aaron886

If anyone else wishes to confirm their key/coupon was accepted (“Coupon was already used” is not very comforting,) check the module information page and look under the purchasing option buttons on the right. It will not show under the “My Orders” page, I’m not sure that has been made clear yet. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/tomcat/

A man of culture, I see!

I think they just summarily reject bug reports if you have mods installed because they don't have time to determine if mods are at fault or not. It seems highly unlikely that mods are at fault because they can't touch the logic that affects the UFC/MC/DL but that's how it goes.

Nice, is it your intent to insult all pilots? Are you enjoying stirring the pot ad infinitum? Does your extensive knowledge as a flight simulator enthusiast or some other (hopefully real life) qualification enable you to pass judgement on professional pilots? Perhaps, being a little more level-headed, you would consider what someone is actually saying and realize that experiential knowledge might sound or look different than what you read in a book, and should be learned from. No, you don't get to insult a large group of people (whose profession you mock as you enjoy the play version of it on your computer,) and then say "no offense to anyone." Say it and mean it, or think better of it next time.

Based on the hinge location, it appears they swing inward toward the pilot to shade the instrument panel.

What's burning off in the pickled engine run, protectant coatings? Not familiar.

Looks fantastic. The quality of your work increases continually. I'm especially impressed with the afterburner detent design.

Sergeant_Hamlet: not really. (Edit: I took so long to respond it looks like you more or less answered your own question. Here's this anyway.) The dihedral effect imparts lateral stability, meaning the jet will stop rolling when you stop commanding it to, or at least more than if it didn't exhibit some degree of positive dihedral effect. Note that this is not to say the outer wing panels did not have geometric anhedral as Victory205 says. In this case "dihedral effect" implies the combined effects of all sources of rolling stability, including the high-mounted wing and low-mounted engines. I'll try to summarize it below. Note how most fly-by-wire jets feature mid-line engines and wings because these effects can be produced by a computer. For the original post: 1. Yes, fly-by-wire can help cover up aerodynamic flaws. Of course there's more to it than that, if you stacked the F-14A up against the F-15A I'm confident you'd find the latter displays far fewer roll-yaw coupling effects. NATOPS will probably tell you the jet exhibits proverse yaw (yaw in the direction of roll,) at most airspeeds due to the way roll rate is generated: spoilers and differential stabs. The differential stabs probably don't contribute as much, being close to the center of mass, but they're the only effective roll controls when the wings are completely swept. Even then, in a left roll, the left stab (deflecting nose-down) is producing negative lift, with a corresponding increase in induced drag. The opposite is happening on the right. That will produce a proverse yaw component. The spoilers are simple. They create drag on the down-going wing, unlike ailerons (or the differential stabs) which produce drag on the up-going wing. You can imagine the result. Short story long, the Tomcat has a lot of aerodynamic features that produce roll-yaw coupling, and was designed before fly-by-wire could fix the problem. It highlights the ways in which aeronautical engineering is an exercise in compromise. 2. This gets a little complicated but I'll keep it shorter. The Tomcat NATOPS flight characteristics section (should be chapter 11 per the Navy's standard) will have some amplifying information, albeit probably in testpilotese. The gist is simple, at very high AOA, due to a number of factors like fuselage blanking and airflow separation, a conventional jet will display reduced directional stability. (Yaw stability... it won't attempt to realign itself with the wind in yaw, and may do the opposite.) When this happens to an airplane with high dihedral effect like the Tomcat, the result of a lateral input is effectively adverse yaw now, the nose yawing opposite the direction of stick deflection. This brings one wing forward, increasing its effective span, reducing spanwise flow, and increasing its lift production. On the other side, the wing experiences blanking and increased spanwise flow. The result is a rolling moment opposite the direction of lateral stick input. The solution is to recognize reduced roll performance and use rudder to roll as AOA increases. The mechanism of roll is just the same, except it occurs in the direction expected. Fly-by-wire jets (like the F/A-18) do this without the pilot's knowledge.

Edit: misunderstood the question. Because the Hornet's elevation dial is spring loaded to center, you need a graphical representation of how far up or down the radar is trained from level. However, the additional movement through the raster scan pattern helps indicate to the pilot the time remaining before the scan volume can be searched again.

