SCU

ًWell I don't look for a discussion for the sake of discussion, it's just that the popularity of a suggestion increases the chance of a change mostly, especially if this suggestion, if implemented, will make the sim more realistic. I thought of starting this thread in the main A-10C Forum but I figured it would get moved here anyway so I started it here.

Ahem. I guess this section of the forum isn't very popular. Anyway, I believe it would be more realistic ED to just remove the wings dropping behaviour at high AoA. I have no clue how hard or easy that would be, I imagine it isn't that simple but it should be done, unless I'm wrong. But I think the evidence I've provided is enough and the TO -1 just agrees with them. I'd also appreciate it if I know YoYo's thoughts on this? Of course at a later time you can work with the stall modelling to be realistic in accordance with the flight manual.

Cheers mate, I'll play around with that and see what comes of it.

To me, at least on the ground while taking off, there is no difference between mil & AB at all. I don't know if this is just me but if I'm correct I think there should be more sound power to those massive cans burning up. I dunno I'm not a sound engineer but a decent decrease in pitch when in AB maybe?

I agree that it sounds good. But pardon me if I've missed something but is there no sound for the afterburner in cockpit? For me I think there is no change in the sound when lighting the can.

Awesome! Cheers Zeus. This bird just keeps getting better. Keep this up guys :thumbup:.

That's some good news, thanks mate.

I've noticed a problem with the Waypoint House indicator in HUD, where when rolling the WP indicator will 'roll' with the FPM if you get what I mean, but I think that's not how it should be in reality. I've noticed that from this video of an M-2000E: https://youtu.be/OdgZ7K2piRY?t=12m52s Looks like a military simulator I guess, if so it should be accurate to how it is in the real thing. I believe that the HUD in the C version should behave like or close to the E version At level flight, it's accurate to the vid: https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=148311&stc=1&d=1473950899 Problems start when banking: https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=148312&stc=1&d=1473950899 I don't know if this have been reported before or if this is how it used to work and you're already working on fixing it, if that's the case I apologize.

If you're talking about the FPM bounds in the HUD, I have already reported this in detail in this post: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2898221&postcount=29 I think CptSmiley is working on it or have it fixed already in the dev build & waiting release.

Too bad :cry:, gonna try and learn French now :P. I don't know the first thing about French so it's gonna take a while.. Or just wait till a translation or the English version to come out.

I'm sorry for being off topic, but do you know if there is an English version of that manual?

Thank you! :thumbup: Please can you also look at the FPM not being linked to the Pitch Ladder while on the ground (Weight on Wheels). And also this: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2619123&postcount=2 I hope they get into the next update, cheers for the nice work :).

The FPM and pitch ladder are so close to being accurate to reality, but it still needs some fine tuning. The lower limits of the FPM in 'normal' Nav mode should be lower down in DCS, it's too shallow at the moment. While in 'app' mode the opposite is true; it's slightly deeper (lower) than reality. I suggest that you work on normal mode FPM limits first and then match 'app' mode to it. It's easy to figure out precisely where on the HUD the FPM limit is by watching the video & comparing the pitch ladder's numbers to the Magics' G & D indications while in a 90 degrees bank angle. Because the Magic missile indicator are in a fixed position, we can get an accurate modeling of the FPM in the sim assuming the G-D are correctly positioned (<--they seem fairly accurate to me). Some pictures to help you.. The FPM limit in DCS: https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=148050&stc=1&d=1473601575 How it should be: https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=148051&stc=1&d=1473601575 How to get the exact limit: https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=148052&stc=1&d=1473601575 Deduced from this: https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=148054&stc=1&d=1473601596 As you can see, at a 90° bank, with the fpm at its limits, the lower portion of the G or D indication should just tangentially touch the pitch ladder's number. Should be the same for Approach mode as far as I know. Note: the upper limit needs to be slightly higher than it is now, just a tad more above the heading tape.

I think it's the other way around. In the last update it's normal mode that has its limits a bit early up in the HUD. The FPM had it's limit about right in App mode, but the pitch ladder gets stuck on previous 'Normal mode' limits. I had sent you some images for reference. I have more clarifying images if you want, all info is from the video from the bug report thread. To clarify, it's normal mode that needs to have correct limits to be further downwards/deeper in the HUD (the exact position I had sent you in an image), app mode is deep enough but it should be equalled to norm mode (EDIT: After it gets fixed), just so that everything is unified. App mode and norm mode should be identical when it comes to pitch ladder & FPM.

I agree that this is realistic as well. The real guys I believe have the pitch trimmed nose down slightly such that they don't get a very large pitch up when throttling up. Here's two good Heads Up Display videos of the real A-10s refueling, complete with pre-contact, contact and disconnect (should help with the discussion). You can see how they pitch up and down all the time.

