Jump to content

Deano87

Members
  • Posts

    2705
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Deano87

  1. I have the exact same VR performance issues as @YoYo , with similar difference compared to other maps.
  2. You’re going to snap the gear clean off if you land it like the hornet without a flair. Yes the Mudhen gear is beefed up compared to the standard F-15, but it is still an airforce jet and not designed for a zero flair 700fpm drive into the runway like the Hornet. Aerobraking is a big part of slowing the F-15 down on landing as well.
  3. @Nahen There is a difference between talking about somebody’s skill set (can they pilot an aircraft) and their official aircrew title. In the F-15E there is Pilot and WSO, the WSO may well be able to pilot the aircraft but when on duty in the back of an F-15E he is the WSO and not the Pilot.
  4. There is much much less segregation of duties in the Strike Eagle when compared to the F-14 or even the Apache. Apart from a few switches in the back used to power on various systems both cockpits are equally capable at running the aircraft systems. The rear seat even has a set of flight controls and can fly the aircraft. It should be perfectly possible to fly the aircraft and employ all the sensors and weapon systems from the front seat without the actual need for a human WSO. Of course to be most effective a human WSO will be the way to go, with good crew coordination deciding who should manage which system/sensor or weapon system.
  5. Sarcasm doesn’t translate well over text, specially to people where English isn’t their first language. @Hummingbird was pointing out that the docs wouldn’t be available.
  6. Accessibility for people who don’t have the funds or space for a better setup has to be a good thing.
  7. Deano87

    simulation accuracy

    You must realise that the availability of information and feedback on how the real systems work compared to the sim will change after the module is released and a bigger number of experienced people get their hands on it. Every complex module for DCS has had functionality changes after being released, perhaps not to the same extent as the M2000, but still things have changed over the life of the modules. The F-15E will be no different. One cannot expect it to be perfect at the first attempt.
  8. Yes that’s correct. Technically it’s the AN/AAQ-13 Pod and it’s the right hand of the two pods carried under the Strike Eagle. It can be used in conjunction with other more modern TGPs like the LITENING or SNIPER. It provides the FLIR which can be projected up into the HUD and also the TFR. Here it is with the Sniper:
  9. I believe the Nav/Flir pod has the TFR in the F-15E, same as in the F-16.
  10. The hardpoint power switches, if you meant he two to the right of the stick next to the FCR and Radar Altemeter power switches are for the intake chin hardpoints (TGP & HTS) and are not related to the weapon hard points on the wings.
  11. Is it fitted in the mission? Depending on the time of the mission it will default to NVGs instead of HMCS
  12. You don't fly any of the other full fidelity modules?
  13. I suggest you listen to episode 27 of the Air Combat Sim podcast. Ron mentions that they want to implement a simplified backseat AI tool which can probably do things like run the TGP etc. From what I remember he doesn't mention if that would be a thing at release or not, I would guess not. So I don't see it effecting the release.
  14. I believe he means the "Very High Speed Integrated Central Computer".
  15. In that video he's using the keys to zoom. Probably / and * at the top of the numpad, or joystick bindings doing the same thing.
  16. @Thomas_Ryan Are you flying in Open Beta or Stable build of DCS, Stable may not have the new FLIR update yet. You'd need to be in Open Beta.
  17. So a climb profile for a jet will list two numbers. One is Airspeed and the other is mach. Essentially you select MIL, climb at the airspeed until the mach number increases to match the climb mach, then you switch to holding the mach instead of the airspeed. In my example of 375 knots / m 0.8, I set power to mil, pitch to maintain 375 knots, climb until the mach number reaches 0.8 and then I pitch to maintain 0.8 mach for the rest of the climb. The numbers to use will vary depending on loudout and drag. In a clean jet it’s much lower drag so it’s more efficient to fly faster with a climb profile of 450 KIAS / M 0.88. With a high drag config, you climb at a lower airspeed and lower mach, the best compromise between parasite drag (from the payload) and induced drag (from the extra AoA required to lift said payload).
  18. Another little thing I see people doing wrong a lot of the time, Climbing very inefficiently. Sometimes slowly, at reduced power. This is very inefficient. The most efficient way to climb is at MIL which is full power without afterburner. The point is to get to altitude quickly, with the minimum amount of drag. You want to get out of AB asap as soon as you're airborne and then let the jet accelerate to your climb airspeed in MIL, once at that speed you then pitch up to try and hold that airspeed, this will usually be steep at first and then require a gentle push over to maintain the same airspeed. Keep an eye on the mach indicator in the HUD and when the mach number matches the climb mach then you ignore your airspeed from then on and just climb according to mach number, again by varying pitch angle. The speeds for this climb profile will vary depending on your loadout or otherwise known as "Drag Index" or DI. DI 0 is essentially a clean jet with wingtip missiles. DI 300 would be a very draggy loadout. For a normal loadout like 2 tanks, 2 harm, 2 120s, ECM pod. I usually pick climb profile somewhere in the middle between these two extremes and it works well for me. Drag Index (DI) = 0: 450 KIAS until Mach 0.88 DI = 300: 300 KIAS until Mach 0.72 I usually climb around 375 KIAS until Mach 0.8 and that results in a reasonably efficient climb.
  19. That would be an excessive amount of data to try and upload/download when entering a server.
  20. Yes, obviously. But think about it. If the rotation calibration crosses don’t move with the helmet motion then how do you calibrate them? The whole point is that you’re calibrating the helmet when the pilot feels like he’s holding his head upright, looking forward. Due to changes in shape of the pilots head and general non symmetry of humans it’s entirely possible that the helmet may be a few degrees off from vertical. The crosses have to move with the helmet, so that the pilot can drive them back to vertical as part of the calibration process and thus establish the required offset to level the symbology inside the helmet.
  21. Ahhhh ok my mistake. I didn’t catch that’s what you meant. I’m not sure you’re correct though, the pilot holds his head level, then you rotate the calibration crosses to line up, and then essentially calibrates how much offset the helmet is from true vertical when on the pilots head. What would be the point of the rotation step if it *Didn’t* rotate with the helmet? I’ll ask my brother, but that may be beyond his memory.
  22. @FrederfLet me understand your statement. If pilot rolls his head 45 degrees to the right while looking forward, just to the side of the HUD, you believe the symbology in the helmet should maintain level in regards to the cockpit? That is to say roll 45 degrees to the left? And by “symbology” I mean heading tape, airspeed altitude etc etc. My brother flew the RDAF MLU Vipers and in that aircraft the HMD symbology was fixed to the helmet. That is to say it’s correct as it is in DCS. This can be seen well at 33:00 in this video:
  23. The symbology should say static compared to the helmet. All the roll calibration does is account for the difference between the fitment of the helmet and the pilot holding his head upright. When the pilot tilts his head the symbology in the helmet should not move compared to the pilots head.
×
×
  • Create New...