing so the driver stops the tank after first command, just to maximize that barrel doesn't lock-up if there comes sudden rough bump.
The T-72A received the TPD-K1 laser distance metering system that got then later to export versions of it (T-72M1 is export from T-72A, T-72M is export of T-72 Ural).
http://ofbindia.gov.in/products/data/optical/25.htm
T-72 has even a automatic distance calculation by using the tracks travel. So once you meter the distance, the firing solution gets automatic distance metering from moving T-72, the system even calculates the original heading of the target so even if T-72 turns sideways or drive diagonally the distance is calculated correctly. But if the target itself is moving it logically doesn't work. And as well if T-72 tracks slips like stuck in the mud or on ice, it isn't accurate. The T-72A received 1A40 firing computer that offers dynamic lead based movement and target movement. Before T-72A the gunner was required to estimate the lead, what could be more difficult when T-72 or target was moving sideways.
What slowed down T-72A first shot with laser metering systems etc, was that the laser metering was not center of the crosshair, instead it was little below and much a side, so the gunner was required to aim the laser circle to the target to get the distance, then correct the aim to the position where the lead was given by firing computer. So it toke about 2-3 seconds to fire the cannon after solution. And those few seconds are long time in firefight.
But T-72 was first MBT to offer a "hunter-killer" feature, where tank commander could slave the cannon to direction to his periscope, but it worked only horizontally and gunner was required to adjust vertical position. It speeded up a lot the first shot capability and improved the battlefield survivability as commander could easily just override cannon heading instead telling gunner what heading etc.
Even with T-72 Ural the firing for moving target isn't a problem as long you get enough experience. The main problems were that when switching from AP to HE the flight path was different, making long range firing much more difficult if target moved as the HE shell flew so high. And the crosshair moved up so gunner was required to get the leading by using the bottom part of the reticle, that made it even more difficult.
Here is sample of T-72M1 firing behavior.
-
There is more than enough information out there to develop a very detailed and highly accurate EW simulation in DCS, it's science, nothing more. And the internet is abound with numerous papers/book/reports/studies on the subject.
No you'll never get data on exactly how the ALQ-131, for example, performs against threat X or exactly what technique(s) it employs against threat X for obvious (I hope) reasons. But you don't need that data to simulate EW.
I have no idea where this idea that EW is somehow impossible to model just because some specifics of it are sensitive.
The only things stopping ED producing a highly detailed EW simulation are having the resources and the desire to do so.
I agree.
I would like to see more realistic ECM than just the multiplier for lock distances (like range x 0.6 IF = ECM) and different kinds than just the bars going up/down. Like truly hiding the target.
Even the Chaffs are off, so those would be require to be fixed too.
When currently the whole radar system is not even simulation but just "there", it makes difficult to make any ECM. While there truly are a lot of research papers and books about ECM it would be enough to make a realistically behaving systems, while if not 90% accurate but at least 70-80% accurate.
-
Yes, but with a waiting time of three months after the last sale.....
No waiting times. Often games are in Steam in sale even couple weeks after previous sale has ended.
I have multiple times bought something once I skipped or failed to buy on sale, it is good risk to wait like sometimes you get -50% few weeks before summer sale, where it can come then -75-80% off. Or before Christmas there can be sales for -25% and then just after Christmas you find -75%.
You just need to know the special sales periods like when publisher is having own catalog open, theme sale or season sale etc. It as well helps to follow other sites sales as publishers often place Steam as well when their product is in sale in other places like GOG, Humble Bundle and so on.
There is no reasons that Eagle Dynamics with its partners couldn't make Steam Sales same time as their own site. But it is way to keep their own E-store customers happy as they get them first (or often only) and often even little cheaper (unless Steam in your country has benefits).
-
Windows 10 comes in two flavours: Home and Pro.
If you're running Windows 7 Starter, Home Basic or Home Premium, you will get the Home version.
Windows 7 Professional and Ultimate upgrade to the Pro version.
Windows 10 comes in NINE editions.
Windows 10 Home
Windows 10 Pro
Windows 10 Mobile
You can purchase Home and Pro as consumer as WIndows 10 Mobile is pre-installed on mobile devices.
