Hummingbird
-
Posts
4347 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Hummingbird
-
-
On 7/17/2025 at 10:09 AM, Etask said:
I agree, FM needs some tweaking especially in pitch and yaw. It feels a bit too light and twitchy, and weightless. I’m using a 35 curvature on a warthog stick with a small extension and while it feels better it doesn’t feel right. In other warbirds I use 0 to 15 curvature. Also the behaviour when deflecting controls too much needs some adjustment; I know you wouldn’t do that in the real thing, but pushing down strongly on the controls, the aircraft starts making some weird maneuvers that an extra 330 would be embarrassed in comparison.
Now, that’s not to say it feels horrible and I don’t like the aircraft, quite the opposite I really enjoy it and it’s probably my favourite warbird in DCS already, thanks to Magnitude for bringing us this module, but please please adjust the FM!
Yes I agree. I find it hard to believe any aircraft so sensitive in pitch and unstable in yaw would ever be considered a great ground attacker -> a role the Corsair became famous for excelling at.
By all accounts I can find the aircraft was very stable in the air, and a great gun platform because of it.
Note I haven't tried the new patch yet though, but I hope it makes the aircraft atleast as stable as the other warbirds.
-
My question is wether it can really be true that the F4U was so unstable in yaw and pitch? Reading pilot descriptions it does mention light controls, but nowhere anything about directional instability in yaw or that its twitchy in pitch. Infact once cleaned up and in the air, it was supposed to be really easy to fly. So yeah, strikes me as very odd that the FM of this plane is so unruly in the air.
I know you can use curves to dampen the sensitivity in pitch, but it just doesn't feel very convincing even after that.
On a final note, this is ofcourse early access, so things are bound to change. In other words, Im expecting things will ofcourse improve with time.
-
5
-
-
Well... we're certainly going to be needing some more up to date red aircraft.
SU-35 anyone??
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, mikko.1842 said:
Yes.
Well, you seem to worry about the footprint, but imho, you should take the height in consideration, much more. If your grip hides your monitor when you are flying, that will be annoying (unless you can set your monitor higher than the stick).
Check Virpil WarBRD-D base, which is about 6 cm height. Avoid Virpil MongoosT-50CM3 which is taller (9-10 cm), and designed as a mounted stick.
In the same way, avoid MongoosT-50CM3 stick, as it is the tallest from Virpil.
As for VKB, their Gunfighter Mk.IV base should be about 6 cm height too (not too sure, you may want to check). Up to you to choose the right VKB stick.
Maybe some Winwing users will be able to tell you more about their sticks/bases.
Ah yes, by footprint I actually also meant overall space, and your advice is sound. I think Ive decided on the WarBRD-D, seems to be what I'm looking for.
Thanks guys!
-
Thank you very much for the answer!
So just to be clear, you're saying all those you mentioned will move around smoothly in circles with no felt transition between the X & Y axis (unlike the VKB Gladiator) providing the right cams are used? (Also I assume by "depending on cams" you mean the ones without a center detent?)
Also as a side note, I need it to just sit on my desk with no mounts, so I can move it away when I need it for work. Which one of the sticks you mentioned has the smallest footprint you think?
-
Hi guys,
Been looking to buy a new high end stick, however I'm specifically looking for one where there is no noticable transition between the X and Y axis, i.e. so you are able to move the stick around in smooth circles without feeling any transition between the two axis. I got a Gladiator VKB stick a while back, but ended up pretty much never using it because there is a very noticable cross axis transition, not helped by the detent in the cams used.
Are there any high end sticks out there right now, other than the old TM Warthog, that feature this smooth and unnoticable (in terms of feel) transition between the X & Y axis? Or is this quite simply always the case when the gimbal is using a cam system?
Thanks in advance for any help and advice!
-
13 minutes ago, Vyacheslav said:
Hi. Who measured the speed, the turn time at the ground? How in the dogfight against the Mig-21?Don't compare vs ai MiG21, as the ai will make the 21 turn like a legacy fighter.
In my preliminary testing of the F4E module it checks out as accurate to the performance charts in terms of sustained turn rate. Which means it will outrate a human flown MiG21 in DCS between 0.7-0.8 mach. The only issue DCS Phantom jocks will find when dogfighting human piloted 21's is that the 21 is currently overperforming below 0.6 mach - but that's not heatblur's responsibility.
Heatblur's F-4E really is setting a new standard, esp. when it comes to accuracy on release. Really impressed so far.
-
1
-
-
Quite an easy bird to fly really
My biggest problem right now is how I get the radar picture back after I pressed the cage button, anyone know?
-
1
-
-
Lesson for all those who are mad at ED & HB because they took a day off to play this module:
Don't plan a day off to play something before it has actually been released. Release dates are often at risk of changing last minute. Hence ALWAYS plan your days off AFTER it has released.
Besides first day you pick the thing up is mostly going to be spent learning the systems anyway. So relax on the FOMO.
-
10
-
-
On 10/22/2023 at 10:36 PM, bkthunder said:
G onset rate seems slower and the FLCS response to control input is sluggish. The FLCS often can't trim for 1g and will stay at 1.1 or 1.2 for for a number of seconds.
