LJQCN101

That will be surely fine tuned. Also currently it do take some consideration of the time being in overload region and dependent on how much you pull. We do have SME specialised in static tests of aircraft structures, so I think he can help us make it right.

EFCS switches to a much simpler back up law without AOA and G feedback, which means will not limit your AOA and G. So you can actually pull more Gs. The aircraft's structural damage limit is dependent on your gross weight and is usually in a 11-13G range. You're limited to 8G before M0.85 and 6G afterwards, due to preservation of service life span and safety margin.

FBW is taking over that's why. Without a pilot, stick would also return to neutral.

Nothing bad should happen within 27 deg AOA limit as this jet has a no-kidding level 1 control quality rating. If you want to try out-of-the-envelope handling, please turn EFCS on, which will disable your G/AOA limits.

Interesting, I'm taking a note.

Finally, we have our first product DCS: JF-17 released!!! Thanks so much for your support. And thanks Eagle Dynamics, Chengdu Aerospace Corporation and other authorities for making this happen. Now we bring you the release trailer, and hope you like it! Enjoy the Thunder, and enjoy the flight and combat! music "Roused" by epidemicsound

Could be still happening on some players, depends on systems or something else. It's quite random.

I think so too, otherwise may not be able to support buddy lase or JTAC lase. It's in the known issue list anyways and will be posted later. Waiting for the missile team's decision.

We don’t develop missile API.

We do as well.

The overall Cx curve is tuned similar to AIM-7 due to the identical missile body. It has smaller fins than AIM-7, so there's slightly less drag on high mach. It is currently the case in DCS. All the SFM missiles follows the same equation of motion. The missile diameter and weight have a say on this.

We're actually maintaining some sets of performance data/indication internally and would under no circumstances be biased by any "balance" despite being constrained by the current missile FM API. We do looking forward to the new missile API.

Despite what's been said, this issue is taken care of by the missile team. It's AP head would pack some punch against light/medium armor but that's it. I don't see anything got removed.

It won't reset roll/yaw trim.

Regarding the FCS logic, the automatic take-off trim function will activate when your wheel speed exceeds 41kts and start deflecting the horizontal stabiliser for around 8 deg (deflection angle) when reaching 108kts CAS. It can be checked through the FCS page.

Can confirm that both NASA TP1538 and Analog FLCS have 9G limit while earlier version DFLCS has a 9.3G limit (8.3 in the system) which can be spotted in the F16D block25 DFLCS block diagram. Since there's a ton of first-order filter in the control law, reaching last bits of commanded value may take some time due to the characteristics of such a filter. So the 0.3G could be added to compensate for that. Another reason of that additional 0.3G is said to be due to a flaw in the pitch integrator that prevents the aircraft reaching its g-limit in time. Not sure if later DFLCS revisions further improve the integrator and remove that 0.3G. The design of pitch integrator changes time to time from NASA TP1538 to Analog FLCS and to DFLCS.

Maybe from MIL-STD/NASA/GD/LM posted figures. The only reliable source I can find right now is from MIL-STD 1797A (military standard and DoD handbook) which provides verification guidance/procedures and requirements of flying qualities. The figure may not be relevant since it is a F-16A/B FSD aircraft and maximum commanded roll rate is also increased in DFLCS as I mentioned.

No difference IIRC. The flight control system is also the same IRL.

Pretty accurate. The brick may not be exactly a square. Well done. :thumbup:

Looks like when the FPM is caged, it didn't keep the same pitch information as the uncaged one, instead it just simply moved horizontally in the HUD. Same as previously reported FPM outside the HUD issue. An image to elaborate: The pitch ladder is also at the wrong position. It should be always rotate around the FPM regardless of drift c/o.

Last time a user on the forum tested in game that the Viper is able to make 225 deg/s which is close to what I remember. (ref https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4058491&postcount=1) However I doubt the roll limiter function block is currently active since when I did my testing in a low dynamic pressure and high AOA condition under CAT I, the aileron is always at maximum deflection which is an indication that the roll limiter doesn't work at all or not in a condition to be activated due to the limited roll rate command still being higher than the current sensed roll rate. Needs to be double checked.

The issue that FPM is not corresponding to vertical velocity is related to the bug reported here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=252743. It may not be related to what OP describes that the FPM is moving up/down when rolling in crosswind, which is normal behaviour no matter drift c/o or not. Clearly not caged in the vid and I'm afraid no one would said otherwise. You're saying exactly the same as my last paragraph. If the FPM were caged in the vid, it would be moving up/down only. Pretty easy to imagine.

167 deg/s is the maximum commanded roll rate under to/land gains. In cruise gains & CAT I it is able to command a maximum of 324 deg/s for DFLCS. (308 for Analog FLCS). But I read somewhere that a flight test is conducted that aerodynamically it can only achieve 224 deg/s. Cannot find the source ATM.

Maybe not a bug since the FPM shows INS computed actual flight path / velocity vector, which does not necessarily align with the velocity vector relative to the air mass in constant crosswind conditions. And the FLCS does not use INS values as inputs so it will still roll the aircraft around its velocity vector relative to the air mass. This video at 38:03 shows the aircraft rolling in crosswind, and the FPM is moving all over the place. (Moving up/down and left/right around the gun cross marker). (short cut to 38:03 ) When you switch on drift C/O, the lateral component of FPM is eliminated and you'll see the FPM movement being confined to a vertical plane through the gun cross marker. If you do this to the video above you'll see the FPM moving up/down.

That’s probably related to the maximum commanded pitch-rate issue elaborated here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=251163 Currently it seems to me that the aircraft can only command a maximum of 8 deg/s pitch-rate instead of 16 deg/s. Very likely that they forgot to apply a 0.5 gain to pitch-rate feedback as indicated in the control block diagram.