Windows 10 Education
Windows 10 Enterprise
Windows 10 Mobile Enterprise
That is the six, then comes the other three for embedded systems
Windows 10 Enterprise Embedded
Windows 10 Mobile Embedded
Windows 10 for "Internet of Things Gadgets"
And that is all the nine editions of the Windows 10.
So basically right with your "in two flavors" as the normal Windows users has just the two editions to be chosen for, Home or Professional and the difference between those is like non-existing.
-
I'm sure LN will not indulge. 'Cause they are busy with new and more interesting stuff. I'll be totally satisfied with the Bis once they fix ASP-radar sys.
Whatever do you need the Bison for? Whupping asses in multiplayer? It no longer has that nice "soviet" feel to it.
It would have it. Because you would use upgraded Mig-21 next to Su-27S with datalink to give surprise benefits against eagles :D
-
One of the first Mig-21Bis flights and I wanted just to fly around on my first ever training missions easiest variants (second mission ever done) that has only the Vulcans as most dangerous AA units.
I spent about 10 minutes flying around at 800-1000m altitude just with max speed I could pull to see how she handles.
After consuming all the fuel and landing hard (blowing other tire, my first landing) I hit escape and went to playback the track.
While I watched the track in 2x speed I started to wonder how there were so many units, as I didn't remember I had added so many of those.
Then I started to see missiles fly at me, noticed that the full area was full (dozen) of SAM's from Chaparral to Hawks and I was just flying around dodging all the missiles without any kind idea that I had mistakenly loaded the level 3 variant of the training map.
In that I felt how important it would be to not have RWR turned Off from the start and I got lots of trust to high speed low-level flight for dodging all kind missiles by just doing nice slight S-curves horizontally only.
Now I believe myself to do even simple rocket attacks toward almost any AA units just by using speed as my advantage and simply hit'n'run tactics.
-
Steam governs their own sales.
How can VALVE rule when publisher has the sales?
There has been games that are often in sales, like almost once a month etc. You can get daily, weekly, weekend or special holiday/season sales if wanted. But if wanted to get to specials, then there is likely own rules too for periods etc.
As far I know Valve allows publisher to push wanted sales.
-
That's interesting, do chaff or flares help against it? Or do you just have to dodge it?
Optically targeted missiles via radio link so you can't counter missiles. But it ain't either easy to hit a maneuvering aircraft as you need to keep it on needle as gunner.
Most soviet AA missiles can be guided in optically tracking the target so you don't get any RWR warnings, then at the terminal phase the semiactive radar head can be turned on if target starts maneuver to get it easy for SAM, but at that moment the pilot has any more just few seconds and usually it is better to use to eject.
-
Judging closure and thus timing is of high importance in BVR. Your steam gauge should still be showing you IAS if you need it.
Was about say same as firing missiles at max range can be tricky if not knowing distances etc correctly.
-
This is like DCS 2.5....
-
I believe many would be gladly paying a extra for upgrade to modern version. So it could be like Mig-21Bison to Mig-21Bis as Black Shark 2 was for Black Shark.
So it would require the Bis to be bought, and this way offer a low price for upgrade like 15-20.
Think about upgrading a plane as multiple variations? You would always need the older one too.
-
For how many the TrackIR 5 price of around $150 is too much?
For how many a $350 for HOTAS?
The Rift as any other will be a special tool, TrackIR will be cheaper and usable but not so immersive at all. HOTAS is required for pleasure and speed, but just a joystick is enough.
To get a 90fps constant that is pretty tough for many who wants latest games. But if just for DCS etc, it is doable unless price for VR is itself too high, and I believe the limit is around $200-300 for many. (I drop every few months 2000-3000€ for other hobby so it isnt question for me, as i draw my limit to $350)
-
in the youtube video Los Vegas looks amazing - low rez stuff on the edges doesn't bother me at all, i mean how much resolution do we need for salt flats and sand?
You are a fighter pilot, it doesnt matter to you as everything is blurry anyways, but step in helicopter pilot shoes and you are soon in low level admiring those textures. Or get to CA module and start driving around and you really are soon in experience that you are at billiard board.
That is my negativity for current map as well as everything is almost flat if not going to mountains and then it is again the same.
We need more small height alterations and sharper textures for low level.
-
Maybe that's because real F-86s might have been plagued by this problem lol.