Yep, it's supposed to be that post chopped stall tone you're just not getting any extra lift, you even start losing it when the airflow starts separating as far as I understand it. The A-10 does have wings dropping according to the -1, but only in certain situations which are not present when it happens in the sim. As far as what we have in the sim, so far every video I've seen and every thing I have read in the -1 contradicts what's modeled right now. If only a developer of this sim can shed some light on this issue, if that's how it was intended to be and why? Or if it was actually a bug/mistake.. We all make mistakes so I'm not being critical here, I just want the inaccuracies to be fixed when they're discovered.

The FPM didn't get linked to the pitch ladder with weight on wheels/on the ground, can you fix that when you have time? Thanks! :thumbup:

Same here, I was hoping someone who coded this aircraft can shed some light on this. All I know is what I read in the -1 and what I see in the HUD recordings and videos contradicts what happens in the game.

Well, I won't argue a lot with someone with actual experience and knowledge in the field as opposed to myself. You had mentioned a tweak for the SAS, I never thought the stalling problem could be related in anyway to the SAS so that's why I got the idea you weren't for fixing the issue I'm talking about. However I've always felt the aileron-rudder interconnect, which IIRC is part of the SAS, is very weak in DCS's A-10 when banking at slow to medium airspeeds, where (after stopping roll) the jet wobbles about the yaw axis and therefore the roll axis as well. But I didn't read any data about this matter so I have nothing to say if this is realistic behaviour or not. I'm lead to believe that fighters do go (close) to the edge of their envelope most of the time and that's still considered safe operation for the jet cause that's how it was designed. Okay it may have been overzealous of me to say "over the edge of the envelope" but you get my idea.. I guess.

I understand that, and it does make sense. I only meant that 20° of slip is quite a big angle. I know you've stated that you're not saying that this is correct in DCS, but you're also sort of implying that I should accept that fact and deal with it. Even if it's docile and easy to handle it still needs to be fixed, and for me I think I shouldn't have to "handle" this, easy or not, since the real guys don't have to either. And as I understand it, you have flown only civilian aircrafts. While I have the deepest respect for every kind of aircraft pilot but no offense buddy, military aircraft are a whole different beast. They are designed to be pushed to and over the edge of their envelope a lot.

Exactly. The -1 states that out of control flight conditions or "post stall gyrations (PSG's)" (Which is described as uncommanded roll reversals or roll accelerations) occur on slip angles of excess of 20 degrees, which I believe is some large deflection. I doubt such conditions are present when pitching up from a level flight with no roll included. Doing that in DCS you will still get a wing drop, which shows that this isn't dependant on sideslip in the FM. The manual is absolutely clear about the "excellent" stall/post stall/spin characteristics of the A-10 and the fact that you must "severely" aggravate the stall to force a PSG .. I really believe that all arguments will stop once we can have permission to post some quotes from the -1 here. It's really conclusive about a subject like this. All I can say is for Yo-Yo to please re-read the Stall & Departure sections in the A-10 TO -1 Well, this docile drop can screw up your egressing and threat evasion. Also dogfights. They will stop you from pulling more or sustaining a high AoA turn limiting you to less than optimum turns. The wing drops can get very aggressive, they're not always benign like in your test, and even if it doesn't it still is not a correct or realistic behaviour as per the videos I shared earlier (I bid you to watch all of them, at the specific time marks especially), and many more I can still share if needed, and the document(s). Even without those references, I would highly doubt a military aircraft designed to be aerodynamically abused would have the stall characteristics of a civil training prop plane (and a great one at that, but just can't get compared to such high performance mil jets).

Gentlemen, please stay civilized. We don't want this to be another closed thread. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, wrong or right, as long as it doesn't insult or offend anyone. I don't see that Gryphon offended anyone in any way except that he had an opinion (again this can be right or wrong, it doesn't matter).

Thanks. I have a curve of positive 20 for pitch in A-10C. I'm making my movements 'weaker' by this. When you watch the track I shared you can watch the controls indicator to see how hard I was pulling, but I was generally trying to be careful not to exceed max AoA by much. I also read that A-10 pilots were instructed to "pull the stick into their laps" in specific situations.

No offence, but that's due to you not really caring to how the real guys do it. I've taken interest in watching how the real pilots use this machine (and others I've tried to fly too) and reading about their real life procedures. They really do take their planes to the edge of the envelope and still remain within the safety margin. It's just how these military machines were built.

Ok, I'm not a programmer either (damn I'm starting to look like an unemployed ignorant, but really I'm not), but how hard can it be to just stop the plane's wing dip spiral tendencies at high AoA? Maybe even postpone it to some higher AoA value which still wouldn't be realistic but would be better than what we have.