jackmckay

For F-15 it is known that it gets heyvy buffeting at peak turn rate high AoA and pilots must ease out becouse of heavy vibrations also becouse it has no LE stats to keep laminar airflow on wing. That was MD's trade for speed to reach Foxbat, rember mach 2.5? So eagle shouldnt perform STR better than LE slatted planes. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Macerick gave good CL lift progression vs AoA. Im sorry I cant test anything now becouse DCS 2.5 eats my gtx760. Obviously not best time to buy gcard but have to. Regardless of CL, the drag is very important in linear acceleration and in turn as it bleeds speed directly. I did linear acceleration subsonic test from 650 to 1100kmh all modules AI simultaniously, all AB engined fleet, made power to weight progression charts, setup things and run.. A got a complete mess, planes with lower T/W ratio accelerated better than other with higher.. Egg. Viggen had linear acceleration up to vmax without ease out on peak as fastest plane there.. Mig21 was behind many even it has better T/W ratio than mirage that was second befind viggen... The problem is unreal drag calculation in basic linear acc test. Also IAS is onl relevant speed wind tunnel testing. Cd vs AaA is a must chart for flight model correction. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What, 40% of fuel trapped? Cant be. 2% max. What gives wrong fuel readout? Chart or DCS? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If its allready well known to ED then why it is so drasticly and obviously changed with each new update? How come module flight performance margin is not sealed from beginning? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can get along many things said here but one not. How come someone can develope sucessfull simulator product without advanced knowledge of science behind? What competence to relly on? Its like saying GFYS to wing tunnel guys and going for test ride. Airfoils are so damn important if one wants to discuss expected performance. Airfoil makes charts in first place and egg. slats are integral part of airfoil metamorphosis regarding to flight regime. I take side on this discussion and that goes along Maverick's claims. Eagle is OPed again. Tune it down a litlle bit. And set blackout point before wing rip offs in Flanker or other ones. That should be closer to reality. Eagle pilots should learn to conserve energy as on high AoA heavy buffet occurs unsimulated in DCS. Hugs and kisses to everyone here ;) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, tharos, r u sure there are no real fighter pilots here? Maybee they are boored with regular procedures? U can never know. Maybee some of them are real aircraft designers that work on wind tunnel testing and research.. Man can't be sure, right. On the other hand, what performance charts from pilots manual say about stall speed, itr, str, max speed, climb comparison between theese two, where on chart and in whos favor? But before going deeper, what airfoil is used on Su27 main wing? PS. If RL pilots have never overstressed wings to broke off how come that they fall off in DCS? Maybe DCS pilots have too strong arms and super high resistance to g-locs? If so, is that real? And regarding my homework, if you respected mr. Tharos, send me 3d model of DCS integrated eagle and flanker, and ill give you back comparrison data of each plane sweetspots with aerodynamic charts. But not before telling me what airfoils they use? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

@GGTharos So did they (USAF) broke some wings on Ukrainian Flankers there over Nevada since they are pushing them to the limit? :) Having slats was proved to be positive in increasing critical AoA since WW2. If Eagle doesn't have them and Flanker does, who gets better STR? Eagle is energy fighter and flanker close combat one. That's the whole story. Who thinks that plane flies by mind strength instead of aerodynamics, is wrong. One thing which is wrong from beginning regarding ED module policy and that, in my opinion, having multiple flight models for each airframe. That is completely wrong approach from aspect of flight physics since one module is entangled by mystical forces and other is not or just wraith-ed. What is the purpose of "simplified" in game settings if its made on some modules by default. Cockpit interaction level, sure, but flight dynamics, nah. So we can't take anything serious from ED if we have different external FMs.