Also, when centering the stick after a pull, the aircraft keeps pulling Gs by itself, slowly going from e.g. 9G back to 1.0G. So it looks like both the onset rate as well as the "unload" rate are slower.
The input lag is still there too.One more strange thing is the elevons deflect upwards quite a bit during pulls at all speeds, which shouldn't be the case since this would defeat the purpose of a relaxed stability airframe, which is to reduce trim drag and drag that arises from the displacement of tail surfaces. The elevons are there to initiate the pitch moment and then should stay mostly neutral for the duration of the pull.
IMO this is still not a good representation of the real aircraft FM/FLCS combination
I can confirm that the G-onset rate (aka pitch rate)of the F-16C has been noticably reduced, it was a lot more responsive before. Not sure why this was done, and I'm not gonna lie, kinda feels like 1 step forward and then 2 steps back.
-
3
-
-
A JA37 would be amazing
-
On 6/21/2023 at 7:47 PM, fat creason said:
Guys, there is no bug here, there's nothing "look at". The aircraft is perfectly controllable above 25 units and behaves exactly as described in the manual AND our pilot SME agrees with the current behavior. See the attached video and the controls overly for proof. I guess it bears repeating: the Yaw SAS change has nothing to do with rudder authority or high AOA controllability. Perhaps you're getting so slow that none of the surfaces work effectively? You can't expect to maintain controllability down to zero airspeed, that's not how aircraft work. I recommend you practice high AOA flight if you're struggling, it's not a flight model issue, it's a PEBKAC error.
It's during high AoA in hard turns, not level flight, that I noticed a lot of wing rock when attempting to apply small corrections in roll / bank angle using rudder only (didn't apply any lateral stick). That's what I don't recall being the case last I flew a little over a year ago.
-
It's more the EF (and Rafale) figure Im wondering about, as it goes against the statements of the pilots who have flown both (EF & F16).
Not knowing the exact load outs is also problematic.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, F-2 said:
So apparently this is from the Indian MMRCA
Who's the source of the picture? That the F-16 Block 60 is rated better than both the EF and Rafale in STR on that list is a bit perculiar, even when considering the upgraded F110-GE-132 powerplant (144 kN vs 131 kN of -129)
-
I agree, as fun as the jokes and stuff were in the beginning, they do become unnecessary distractions in the long run. A way to limit his vocals to vitals only would be nice.
-
6
-
1
-
-
50 minutes ago, Kula66 said:
This is the toned down version ... a few patches ago, it was far more pronounced.
Odd that such a rather drastic change was added so late. Based on what Ive read, you should be able to roll at high AoA without wobble when using rudder.
-
1
-
-
On 6/13/2023 at 11:58 AM, Zahnatom said:
im pretty sure that most us that are still here have read everything
its going to be a fun aircraft to fly
Well the above comments above indicated they hadn't
-
Finally got back to flying in DCS after a long hiatus, and noticed something different about the F14 right away. Specifically it seems a lot more wobbly when maneuvering at higher than 15 units AoA, eventhough Im only using rudder for roll here and not applying any side stick movement. I recall previously being able to roll without wobble at high AoA when using just rudder.
To me this is a big change to the FM, and it strikes me as odd to come so late. Was it really all wrong before and is it supposed to handle this poorly at high AoA when using just rudder for roll? Asking as it appears borderline pointless to try maneuvering at high AoA atm due to the unavoidable wobble.
-
3
-
-
Did you guys not read this?:
EF is going to beat the F-16C in BFM at any altitude.
-
@Aerges Devs
Do you have available the real aircraft's EM charts to tune kinematic aspects of the FM with, or are you forced to extrapolate/estimate here?
Just curious
-
3
-
-
Excited to hear about a change here, as the 19 felt way too stiff in pitch last I tested it. So really looking forward to trying her out again once I get back to flying
-
1
-
-
F4S imo, although I'd really like the J too.
-
1
-
1
-
-
The 54A Mk.60 goes over 500+ knots faster when launched from 33 kft at a co-alt target 80 nm away for me. Resulting in a speed of 1500 KTAS (Mk47 C) vs 2000 KTAS (Mk60 A) once withing 10 nm of the bogey. That's pretty extreme.
Also noticed that the missile will go into a super high lofting arc even against targets at relatively close range of <20nm.
-
9 hours ago, myHelljumper said:
As said above, the video is wrong the aircraft is not having 17 °/s turns at these speeds.......
We know the aircraft is over-performing in STR by ~10% at worst, but we already have a reworked FM version in development that resolved this issue.
As soon as the reworked FM and FBW are ready we will release them and then you guys can compare the turn rates :).
Ok, that's good to know. 10% can afterall be crucial in a dogfight, as it can amount to several deg/sec in turn rate.
Nice FM Update
in F4U-1D
Posted
Sounds good, the instability in yaw coupled with the extreme sensitivity in pitch has been my biggest gripe with the FM. Haven't tried the new updated FM yet, but hopefully the instability was dialled back SIGNIFICANTLY.
The Corsair was afterall famous for being a great gun platform and excellent ground attacker, which is not something instability in yaw or high sensitivity in pitch is very condusive to
The Corsair had light controls, not sensitive controls, there's a clear distinction there. Once cleaned up and in the air, its supposed to be very stable and easy to fly.