jackmckay

I brought my Hotas Cougar in 2004 cause of flight sims, played all versions of lock on, up to dcs version now. Changed 3pcs since, every one cost around 3-5k bucks. Tracking every change ever since and I dont like the mess now. Im old enough to claim what is wrong from my perspecive as long time user and player. I know how FM and DM behaved before, and I'm sure many other witneses are here too to say some things are teribly wrong with physics. Is that a sin? Instead, I got banned for demanding some explanations as customer. I'm at that point to fire up vulcan api, dotnet, 3dsmax, setup team, kick crowdfunding and build and compile core engine that actually works. Later modifiyn prime template to morph it into any possible plane or craft in the world in matter of months not years, inteligent netcode that just cant be misinterpreted as teleportation. In that case I would just refund allmost complete DCS and go coding up to 3AM .. Somehow I'm still here, not becouse what DCS is now, bu because what DCS used to br once before... So we expect new DM? Tell me when it will be applied?

ED is developing DCS for 30 years? How come they cant fix bugs so fast then if coders know source code as own pocket? How come that in 30yrs ED didnt manage to complete core engine stablility and modular system based on unified physics and DM, one ring to rule them all? Instead they deal with 'beauty' of dx11 api utilization and gpu subroutines thanx to Microsoft. Terrain aquired from nasa radar elevation points, beutified by 3d max outsourced plugins.. The only thru simulation task was to setup physics engine and ED neglected it. That was the only real task in 30years that shoul be progresively updated and set up as golden rule of simulation. Instead of modyfing super flexible template ed gives modules to ousourcing companys that do what, 3dmax model and animations for years. All charts found online in actual declassified flight manuals as valid sources. We, the customers dont believe that simulation is right, as can be easily seen if one compares simple missile range data from dcs one. Missiles never reach even 30% of their nominal range. Either air has super low Reynolds numbers or all models are actually enlarged by factor of two. Making two versions of game instead of implementing localization charts brings suspition that what is indestructible in EN version could be not on RU version and vice versa. Its up to ED to proove that DCS is real simulator by giving us comparison tests simulated vs real charts and deviations in any region if they want to shut up the customers. Even simultanious tests of all modules side by side that are validated by actual geometry and propulsion data. Either that or stop calling this rigged game an 'simulator'. Why so much trouble, well DCS made people spend tremendious amount of money on hardware aside from modules, to get what? Unoptimized 25fps game that is so obviously rigged in favour of specific on demand modules and uses single core aside from second for sound. Thats no game developement as it is manipulation of customers. We the customers value our time as much as ED does but we dont get the product we support. Even less, we dont even get minimum respect. Thats BS.

Who in the world would accept 'simulator' to have single model OP-ed? Thats no simulator, its rigged arcade game designed for f15 jackasses that should actually play acecombat instead, prefereably on ps gamepad. That is DM level of F15 now. Such a waste of time.

The only thing that should be shutdown is eagle damage model. Everyday we see IAF case on DCS MP servers, even IAF case defys all laws of physicy, with many aspect of nonrepetitive practice, survivability of IAF guy is up to only one factor - luck. So how lucky eagle will remain in DCS, its up to developers but sure one day it will be put on the ground, either by fixing DM or by being overrun by competition in flight sim domain.

There is no player in MP that hadn't experienced this F15 DM BS. I get your point but F5 is not even in high class of fighters.

DCS lacks in good code structure as basis for upgrades of any kind. Any new update that aims fixing stuff brakes lot of another things. There must be a good code map under all levels. Memory allocation is obvious problem. Tectonic changes in frontend should be exception rather than rule. MP code is non synced across all clients and its quite limited. Hardware resources are extremely high and very expensive. Priority should be code optimization, fc4 should come later.

Besides obvious sluggishness and buggy DM, Mig29 has some serious pilot issues like tendency to blackout sooner than on other modules. There's something very wrong with that, personally observed.

