SinusoidDelta

The data would need to be extracted from a DCS flight to make that comparison. Tacview can record telemetry which can be exported to a csv. Then we could prove, quantitatively, which bird turns better and where in DCS. If we are then saying the Su-27 turns too slow compared to F-15C we would need to correlate with the flight manuals. Opinions need to be left out of FM validation. ps Thanks for the translation help on those perf. charts.

No there is not. In order to have a consensus someone will need to test sustained level turn performance, find a way to log it, and plot the results vs the actual flight manual. Also don't forget the manuals impose structural limits and give no performance figures beyond that point. The F-15 could be stressed to 12G in combat safely but the performance at those loads is not captured in the -1.

The charts I posted literally came out of the 2004 flight manual. Are they lacking something? Where did the charts you posted come from?

The F-15A~D, specifically the radar, still has the capability for AG modes. It may need a simple reprogramming but the capability is there.

So these are excerpts from, "САМОЛЕТ СУ-27СК РУК В ДСТВ П ЛЕТН Й ЭКСПЛУАТАЦИИ" aka the Su-27SK Flight Manual, dated 2004. Could someone possibly translate the chart titles and axes so we may use them for evaluation of the DCS FM?

The F-15A/B/C/D APG 63 radar has always had the capability for AG modes: http://www.ausairpower.net/Profile-F-15A-D.html

There is no reason to fly high? There are only SOME scenarios where flying low works. I'll agree in that I'll keep doing as I damn well please, 9 miles higher than you, speed of heat, and music on(Springsteen or something else patriotic). Sure I might be a target for everyone to see but I get a kick out of watching them try to catch me. Sure my turn radius may be the size of Texas but when the first indication of a missile launch is my slammer piercing through your canopy and I'm already 20mi cold, I'll say there IS a reason to fly high. Ignorance is bliss I suppose.

Yep, just an AI aircraft unfortunately...

See my post #252. The job of the FCS is to provide the pilot the same aircraft response when applying the same amount of stick deflection throughout the flight envelope.

Springs and dampers.... I'm listening! Do you have a design in the works? PS I ran a Mazak turning center at a previous job, nice work!:thumbup: I have a decent amount of experience with Autodesk Inventor. If you need something modeled in CAD I'd be more than happy to help.

Thank you for this. I stand corrected, there are numerous other documents available regarding a conceptual supercruiser. It's unfortunate only the abstract is available for the document provided. As of today, the term supercruise is more of a "buzz word" as it lacks a true definition.

If this is true please provide a source. To my knowledge there is no source, MIL spec or otherwise, that explicitly states criteria for supercruise.

Not to stir the pot here but my understanding was that no universally accepted definition exists for the term supercruise. If anyone can provide an official reference please do. The term 'supercruise' was invented by Lockheed Martin during development of the F-22. There is no point arguing over a capability that has no specific criteria.

I couldn't agree more. Teamspeak is the most valuable resource you have. I might add spending some time in single player with the manual handy to learn the basic controls. Most people in TS will be glad to answer more detailed questions. I also spent a lot of time in the virtual aerobatics server, dogfighting with the ground, just to learn the jet's performance capabilities.

Thanks for the information. Sorry for the OT post.

I apologize if this has been discussed elsewhere. I'm having issues when replaying multiplayer tracks from the 104th. They de-sync roughly 90% of the time, showing my jet as being stuck in the grass the entire mission. Is there any workaround for this? Thanks!

This looks awesome! I'd like to register as a lone wolf if slots are still available. Username: TwinScroll Aircraft: F-15C

I don't doubt that. I should've been more clear. The 220/229's on the F-15E's at RAF Lakenheath spool faster compared to the 220 modeled in DCS.

Were you watching F-15E's at RAF Lakenheath? The 229 responds to thrust inputs much faster than the 220. Its 7 seconds vs. 4 seconds to maximum thrust according to: http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/technology/engines/101-engines

AFIK, yes it's still broken. The T/O trim should only be pressed before takeoff. Yaw and roll actuators are driven to neutral position. The pitch trim actuator positions the control stick to 1 deg aft. The current FM just incrementally adds aft stick each time it is pressed.

I envy of you, I would empty my bank account for a ride along! I don't think we'll be able to simulate everything in my lifetime. The lack of feel is true with racing simulators as well. Us armchair pilots can't feel anything, so we have to keep our eyes glued on the HUD. We have no perception of roll rate aside from watching instruments and the horizon. This makes determining the point where the aircraft is about to depart very difficult, especially when it happens so quickly and in conditions where it should not. One thing to consider though, the F-15 requires 20lbs. of aft force to command 8G! (See the image below). You really had to work for those high G maneuvers. The force required to pull the Thrustmaster Warthog full aft is probably *less* than the breakout force (deadzone) on the real F-15! My understanding is the F-15's ARI intended to eliminate the need for flying with your feet at high AOA or adding left yaw with right stick, mostly because constantly dancing on the rudder pedals was such a burden for F-4 pilots.

A lengthier explanation of what you want to accomplish would be helpful, and for which aircraft. I don't know if every FM uses the same logic for stick input, obviously they don't in real life. Do you know if "flight control force" is some universal parameter in DCS? Regardless, it doesn't seem like there is pre-made solution hence why no one can link you to a specific thread. Have you experimented with any files in DCSWorld\Scripts\Input? Also: In the Eagle if you take your hand off the stick it will stay centered which is why I don't understand the second portion of your question.

I'd love to have a go in a professional simulator. You've flown the eagle in real life as well? What 'feel'/feedback' was the sim missing as opposed to the real thing? Regarding the PRCA, IMO the CSBPC could be simulated in Matlab or Labview. The flight control system is a bunch of block diagrams in the virtual sense. I'm not saying it would be a walk in the park to simulate but it's far from impossible.

Why can't the PRCA or the ARI be simulated?