SinusoidDelta

I had the same opinion as you before trying the Rift. I wasn't about to give up on my 34" ultra wide with TrackIR. Eventually I had enough of hearing how incredible VR. Curiosity got the best of me and I bought a CV1 with the intent of trying it once, confirming that my monitor setup was the best and then return it. That was about 2 months ago. I can't even stand playing DCS on my beautiful monitor now :cry::cry::cry: Obviously it isn't perfect. Spotting aircraft further than maybe 4 miles is impossible without model enlargement. The cockpit details are actually much better than I'd expected, so long as your PC can handle it. You might be waiting a while if you hold off until the next gen. Maybe just wait until prices come down for this gen.

I've grown to like the "User Curve" option over the exponential curvature. Here's a very rough example I posted in another thread: I typically try to keep the two segments of my "User Curve" linear. The initial curve at the stick-free position provides the fine control needed for wing-work or A2A refueling. It also provides a constant breakout force to overcome the deadband and make a significant control input. Once outside of the deadband the response is linear.

In the last few years a lot of research has been published applying game theory and optimal control techniques for autonomous descision making in A2A combat. A few examples: http://acl.mit.edu/papers/McGrewSM.pdf http://www.operaatiotutkimus.fi/seminaarit/203/esitykset/virtanenkai.pdf http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/ucacres/PCES.pdf You may recall a month or two ago when a raspberri pi defeated a USAF pilot in a simulator. The pi used something called "Genetic Fuzzy Trees". Information on that technique is also publicly available. It'd be very interesting to see what programmers could come up with if the AI logic in DCS was available!:pilotfly:

I'm not sure what you and pr1mal are arguing about. If we are trying to understand how TO trim should work, read my post and look at the link. There's more than one article that touches on TO trim. I'm not asking anyone to take my word for it, the article was written by an MCD Lead Engineer.

Nose wheel range allows the nose gear to be turned further. I can't remember the number of degrees. It's mapped to the "S" key by default. Only use it at very low speeds for sharp turns. If rudder is applied when the nosewheel touches down you'll likely wind up with a "tank slapper", veering from one side to the other. Obviously this gets worse the faster you land. Make sure you are landing at the proper speed. Aerobrake as long as possible, setting the nose down around 90kts. Continue to hold full aft stick and gradually apply brakes. If you are braking over a long distance don't use maximum brakes. I usually apply half of max as shown on the controls indicator (rctrl+enter).

Here is the link to the MCD Eagle Talk Product Support Digest So if you trust the source is accurate (I certainly do) the F-15 will fly itself off the runway at approx 165 knots when TO trim is selected. As GG pointed out this is because TO trim stick position is established as 0.4" aft of neutral. As I understand it, this serves the purpose of defeating the PTC in order to get full commanded stabilator without delay. See the excerpt below: Hopefully this clears things up a bit.

IIRC a clean eagle will fly itself off the runway at 165 knots with TO trim. I'll have to dig up the Eagle Digest article I saw that in.

I decided to have a look at the -34. According to it, the Eagle's M61 should have a dispersion of 90%, 8 mils at 1000ft. So, at a range of 1000ft, 90% of the rounds should pass within an 8ft circle. I haven't tested this. (Honestly I'm not sure how you would) IRL, the rate of fire is selectable between either 4,000 or 6,000 rounds-per-minute. Anyone know what the rate of fire is in the DCS F-15?

Just wanted to share this RL video of an F-15A doing ACM. There is some commentary from the eagle driver as well.

For those who don't have the -1, here ya go. Take note in the upper left hand corner. With or without CFT / All drag indexes / 21 Units AOA.

I'm unable to replay tracks from the VR cockpit view. When un-paused the viewpoint will be set at some airfield. If I enter the F10 map view I can't leave it. The view never switches to cockpit view. Can anyone else try to replicate this? The track was recorded on the 104th phoenix server.

I haven't checked the russian jets but the F-15C pit has a lot of animation arguments that are un-used at the moment:

I can confirm that bug still exists, in MP at least. I don't know if that is what OP is referring to either though.