Why is the Viper's ECS so much trouble? Are the water separators just that bad?

The guy posted a video for your enjoyment and mistook an airplane's model. Chill out, grow up. Always the same characters...

Ridiculous response to this thread. There are now probably a hundred threads in this subforum that are barely on topic, or individuals asking RTFM questions. This guy just wants to discuss his perception of the FM. For what it's worth, there are situations in which I agree. Probably shouldn't be able to climb at 40-50 alpha.

It's a trivial (but important) question. People try to complicate it with fluff. The relationship of climb performance to speed or lift is of lesser importance than excess power/thrust available. If you had even an impossibly efficient wing capable of producing enormous amounts of lift per unit of weight or drag (take your pick,) would it fly without something imparting energy to it? No. Speed is fun, and you can trade kinetic energy for potential energy, but you had to get that kinetic energy from somewhere. In maximum performance climb profiles for jets, there are situations where calculated transitions from one speed to another commensurate with specific combinations of drag and thrust production will provide superior climb rate, but that is all achieved through excess thrust. Lift is great, yes, but it does not make an airplane climb on its own. Gliders do not climb without being imparted energy in the form of lifted air like thermals. Without excess power or thrust, nobody climbs. Law of conservation of energy. Jetsun's source is excellent, read that!

Not to be a beater of dead horses, but I agree that it doesn't need to look stylish. It can't. I think form should follow function, that being ergonomics, comfort, and durability in that order. Sure, companies like Oculus and HTC style their headsets aggresively, but that's just putting lipstick on a pig. Nobody looks cool with a VR headset on. That said, I would look into trying to improve 3d print quality. Your printer may not be up to the task. (I forget which type you said it is?) The layers look pretty inconsistent, maybe an extrusion problem. If that's ABS it's not too bad I suppose, though I'm just an FDM printing newbie.

Really nice. The acrylic looks great. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's time to give that panel a more fitting frame/cockpit to sit in!

In the most respectful/grateful way, I think this is why SSA should be designed to be more open for modification, to allow users to add profiles for new aircraft or even mods, and with the flexibility to adjust precisely what performance factors influence vibration.

Remain calm. Navy needs a pod with significantly different spec than the Air Force. The Navy lands on carriers and deals with much harsher operating environments, so tradeoffs have to be made. You can imagine the delicate lenses and articulations of a targeting pod would not mix well with carrier arrested landings. The F-35’s integrated EOTS has some of those tradeoffs as a “one-size-fits-all” solution, and it’s already been a growth issue. Sometimes diversity is worth the costs.

For reference, here's what mine looked like. Only a few weeks of use, though.

Ah the French, always having private conversations in public. :D

Looking really fantastic, John! The vapor-smoothing looks phenomenal! Not sure if you intend to release or sell models, but I can't wait to try printing some functional parts like this when I get my printer running.

You can turn ASW off with LCTRL + numpad 1. It doesn't make anything better. The sim used to run at 90 consistently with my 1080Ti and it has rapidly dropped off since the 2.5 release. Not great.

Whatever I may be, I don't take bait. ;)

Well, your derailing of this thread was an experience. Personally, I don't really care for the way you insult people doing that which you clearly have not. Not impressed by the armchair tough guy with flowery language vibe. Earning a pair of wings hasn't changed. Millenials are out there doing it every day, whether that clashes with your world view or not. Not everyone chooses to (or can) make the additional sacrifices that go along with the strike fighter world. That doesn't make them "slackers," as you put it.

No, what you're implying when you say "bad apple" is that backstab got the only bad one in the bunch, and everyone else has a perfect throttle. You made that conclusion based on your throttle being fine, with barely a clue of what's going on inside and how it may or may not differ from backstab's or anyone else's. I don't doubt you're a smart guy, but you're making some hardly scientific claims as if they're straight facts. You could stand to be a little more skeptical.

How can you say so confidently that he's "got a bad apple" when just earlier you told us you can't be bothered to open yours and look at it? Backstab - if I get a chance this week I'll pop mine open and check it. Still pretty new, maybe 15 hours on it.