brianacooper11

I have been asked repeatedly about my methodology for the flight model. Since it's not really a commercial thing for me, I will post on it in the forums. Give me a little time, though; DCS time is not real world time ;)

I had intended to do a follow up post about what I meant when I said, in reference to the Tu-22M3, "I didn't say it can't be done. It might be done, even with official support, and that is the way I think it should be done." The short explanation is that this project needs resources FROM THE START to make it happen. My 'free load first, money later' approach would never have worked. Knowing what I know now, I'm kind of embarassed to think about what went through ED and Heatblur/Leatherneck people's minds as they watched me push this along. Man, I was so pie-in-the-sky! To state in hindsight what should have been elementary from the beginning, this is not a Yak-52. The external model and cockpits (plural!!) are complex, as would be the flight model and aircraft systems. The thought that really got me going on this project is that the analog nature of all its systems would make it easier to program than an aircraft with digital displays and systems. I would not be surprised if that's incorrect, though I still think along those lines. Regardless, this is a project on the scale of the F/A-18 or F-14. Look at the resources they've consumed, and how hard the slogging still is, though in the end I think they will be economic successes. I had thought the main obstacle was technical data, but it's not. It's the usual stuff: time, money, and people. Time is really just money in another form. People, great people, require money and so there's money in yet another form. And that forms my short, unhelpful answer to the question, "How do you make a DCS Backfire happen?" Money. ED's licensing requirements at first seemed like an unhelpful obstacle to getting money, but really they're just trying to head off what can become larger problems for everyone in the long run. If you have sufficient resources in the first place, what ED wants to see up front is not inconvenient. In fact it forces you to get your priorities straight in the beginning. Good on them! If money is the main thing that is needed, I do have two smaller points to make. First, the project should either be a prodominantly Russian/Ukrainian effort, or at least lead by a Russian/Ukrainian. Although everyone loved the project and generally believed my intentions were not malicious, in the end I was a US-person asking for priviledged information about a Russian military plane. It was 2015-2017, not 1994, and my citizenship was a problem. I'm convinced a Russian could get the portions of the flight manual necessary to simulate in DCS the Tu-22M3 as it was around the end of the Soviet Union. Second, I'm not the guy who should actually manage a project like this. I'm learning my limits. Research is fun, as is programming flight models, aircraft systems and avionics. Learning about models and texturing, OK, I can learn enough about them to know what they need from programmers. Schedules: meh. Money: ugh. Forming a business case, fundraising, actually building a company? I'd rather clean my toilet. Person-who-is-perhaps-NOT-Matt-Wagner-but-is-LIKE-Matt-Wagner should lead this project. So, big obstacles, the project is dead, and I'm not really working to make it happen, but I'm still nursing little bits of it along, in the hope that someday Matt Wagner announces that somebody got a license to do DCS Backfire. It's a pipe dream, but a pleasant one. One of the things that excited me most was the prospect of doing a flight model for the Backfire, so I'm trying to put that together so people can at least play with the default Tu-22M3 in external view. I've only just now gotten back to it, after a break of at least a year (has it been two?) I'm in the middle of trying to switch career fields from engineering to commercial flying. It's a very cyclical industry, in the US at least, with periods of furloughs and bankruptcies, and many airline pilots have a backup source of income. I've decided to make mine programming, since it's something that permits flexible hours. I'm trying to finish the Backfire flight model to include in a portfolio to present to potential employers, so it might actually get done...

I chose my words carefully when I said I stopped working on the project. I didn't say it can't be done. It might be done, even with official support, and that is the way I think it should be done. I will write a longer post about my successes and mistakes, and what I think it would take for someone else to succeed.

I quit working on the project for two reasons. First, although I was very open and honest about everything, the project still became a bureaucratic security issue for my employer, as a US Air Force contractor. I ended up resigning partly because of it. But more importantly, I had established a relationship with some Tu-22M people in Russia who were happy to contribute to the project, but eventually had to ask me politely to cease my research efforts. I won't say exactly why, but the request was reasonable, they had been very fair with me, and I agreed to drop the project. While I was trying to make the Air Force job work, the best thing for me to do was cease all communication about the project while I was investigated. I resigned in March, but remained silent while I looked at other work (the security headaches would potentially follow me to any government related job), but I ended up getting out of engineering entirely. I have moved to Alaska to fly professionally, and can say something now.

Workin it, workin it! Sirius, sorry, I owe you a response too!