Yeah, I meant with gear down, V1, Vr, pitchup 12deg (11 is ok iirc), then kaboom, plane is runway scrap. Its very difficult to takeoff without AB. Naah, -1 to damage model coders. Any fixes in sight?

Mig29 tailstrike on takeoff shouldn't be fatal. It should generate nozzle failure first.

The speed considered should be TAS speed, not GS so roll rate should increase with air density. Also factors to be considered regarding roll rate in respect to TAS are inertial matrix or weight distribution meaning that roll rate is lower if wing tanks are full.

This sounds like dr chow neck belt commercial but I cant remember last time fighting against full scale SAM defences with S300/Patriot on top anywhere dcs online. This is utilization of all modern dcs assets. Few can do it, drax did it, and most imortant, it is stable as there is very few lag occurances. What is missing by my opponion is ability to anable/disable slots by user actions so players can enable slots closer to battle line e.g. by escorted transport plane.

The only full fidelity server. Fast, stable and chalenging. [emoji106]

Guys, get real. None of you last here offered any explanation nor standpoint besides active trolling without arguments. The few engineers and reasonable people offered some guelines and articles like tharos did for nasa study. David, zukhov etc. you give nothing to clear any point of initial claim so dont push that conspiracy or neverending argument war card, its way out of this topic and can be used on topics from car color to mars rover. Its obsolete. The reason that eagle landed in one peace is on edge of luck and any other deviation would result in crash as all initial claims are very real and valid. Luck saved him and if you have something regarding explanation of aerodynamics or mechanics feel free to add to topic, otherwise dont push that nostandpoint outoftopic posts. ;) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Flow, I was just to model it for analysis but then i noticed that there was this part still attached to wing root. Just enough of parasitic drag to counter yaw tension. Wing was scissor cut upwards as there are traces of collision from starboard engine bottom up to wing root parallel to rudder fin that probablly saved plane from aft damage. collision speed contributed cleancut and removal of dangerous fuel mass from wing tank. possibly fatal leak was not continued from conformal one as if it did plane would for sure burst in flames. Guy was lucky as hell. That peace of flap kept fuel leak path away from entering afterburner zone by countering yaw as i said before. Any other case of midair wouldnt result this combo atleast in 1/mil cases. NASA's control surfaces reconfiguration is by my opinnion obsolete study but this conclusion opens a lot of possibilities in case max asymetric drag config. I still stand by my claims from beginning that complete loss of wing is fatal for plane, case is that wing was not lost in complete and that I havent read from either articles, HC video nor NASA. I said what I said, and I was probably wrong in some parts but pilot didn't told complete truth as it triggered my reaction and I didnt zoomed enough in pictures. I'm about to comit windtunnel test as it was my initial intention but with parasitic drag amount range instead of complete wing absence. This does not mean that DCS should give F15 that lucky strike so it allways flies rtb without wing. That odd is one in a million, not rule.

Yes they do by default. Here comes the conclusion. The only thing that could save this pilot is miracle, and it obviously happened. Statistical possibility for IAF case to happen again are in milion scale. And it seems that I was possibly wrong about one key point: counter drag. After midair, remaining wing could have had enabled enough drag to counter extreeme yaw momentum due to missing large portion of wetted area. Stable state was not possible to achieve by any remaining control surfaces or engine power if complete wing was missing, burning afterburners on leak was highly dangerous too. It looks that remaining of flap held missing wing crossection drag. Nothing else in the world could have save him and it looks by the pictures that it was the only solution. But thing about wing hidden in cloud of fuel could be very subjective view of pilot in trouble. But at the end, its not whoole wing missing, god gave him another smaller but draggy enough in place. What did the wingman saw? He couldn't catch him on afterburner? I will laugh for weeks. Ps. Where are that engineers here?