IMHO the only viable use of the flying telephone pole is when there's risk of fratricide. This is assuming 120's are available though. High alt/mach sparrow shots don't seem nearly as effective as of late but I don't have acmi's from a year ago to prove it. That's a whole other subject though.

IIRC the P-42 had more modifications than listed there. The leading edge slats were removed, the flaperons were removed/replaced with fixed units, and the engines were hot-rodded to produce several thousand pounds more thrust. The P-42 has much less in common with the Su-27 compared to the streak eagle. The majority of the records it took were beaten by about 4 seconds or so and 10+ years later. It's certainly an impressive feat of engineering but has little relevance to the performance of the Flanker.

Well as a matter of fact....;)

I think the OP is mostly speaking about climb rate. A clean F-15 with less than 5k lbs of fuel will climb like a bat out of hell. OP hasn't provided a track so we don't really know the specifics of his concern. It would be much appreciated if he would post the track, in order to keep this thread from devolving like they typically do.

Interesting stuff. A quick google search turns up a lot of applications for pseudorandom noise (PRN). Punk's citation is intentionally vague in terms of how PRN was utilized. I'm guessing it's elementary stuff by today's standards. Here is one source that mentions it for the Aim-54 and 120: http://calhoun.nps.edu/bitstream/handle/10945/41427/14Mar_Osborn_Adam.pdf?sequence=1 And a small excerpt from Missile Guidance and Control Systems by George M. Siouris. I think that is what he alludes to here. The only other mention of PRN is in regards to cruise missile GPS guidance signals which doesn't really apply here.

I've had a few multiplayer rounds in recently. What is the consensus? For me, the missiles seem to perform the same as always, which is awful. In my opinion there has been a slow but very steady degradation of missile performance over the last 7-8 months. The range of shots I take now are about 1/2 of what they were in 1.2.x. and the initial 1.5 beta.

Во-первых, я извиняюсь за помощью машинного перевода. Я надеюсь, что это может быть понято. У меня есть вопрос относительно config.lua FM http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2133844&postcount=25 После некоторых обновлений record_enabled функция изменилась. Команда не клавиатура больше не создает текстовый файл данных журнала полета. Содержимое файла .lua теперь это: Может кто-то сообщить мне, как включить и записывать данные из этого? Было бы очень признателен. Я скучаю по этой характеристике очень много. Спасибо.

I found this document for reference. Pages 9,10, and 14 have good dimensions, torso angle, h.p., and c.g. location. [ame=http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a029180.pdf]http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a029180.pdf[/ame]

I have to re-bond zoom every flight with the rift. Occasionally it stops working mid-flight and I have to re-bind. Same with the set center position UI control.

I disagree that a common eagle pilot in DCS will sustain 10+G for 3 seconds. Regardless, if you've read this thread in its entirety I don't know why you think 14G transient will kill you. Like Ktulu said, there is about a 5 second window. Humans can withstand a very high transient G inside that window. John Stapp survived a ~40G deceleration in the forward direction. His colleague Beeding survived a rearward decel measured ~80G for 50ms at the chest accelerometer. http://youtube.com/watch?v=siau78EFLgc I think if anything, DCS's G-LOC happens a bit too early and far too abruptly if our pilot is wearing an anti-G suit.

1) Yes, the first two digits (i.e., 17R = 170 degrees right aspect) 2) I think you're describing the minimum indicators for chaff/flair 3) The target bearing relative to you

I don't really see how it's relevant but can you provide a source the F–14 test data? The core, if you will, of this argument is one failure modes. AFAIK there is no F-15 airframe strength test data. I may have seen a photograph in a book somewhere but no load factor was given. You can find some data about fatigue life but mostly useless for our purposes. I imagine the F-15 might elongate more than you'd expect subject to a high load. I also know you can "rip the wings off" as a McAir engineer put it. We also know of the crash I've posted. Hence the OWS. That's about it.