Macerick explained the difference well. F15 is energy fighter and flanker better in close combat. Thats fundamental difference and RL fact. Yenkee knows it, Commies knows it. DCS is wrong. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If they have data, i really hope they do, then why fligh model changes from time to time? I can understand structural modelling or damage model being hidden or hard to evaluate but flight performance margins should be clearly known and clearly immitated if ed guys have them. I again hope that they have aerodynamic data available. From my perspective they are close to real but again, independent certification is quantum leap. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then, from my perspective, ED is giving up best argument against any doubt. Its generally matter of geometry only and geometry can be receated from outside and tested independently. Systems are mostly classified as it shoul be but geometry is visible to all. Not giving cfd validation of flight modeling is big step in direction away from calling DCS a 'simulator'. Just that simple, no certified validation, no pro market. Just game, no more no less. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everything maxed, gtx760, 2gb vram, mssa off, 45fps.. mssa on 25fps. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With all the respect to everybody here.. I haven't seen any simulated professional grade CFD studies committed by either ED or FC that will give even rough level comparison between all high performance fighters in aspects of AoA vs Drag or Mach vs Drag SA charts from clean to fully loaded up to landing configurations. None. That data charts must fit into pilot's manual charts available with certain error margin that has to be same for all models tested. Why? Because that data would give ED or everyone included in module development credibility for all the work done here. It would also stop talks about who's favorite plane is better in this or that aspect of combat turns and everybody would go play instead of complaining here about mostly personal observation confronting their understanding of flight dynamics. I can do that evaluation but someone from ED or FD needs to PM me, set price, sign NDA, send 3d models, get charts and verification and enjoy the silence of sheep here on forum and get credibility for work done even beyond gaming industry. It doesn't have to be me but any professional in field. That's the missing link here.

What about EKRAN codes? https://studfiles.net/preview/2137820/

What is RL case then for A/S models? Found this: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=39372

I just found out that Eagle bleeds energy way quicker now. Which should be realistic as RL buffeting occurs at high transonic speeds in max G turn limiting laminar turn. Eagle pilots are not happy about that but Flanker guys had much worse problem in wing rips and Eagle OPd so they'll have to adopt. Flanker has one issue remaining still and that is inverted flat spin entry and recovery. Engines are dead in secs and hyd power too so there's no way to deflect control surfaces at all to recover. Is there a backup system or negative G tank in Flanker? On the other hand, when turning off FCS and if not trimmed up (trim limit is not sufficient for high transonic stabilization so manual work is only solution which is hard to believe to be RL feature) plane goes in instant flat spin and pilots blackouts. Next, pilot is unconscious all the way to the ground even plane is stable inverted in free fall. That is hard to believe to be truth.

Works for me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Red are not able to load crates at any FARPS. Is that intentional? I noticed that red MANPAD troops are not firing missiles in any case but they do capture airfields. Sukhumi didn't had reinforcements after being captured. Nothing inbound. Server is very stable. +10

The real problem is Mig29 Pilot. Yes. It goes blackout really easy and that limits close dogfight ability, now F15 has better turn rate in furball than of Fulcrum which doesn't make much sense. Mig29 also has terribly low roll rate at high transonic speeds (which could be real) so all of this makes it really limited airframe that can't do dogfight against anything with A-A radar on and can't protect itself in defensive maneuvers. It's a really shame and waste of any effort now as it's being completely downgraded module by some unknown reason. PFM definitely but Pilot G-LOC training first.

@maverick Can you post GPS cord of Farps somewhere in the briefing? Also is it possible to disable (red) AWACS radio chatter sound on server and leave only subtitles? PS. What about adding some (orange) early morning or sunset time set just for immersion. Mission looking good and sable. Thumbs up.

Shouldn't IAS be refereed as primary speed reference?

I would go for Mirage on booth but skin different (blue-ish on blue, red-ish on red) as F5 would go on blue.. But don't mind it as is. Respect to the mission coders, tough job.

104th is in the race now. Nice. Very stable server should be joker on this one. GCI restrictions, great idea, already talked about that, good to find it implemented. Looking forward to this one. Order of battle is very clean as there is strict visual difference between NATO/Russia assets, except F5 (but fits into Iranian assets). M2k is very popular but F15 should handle it good especially on 104 and also Harriers should mimic Falklands versus Mirages too. I'm really hope that it will stay stable and warping free. Lets try it first. Good luck 104.

Zulu time maybe? :D

Its probably gonna be released on 31st at 23:59 :)