I don't think so. As watching in use airplanes windows, they are cleaned on service periods.
The problem with the simulation in these is that they are often taken as well from airplanes in museums or otherwise "abandoned" variants that doesn't get the service.
That is same thing woth example the textures in cockpit that those go without painting jobs now and then to keep them in good condition against rust etc.
But the real problem is that there is no depth of field! Meaning everything is sharp, including canopy. That is unrealistic and should be changed so when you look out, the canopy is out of focus and when you look in cockpit it becomes visible.
-
Here is the story about BNo: 164341, F-14D (from home of M.A.T.S)
On Nov. 6, 2002 this F-14 took off from Fallon Naval Air Station with a VIP in the back seat - a naval officer from the cruiser Anzio who was on what the military calls a "FAM Hop," or familiarization ride. In flight, when the pilot pulled a "negative 1g," the gravity force moved the officer nearly off his seat. He reached down to reposition himself and accidentally pulled the ejection lever. The cockpit canopy flew off and out went the VIP. The ejection system automatically opened the VIP's parachute. He landed safely in the Nevada desert and waited for his rescue. The F-14 returned to base.
dumping out the fuel:
That was interesting as a year ago I ended watching the JAG series and on last season or so there was an episode where the Admiral was required to have a "familiration" flight and he did exactly that accidentally on negative G and "got off". He didn't land on desert but in forest, at winter and just coming blizzard time. Rest of the episode was about searching him from forest while he basically got frostbite, hallucinations and accidents causing him to wonder away from the drop site.
Of course it was required to change little details for show but i didn't believe so would happen, until now. WOW!
ps. The JAG was interesting because how it showed the USA military daily working manners and internal politics and problems by point of JAG officers. Especially F-14 and later F-18 were nicely presented in show style.
-
And some animations like shaders strings doesn't swing naturally etc
-
I don't think I'd really be bothered if ED went back to making the "S" key perform the scripted Kobra and removing the ability to turn off the ACS. OK, OK, I know it's realistic but I think it's largely pointless.
The Cobra maneuver is very useful, but it is just one maneuvers among others, not a silver bullet.
There are three kinds of people:
A: claiming it has little or no benefits in a dog fight and always point out that energy reservation is best choice regardless of situation (or suddenly situations change to 2 vs 1 etc)
B: claiming it has a lot benefits and try to use it as often they can, even when there is other better choices, giving just examples to A by doing stupid things.
C: understands it has many great benefits but it is like a Cannon in BVR, you are happy you have it when suddenly you are merged with the enemy and you know you have a wider range of maneuvers to solve situation when or if it comes to that.
The Cobra maneuver or AoA exploiting same benefits is like HMS and IRTS or a datalink between planes and missiles or a vectored thrust nozzles. They are not always needed, not always the best choice and when there comes situation it is giving benefit.... It can be the tool to get the victory.
I dislike it is a single key push to disable all, unlike it should be. (Based the previous thread about how it should work and what switches does what) Limiting player possibilities.
-
What I have found is same that the R-27P can be launched totally passively by just using the missile own seeker, allowing to do stealthy surprise attacks without target knowing missile was launched at it, it cant be targeted via radar etc.
But as targeting system is classified...
-
If you have bad habits in terms of piloting and abuse the Su-27 you get to reap the full consequences of your piloting mistakes. The aircraft will not intervene to save you from your mistakes.
That is wrong as in documents the Su-27 engineers and pilots praise the computerized FBW that denies pilot from giving dangerous inputs and why it flies like a dream as it doesn't do anything crazy, without pilot disabling the augmentations etc to override the safety features and finally disable functionality allowing to pull extensive maneuvers.
So now there is like a single button to override all and the plane doesn't have safety features.
-
I fined the su27 very stable, but you can't pull the stick more then 1/2 of the way back.
It is more like 2cm. I have G940 with 32cm extension (so very long stick) and I cant pull back more than couple centimeters without Su-27 reacting aggressively on higher speed than 500km/h. I can move stick far more only when in very slow speeds and it reacts very nicely. But if i want to trim for forward flight, i need to keep stick 80-90% forward from its max movement.
And all these just make feeling that the FBW doesn't work at all as should because at high speeds it is way too dangerous to pilot to get killed by very small accidental stick movement, like sneeze by accident without flying by autopilot in 750km/h speed and you will be easily in inverted flight.