No toes stepped on. Beautiful, and motivational. I have next weekend set aside to work on the flight model. When I get it working, I will probably hand it off to Oleg and Dimitry to make a video with. I'm not set up to do a good job of that. Me does the 0's and 1's. Brian

Hahahaha! I get that a lot actually. I'm too much of an engineer, too nerdy, to pick a vanity username, so it's literally Brian A Cooper. 11 is my lucky number, from the Pitts S-1-11, the greatest airplane ever made by anyone, anywhere, period. I use that same handle for most everything. That might be risky in terms of identity theft, but I'm crafty about passwords and not having really personal data on the internet in the first place. No facebook, no photos, no twitter, no financial data. I think it also helps with some of the crazier requests I make, of Ukrainians and Russians for the Backfire project for example, that I'm a particular person not trying to hide, that I'm honest, predictable and consistent about what I say across e-mail or Skype or here. I want to hide from identity thieves, not anyone official or with a non-threatening need to know who I am.

It was a stealth video. Looking at my calendar for a date to commit...weekend of the 17th.

I totally get why it takes ED so long to do anything... I'll prioritize that the rest of this week.

I worked it all day every day for 10 days straight. I needed a break, but I'm back at it. I'm at that perpetual 99% done point, keep finding little things that need doing... Don't worry about money right now. Backfire-C will see the light of day. It's too cool not to.

Didn't make it tonight. Will try again tomorrow.

Can somebody point me to where the various iCommands are associated with command numbers in ed_fm_set_command?

FM logic is done, now just trying to build .dll. May take a while getting the FM to line up with ED's EFM template.

If you want to help, everybody do your voodoo chicken dance, sacrifice to the God of 0's and 1's

I'm 99% the way there. Populating aerodynamic data right now. I'm at that project stage where it seems almost done, but last minute necessities keep popping up. Should have video later today or tomorrow.

Thanks!

Better yet, anybody know of a more recent listing of common external arguments? Tu-22M3 goes up to 452, but I'm playing with the AN-26, and it goes to 1160.

Wondering for the default Tu-22M3, what external argument is wing flex? I'm out of patience.

I'm taking off all of Christmas week. That's nine days of Backfire. I should have a demo ready that week.

Это несчастливо. Я надеялся, что каталог будет существовать. Спасибо, что дали мне знать

Никто?

Кто-нибудь получил каталогизированные данные профилей Цаги? Не для конкретного самолета. В целом. Спасибо

The video will show the existing Tu-22M3 external model, but driven by our EFM. Many external animations should be hooked up. Key parameters will be displayed, so you can judge for yourself how the EFM will be doing. Aerodynamics will be a mixed bag. Wing sweep effects should be demonstrated, but mach effects will be crude. Proper mixing of roll control spoilers and stabilators. I've got a pretty good cycle (cycle = aerodynamics & thermodynamics) model of the engines and inlets, starting excluded. No suspension, so no landings or takeoffs. I'll be narrating, pointing out the highlights, and what's missing. I've started work, which is adding free time (counter-intuitive maybe, but you try running your own business!) and stability to my life.

Working through the book, standard day at sea level, 124 metric tons gross, looks about 1800 meters for the actual takeoff run. Balanced field length is longer, about 2 to 2.1 km, but I don't see the actual calculations. That's about 7000 ft, and any airport with commercial jet traffic will be at least that long. Most of the real airports in the Caucasus map and NTTR are at least that long. However, carrying 3 Kh-22 missiles is an over-gross operation, to 140 tons. Don't know the runway length for that.

It's not as amazing as it sounds. I've been interested in Soviet/Russian technology and culture for a decade. I learned to transliterate Cyrillic long ago, and have been sounding out words for a long time. Russian, thankfully, is consistent and phonetic; many, if not most, technical terms are similar to other languages, and I've already done a lot of the learning. I'm just going the last few bits and stepping up my elementary grammar so that I don't need to rely on google translate and dictionaries to read on the fly. I'm not learning to write, speak or listen to Russian, just reading technical material, of which there is much undiscovered to the western reader. I couldn't tell you how to say 'I am happy' in Russian, nor would I touch Russian poetry with a ten foot pole. I don't pretend to have a Russian soul. I just like their toys! One nice thing about the Soviet economic system is that many details about things like jet engines are not commercial secrets, and are discussed in great depth in Russian engineering texts, many of which are .pdf's on the internet. It was specifically developing details on the Tu-22M3's NK-25 engines that lead me to switch to working in Russian. I found so much that I decided it would be easier. I would add, however, that reading Anton Chekhov's populist magazine shorts (not his plays) are incredibly good and funny in English. His voice and sarcasm are very like Mark Twain. There is some stuff online.