The Falcon

Try not to disable the fuel burn it could be the option that breaks something

Cmon the Tornado is a supersonic jet not like the other one slow and fat :hehe:

How did you solve it? I for reasons of friction stopped using my x52 pro. These peripheral manufacturers should always use low friction materials such as teflon-steel or teflon-teflon instead of plastic-steel..

This is because the IAS is useful for determining the aerodynamic forces and so the maneuvers, but it does not say how fast you move in the air, it doesn't tell you what your kinetic energy is and so is not reliable in combat to let you know how fast you can go up or down.

Yes energy depends on the observation point but the TAS is always a speed like the IAS only that the IAS is not correct because the air probe, in addition to reporting errors is subject to changes in pressure, temperature and therefore density. If you use the IAS you don't understand at what true speed you are moving with respect to the air. Of course this was related to my example, if you want to measure the energy with respect to the center of a planet then you are right but it is not relevant to the example.

+1:lol: At what price :cry:

I thought i was wrong again:joystick: thank goodness:lol:

They have the same "IAS" not the same TAS, 30k a/c have more TAS. Which of the two should i take to calculate energy? for me it's the TAS. But doing so the 30k a/c is the one that has the most energy

Good question, I had seen something, i try to find it again

Do you see much difference by changing between dx12 and vulkan in rdr2? Honestly from the videos that i find i see that there is no difference. For most games it doesn't make a difference between dx11 and dx12, but the hardware changes, in fact not all cards supported dx12. There is certainly a question of hardware sales behind it, the developers have no particular interest in making dx12 go much better than dx11 or vulkan, they must satisfy everyone and at the same time help sell hardware imop. So I don't take rdr2 or similar games as a measure of expectations. For DCS it's different, increasing performance is worthwhile for sales, I expect an important step forward with vulkan :)

of course but is the real airspeed So which of the two a/c rises more vertically. One at 30k, one at 1000 feet, same at 300 IAS.. We have to convert the speeds to altitude but to get the correct result we have to use the TAS, so for the first a/c goes up more.

This is imop. Rdr2 is dx12 or vulkan, therefore not dx11. But let's ask ourselves why make a game both DX and Vulkan? why not put the best one directly or why leave them both if in the end they are equal? I will tell you, i don't know if dx12 is as good as vulkan but i am sure that if the developers don't have earnings they will not do the same job, so for me behind games like rdr there is interest in selling video cards. DCS is different, we use already the top of the hardware, improving its performance would increase people's interest and sim sales. So from vulkan I expect a result totally different from that of rdr2, much better :)

This reasoning would be useful for the wind discourse, but now we are talking about another thing. So do I get wrong? For KE what type of airspeed should I use? for me the first a/c has more kinetic energy but both have the same aerodynamic energy. I explain better, making an argument, I hope not to be wrong. Total energy in this case AE = aerodynamic energy, due to drag ME = body energy, due to mass To calculate the AE i use the IAS or CAS, while to calculate the ME i use the TAS. The combination of the two tells me total energy or at least tells me the real performance, so the correct FM

I got confused about some things, now i understand better, but some statements confuse me, for example, not considering the TAS. It's a bit like the speech of the wind, it counts aerodynamically from a POV. I considered the GS but in reality i had to consider the TAS for energy, TAS is equal to GS in horizontal flight and in the absence of wind, that's why i confused myself. I would like to understand one thing, always with the example of vertical ascent: Two a/c, one at 30000 feet, the other at 1000 feet. The speed of both is 300kts IAS. Both perform a 90 degree vertical. Which has more energy to go up? I believe the first a/c, the one at 30k has more energy, if I'm wrong correct me.

It would be great if they did, i just wondering how voice commands would simulate

I am also really interested in knowing it

Terms and strong assertion can be trick minds and do this

I was getting confused because i thought with the wrong formula Kin.E = 1/2 m v2, it is not mathematically wrong but it is not the correct one. In our case we talk about angular velocity since we are rotating around a point. The correct formula is E = ω ^ 2 · r. So technically it is not possible to convert the motion vertically but once you reach a certain speed ω you go in the opposite direction to the center then vertically. ω can be converted to v and that is why it is not mathematically wrong the formula E= 1/2 m v2 but v must be seen with respect to the center of the earth not on the ground.

We are no longer talking about the bug since page 2 :lol:

I bet will be the apache Who doesn't want an apache?

This thing cheats my mind. I understand that the calculation of kinetic energy is relative to the observation point, but there are things that confuse me, I would say that it is not really a basic thing. For example the discourse of the earth rotation. Why can't you add that energy vertically? I believe that by rotating together with the earth surface we have a certain kinetic energy and the bodies tend to conserve this motion energy. But if the earth stopped spinning we would fly away towards the direction in which the earth turned but also vertically. So in addition to having a kinetic energy we are in a system of forces. In this case we have the centrifugal and centripetal force, but gravity does not allow us to escape or to orbit, therefore our centrifugal force is not strong enough to escape. And here comes the problem, what cheats me. When you want to go into space and orbit you have to reach a certain speed to escape gravity and a speed to stay in orbit. This speed is not related to the airspeed but to the GS. So if as you say the two a/c have the same vertical climb it is because you are using the airspeed. But the calculation is mathematically correct from the GS point of view only but it does not apply in reality because we should have a fleeting speed sufficient to convert our kinetic energy vertically. I hope someone can prove mathematically so i'll have clearer ideas. Just to clarify i'm using this formula Kin.E= 1/2 m v2 This has nothing to do with the bug etc ... but it's nice to learn and understand things.

Guys on the IAS TAS speech I would like to report one thing.. To obtain the TAS, the other speeds must be corrected by the errors: IAS corrected by the position and instrument error gives the CAS; CAS corrected by the compressibility error of the air gives the EAS; EAS corrected by the density error due to the altitude gives the TAS; TAS corrected by wind effects gives GS. The TAS is important in the calculation of the energies, it is like a reference point. IAS indicates the speed relative to the mass of air, it does not correct the density, it does not tell you at what real speed the a/c is hit by the air. It only tells you what your "aerodynamic speed" is. TAS tells you absolutely how many meters per second the air hits you, not for nothing it is called true airspeed. In the absence of wind, the TAS and the GS are the same. So in the calculations it gives you the energy related to your displacement of your mass in the air. If I used IAS, the calculation would not be correct simply because IAS is not affected by the attitude of the aircraft, the change in density and air temperature with the altitude and the compressibility effects.

Sorry but make me understand. If in one case your mass is moving at a speed of 200kts and in the other case your mass i moving at 0kts, how can they ever have the same vertical climb?

See what the problem is with separating things? from the perspective of the wings/control surfaces/lift/drag it's correct, but not for the flight as a whole. The TAS for the a/c matters!

Well thank you for clarifying. A table can also be made using CAS but it is better to use TAS. CAS is a calibrated speed, it depends on the density, etc. The TAS is not, therefore it is a point of reference, it is easier to understand how much altitude you can gain or lose in a fight because it is a "true speed"