The problem isnt what plane can do, it is how the stick makes plane to react.
Sure i could adjust curves and input/output levels but it would dramatically affect differently on different flight speeds.
I fined the su27 very stable, but you can't pull the stick more then 1/2 of the way back. -
Ok what's the per eye then? Never mind that resolution is split between two eyes so it's still not enough resolution. Bummer. At least it will be better than dk2
1080x1200 @ 90Hz is then the final per eye. More than enough. But for their game it is same as 2160x1200 as it needs double rendering as that is the field of view area.
-
I was wondering what some of you all set the curvature on the X & Y Axis, on the stick to for say the Su-27 or F15??
Can't use curves as I have Logitech G940 that is Force Feedback Joystick and I have modded it to be with 32cm long extension tube. I fly mainly helicopters so the stick is better be long. While on Su-27 that stick is way too sensitive by default.
Some point need to disable force and apply curves and slow down the axis levels as it doesn't feel realistic to fly a jet that can do 12 rolls in a second with small twist in stick ;)
-
Just asking a noob question; people "throwing" a ARH missile at you and turning around, does DCS allow datalink from a other F-15 or AWACS to guide missile in, or does/can the fired F-15 turn some point to update trajectory to get the missile back to correct basket position?
As i hear a lot of these tips to fire and immediately turn away, that should lead missile be lost if target does any kind maneuver that leads it out of the estimated flight before launch. So how wide/long the basket area is for 120 to acquire target by itself as F-15 has already turned away and isn't updating target positions via datalink?
-
Im 46 yrs old and think that I am just past the age when all this stuff comes naturally. So I wonder if some kind soul would do a 'Sticky' on installing mods etc, and keep it real simple.
...Guy
P.S How do I find replies to my posts as well. (Don't use forums much either)
Hi and welcome to DCS world.
You are not alone, most people on WWW are not computer nerds or talented even. When it comes to very "low level" functions of the computer technologies, 99% of people doesn't know what they are doing. Most people know the basic things of how to copy file to specific directory or how to even install an software to their computer. But everything such can be very difficult for even 20 years old people. Computer skills are not fed in milk.... ;)
I have observed the same thing on many many forums how the first step can be very deep (learning curve can be deep or shallow) but once the first basic things has been learned it gets easier. (And remember, "easy to learn" is different from "easy to use"). Hopefully someone would make good nice tutorial, if there isn't already. I just made quick search on YouTube site about mod installation and this was one of the first results:
Do you mean something like that?
-
1
-
gyro stabilizer?
in DCS: Combined Arms
Posted
There should be many improvements to each individual units. Like M2A1 Bradley has only vertical stabilization, inaccurate and ineffective slow cannon but with awesome thermal gunner sight.
But the most effective features that CA would ever need, is not the gyro stabilization to units that should have it, as we can always stop to fire or not to turn when firing.
The problem is the terrain. There are no obstacles like rocks, bushes etc that would make harder to find the targets. Just the trees and buildings and terrain itself.
The terrain is way too blocky (low resolution) and flat, there isn't really any kind change in heights where to get hull/tower down positions.
And those makes many things bad in ground combat. As soviet units that heavily use ATGM has the range benefits, as you can't really hide or get good cover, western units are in bad position to do the attacks.
There is no benefits for western MBT to benefit from capability more down than soviet ones, making hull-down positions basically more difficult.
It shouldn't be hard to paint even large maps like the current one with a random obstacles like individual trees, rocks, bushes. As in my opinion, I don't care if those are realistically there or not or if one tree is inside a rock etc. As the most important thing is just to get cover for ground units, for helicopters and make the CAS airplane pilots work harder to find a units on the ground, and make the air-to-ground radar in future to be worth of its money.
Improving the gyro on units that should have it would be improvement, but not such that it would make the CA more attractive to people. Now it is just sitting like ducks in billiard table metering distances and waiting when target gets to firing range or then get to knife fight because terrain, usually against ultimate reflex AI that blows you out on first second you come visible.
So I don't really know why we got the CA when the maps are all designed around aircrafts like Su-27S, F-15C, Su-25T etc. Even the KA-50 is pretty out of its class because the terrain.
/ end the rant ;)