Troll section is down the corridor guys :) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Zhukov looks good in psychological profilation so I suggest profiling Nadiev statements as f15 pilot. Flow if you're engineer than why dont you stick to the topic then and use all your engineering skills to counter my claims? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

zukhov&flow are you engineers? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

@Vitormoura, are you payed to post such claims? You can call it "quarkized" but it wont dissolve to quarks. There is only one form of fuel/air mixture cloud behind leaking plane, and it damn burns hot if ignited in any way. FA18 Manual, page I-2-14/Change 6: "Simultaneous selection of fuel dump and afterburner during high AOA maneuvering may cause fuel to ignite with resulting fuselage damage." The only upper limit of landing speed is tire limit, lower is stall. Pilots must stay in between to stay safe, every pilot knows that. If ED based F15C damage model on IAF case, I say its wrong and that's my conclusion. ED doesn't have to listen to me or anybody else but I hope they will fix this dm saga. I also hope that no AF pilot will ignite fuel cloud by afterburner if leaking from wing tank, that's bad thing to do. Stay safe. Godspeed.

@David OC ttaylor obviously can speak for himself but lawyers assistance is always beneficial. So let me post you again: -atomized fuel.. fine, but word meaning is misleading cos you cant atomize molecules, nevertheless, its about air (n78%,o21%,x1%) jet fuel(CnH2) mixture in various rate that is flammable if temperature is above 40°c (flashpoint), if t>220°c autoignition occurs. Exhaust gas temperature is >800%c so you can easily ignite leaking fuel that creates fuel-air mixture cloud behind leaking plane by use of afterburner, that's why egg. f18abc flight manual says that it is FORBIDDEN to do so, ttaylor should know that. Heat is transferred in 3 ways: mixing, transmission and radiation. Fuel/air combo burns at >1000°c (and is/was used in napalm) but that heat is sometimes enough to melt skin of fighter plane which is mostly made of aluminum (composites, steel and titanium have higher melting point) that melts above 600°c. Concerning origin of fuel dump/leak spot and time for fuel to completely scatter and slow down enough to ignite, fireball will be closer to skin, closer to skin, faster it melts, if it melts it loses aerodynamic function etc.. tivial. -mig29 collision image has sequel where complete plane is engulfed in flames cos fuel mist entered engine. its just few seconds later on video. David OC, get real man, we don't talk conspiracy sh* here, were talking mechanics and physics not being implemented right way on F15 model in DCS. RL parallel is that IAF mystique one winged jedi flight that is by my complete understanding, knowledge and experience complete forgery. If your'e scientist or engineer, please be free to counter any claim from start by numbers or graph. If you're somebody's lawyer, please change profession.

I found warheads data somewhere. R60 has warhead weight of some early iglas or even early sidewinders so its no breeze. Actually salvo fire is default for intercept mission bomber kill. I will answer on that ttaylor post davidoc when im at wider screen. Im glad we have guy that has to read actual manual and take it serious. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

nightwolf.. he had wingman.. he didn't saw missing wing too. tharos.. nobody seen missing wing until settled down on runway.. like it was a paperclip. cmon' i'm rock solid about my claims. im using rule ot the thumb and magnitude level comparison to profile the case. if i had a slight doubt i wouldn't step out with this. the only link between current eagle damage model and RL story is this one from IAF guy. As also is one case of torn of portion of wing from su27 test flight that made all dcs flankers loose wings with fcs on. that was fixed, eagle is on dm steroids rampage.

Vitor, agree, that is obvious. But check what IAF pilot said about vapour hiding complete wing. we call it brain**** in my county. if so he must have lit it as soon as hit afterbnurners. first person in human hhistory to do that and walk away from a plane - unburnt. I only saw eagle flying with one wing in DCS, even without booth. brain**** squared.

vitor... its going to ignite if you have fuel leak over engine exhaust path and lit afterburner. autoignition 220°c/exaust gas temperature +800°c - what else to add? burn temperature 1000+°c/aluminium melting point 600+°c check that mig29 collision video, read flight manuals and get real. or stay away.

Rage: You're right about that bug. That's the core problem of this post. - Im trying to link anything that could give ed team credibility to give f15 this hard dm model. i found only this IAF story. tharos and other guys that claim that plane can fly without complete wing and brake all structural an stability limits are one that my replies are directed to.