Jump to content

tom_19d

Members
  • Posts

    443
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Personal Information

  • Location
    United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks for the update Pikey and for the work of the whole team. You guys are a model of professionalism and transparency, truly an amazing effort.
  2. It‘s almost as if you think you are the only person on this forum who has ever started an engine. Regardless, I haven’t been disagreeing with you so much in principal as trying to point out that trying to get ED to change anything on this module that doesn’t violate manual limitations is awful tough. Getting them to do it without incontrovertible evidence is a lost cause. Good luck though (again, not sarcasm, more realism is always better in my book).
  3. As one of the (occasional) Harrier drivers, I have used FARPS across several of the missions, although admittingly not all, and have never had a problem taking on fuel and ordnance. Except of course, you can't take much of either (not the fault of the mission/server, just weight limitations coming off a FARP pad). Despite the fact that I like using the Harrier as a striker and because the VSTOL is a fun novelty, I agree wholeheartedly that the aircraft is a bit of a shoehorn fit to this server, and if the F4 materializes I will fully embrace swapping the Harrier for old Double Ugly.
  4. Cool video (not sarcasm, I actually really enjoy any of the old training films from the various services) but I have a question when I watch it. They only show instruments on super tight shots, with usually just one whole gauge visible. Also, they demonstrate several abnormal start conditions. Do you really believe they actually induced a hot start and dealt with it so expertly on the first try (because you won't get a second take if you don't) that they captured the needle at exactly 845 and it slammed right back down? Because personally, if I were going to make such a video where I didn't need to show a wide shot of the whole process, it wasn't live, and modern CGI wasn't an option, I would just have maintenance pull the EGT harness apart at one of the cannon plugs back by the engines. Then they could hook up a test set and induce a voltage to show the readings I need to capture. That seems much safer than potentially burning up a perfectly good engine just for a training film. And once they had that done and the camera was already perfectly framing the EGT gauge, I would probably just capture footage of the other "starting abnormalities" and a "good start" as well. This would be much safer and has the benefit of not putting extra cycles on the engines, and it would be easy to dub over whatever sound was required. Of course I can't prove that was the method used to generate that footage any more than I or any other viewer can prove those were actual shots of an actual EGT gauge in a real T38 in real time. But regardless, as you said, the DCS start violates no limitations set forth in the manual. Perhaps more importantly, at least on their website, the USAF says the T38 uses a -5 engine. Our DCS F5 uses a -21, so I'm not sure trying to match numbers to a T38 is a valid comparison. There is a difference in published engine limitations between the state "continuous" and the state "idle." By your logic, since the DCS J85 idles in the mid 50s, that is also incorrect. Should it idle at 80% as denoted by the bottom of the green arc? Because right now in DCS as I begin a smooth spool up for takeoff my EGT and N1 both enter the green arc at almost exactly the same times, which is perfectly logical. This whole thread seems to lend some credence to the design philosophy of removing numbers entirely from engine instruments and just using colored arcs, since from the pilot's perspective the numbers are basically arbitrary anyway. This world has plenty jet engines that have higher temperature / longer duration EGT starting limits than the J85. There is nothing strange about it, it is just the difference between holding a thermometer 1 foot away from an acetylene blowtorch to holding it 5 feet away. The torch temp stays the same, you are just reading the temp at a different location.
  5. Why? Different manufacturers have different ITT probe placement relative to the burner can so comparing ITTs across makes or really even different models by the same manufacturer isn't particularly useful. Per 1F-5E-1 there is no reason to abort a start until EGT reaches 845 C, so no limitations are being exceeded. I'm not saying you are wrong that most J85s might start a little cooler, and I too would be very interested to see a startup video, but if you were going to squawk "our" F5 with maintenance, what would you tell them? It is performing within book parameters, so how could you really argue a change is needed even if video from another J85 shows a cooler start? Lots of factors are at play here and as you know, even the two engines on the same aircraft will have different indications during start, but as long as they stay within limitations it isn't a concern.
  6. The NA version of the Harrier (the DCS model) is Sidewinder only. The later Harrier Plus versions had a radar (APG-65 I believe) that would support the AMRAAM.
  7. Nicely done, thanks for the effort. Interesting read.
  8. +1 — If it could also save a small text file with the results and the settings that were employed during the test (or post such data in game so it could be captured in a single screenshot) these results could easily be shared here on the forum — it could eliminate lots of speculation, arguments, and bad information.
  9. Sweet! Loving the last couple days of Harrier news!
  10. Will do Phone booth never disappoints, agree with @Brown Floyd, it was a good rotation last night, numerous red and blue aircraft on the mission all the way through until it timed out. I actually got to see this message on Phone Booth just before New Years. I don’t know how common it is but I don’t see that many complete victories on this server (granted I don’t get to fly as much as I used to) but it is nice to see that there are always at least a few people trying to complete the overall objectives.
  11. Hi Alpen, regarding strong crosswinds, as you know I have always been in favor of more challenging weather but when it comes to wind the F5 still has this bug. It has been confirmed by ED as affecting both the F5 and the F16. It is supposedly fixed internally for the next beta for the F16 but I have seen no such fix confirmed soon at hand for the F5. If you read that thread you will see, but suffice to say headwind/tailwind changes are currently doing some very weird and unrealistic things to the aircraft. Once this gets squared away, I would say have at it with some gnarly winds, good idea from @Velosocuba.
  12. I experimented a little bit with JDAM PK on the A10C last fall. Running 20 consecutive passes using the most consistent and favorable conditions I could conceive, I found 38's to have a success rate of ~75% achieving one pass / one bomb K-Kills on T72s. Full write up / data / tracks here. In light of that, my feeling since has been, when a tank positively has to go down in one pass under visual conditions, I'm going for the Paveway. This was using the latest OB of the time (Oct 2019)...if something has been updated or changed since then, kindly disregard.
  13. I didn’t know that was a thing, I need to get smart on the red aircraft! Thanks.
  14. Maybe I am missing something, but which server setting could affect the RWR?
×
×
  • Create New...