LowRider88

No, you are challenging it, and requesting it despite being far removed from being a developer or expert. Case in point, you think Northrop Grumman, means F-14 and F-18 are designed by the same company. So you provide what rebuttal you want. How many times do I have to tell you, I will provide more details, when time permits? Anxious much? Don't care whether you think it is enough or not. You are not the authority. Will wait for an objective developer response. Didn't bother watching your off topic linked video. OP video end result speaks for itself. Horse is beaten dead already.

You are questioning me, so you provide the data. I will provide more findings when I have time, even thought the OP video speaks for itself, and anyone can reproduce this. Are you a devleper? If not, how do you know it is not enough? There is a freaking video, which anyone can reproduce. Ridiculous. I prefer to provide those details to actual people who can fix this and would be objective about it.

Coming from one who knee jerks and jumps into experiments with all the wrong premise to begin with. What expert are you to state that, with zero evidence? Still see the wrong result in the OP video. Other AI are more realistic to play against, so your first sentence is useless.

Again with the faulty logic. I said your logic is faulty, not mine. Way to reach for a conclusion. There is no need to take it to the extreme in your off topic case. Like I said they are not the same era, and are not comparable. That is poor scope on your part, and rather ridiculous. I am not even going to address anything about interwar planes vs 4th gen jets. You say I don't see the F-18 doing wrong things. Read my earlier posts. It is making bad decisions, already said that. Don't rephrase me. The F-5 is not only retaining too much speed, but can pull more Gs in the turn than the F-18. That is why it gets behind the F-18 even when both are flying low and slow. Watch the video again. And no, you still did not explain why the F-5E reasonably wins here. I find it ridiculous. The video clearly shows a discrepancy and you try to so hard to make sense of it. Like I said, your "great idea" does not prove anything. It may show the player F-5 FM may also be flawed. And like I said, I will do this when I have time, even though this is irrelevant to the comparisons between planes AI FM. Yet another off topic example. You have a problem with scope. Wrong, the F-14 and F-18 are from different manufacturers. And why shouldn't the F-14 win? The F-14 has much better wing loading. It has the extra wing area between nacelles. You just focus on the word predecessor, without understanding the peculiarities of era and within design house evolution. I-16 is a different era, F-14 is a different design house. The F-18 is an evolution of the F-5. Yet another waste of an off topic comparison. No your experiments are not useful and are off topic. Why should you explain it? Because you are challenging with bad data. Why don't I test it? I did. All of them. Why don't you since you still have not given any worthwhile data. While it is fun to point out you wrong ideas, it is a waste of time. Something more efficient is to have the bug reporting system based on flight manuals, rather than your missing data and misinterpretations. According to you, the ridiculous end result in the video of my OP would just illogically explained away and nothing would get addressed.

You are the one with the faulty logic. You take it way off topic. So you proved the F-18 AI is making bad choices, and so flys low and slow all the time. In this case, of course it will lose to a prop plane. Why are you comparing between eras? That is the ridiculous thing here. My comparison is more meaningful, as they are the same era, and from the same manufacturer. You still haven't explained why the F-5 fly bys are mor extreme than all other planes. Test all the jets and see the difference. You still haven't explained why the F-5 wins against the F-18 in this scenario. This is why DCS really needs a dedicated bug reporting system, rather than using a forum. Answers should come from flight manuals and not from biased multiplayer teams, trying to protect certain advantages, whether accurate or not.

How does seeing it from the F-5's perspective change the end result? Like I said, anyone can set this up. Try it yourself. Yeah, we already went over that the F-18 FM is flying like a pansy. That doesn't confirm the F-5E AI FM is not inaccurate. What logic is that? Look at the flybys I mentioned. To quote the rather lame comment above, you crack me up, seriously? Lol. How is the F-5 flown by a better pilot? They are both set to Ace. I already posted why the F-18 should beat the F-5 in my original post. Why make a hornet if the F-5 is better? That's the most ridiculous thing I have heard.

If you want to explore this, be my guest. Maybe that will show the player FM also has a problem. I will do this when I have a free cycle. But this "great idea" means nothing to what I posted about, and is off topic. My concern is the difference between planes.

Watch how fast each one flys past in the head on passes. Notice the difference in rates. Please provide a better reason why the older plane beats the newer plane.

You are asking me what I want to hear, and then try to just brush off what my concerns. If they are finding something, great. They fix a lot of things and somethings items are not included because they are not aware of it. They can fix the FM engine, but what about the differences between the planes. In each plane lua file there are some FM details. If they fix the engine, they should look at these as well, and how they related across planes. You doubting whether they do this is of no use to this request and adds no value. Yes, the F-18 is reacting much like a coward in this video, and should also be looked at. So there's nothing wrong with the F-5E flight model? How do you explain it getting behind the hornet twice? I posted 2 prior videos. Compare which of these whips past in a head on pass in those videos. I have tested all the planes. The F-18 flys past at a rate in line with all other planes. Only the F-5, AV-8, and VIggen AI fly past like a UFO. Like I said anyone can try this for them selves.

Seriously what? Don't understand what you are implying. That was a useless comment.

Anyone can set this up and try. DCS Version = 2.7.9.18080 Comparison between the AI for the F/A-18C and the F-5E, both set to Ace level, and shows the inaccuracy of the F-5E AI flight model The F/A-18C is like a injured pidgeon cowering from the F-5E that is flying overhead like a hawk. It is unrealistic that the Northrop predecessor can outfly the successor. The F/A-18C has the advantages of thrust/weight ratio, flaperons, and fly-by-wire/relaxed-static-stability. And yet, the F-5E AI is able to climb higher and get on the tail of the F/A-18C several times. This affects the use of AI as opponents and wingmen in single player and campaigns.

I think this was at Min Vody.

When the JF-17's wings break off, the missiles stay with the fuselage, rather than falling off with the wings.

I shot the wings off an F-5E, but the missile stayed with the fuselage rather than falling off with the wing.

Hi RustBelt, Do you have tracks or videos to show what you are describing? The preeemptive FFB catch you describe seems to apply to scenarios when the landing has a bit of force, so the impact of the main landing gear hitting the pavement causing a rotating moment around the gear. But I have experienced what 1130 describes on the occasions when I am able to pull off a feather light landing, and yet the nose still drops a little after touch down. I suspect the reason is not FFB, but instead that the wings lose all lift a little after touch down speed. According to the F-5E manual, touch down speed is about 135 KIAS. But the manual's Stall Speed chart 6-1, Sheet 2 shows that the lowest stall speed can be about 96 - 100 KIAS (wings level). So stall speed is about roughly 30 KIAS less than touchdown speed. So if the stall speed is less than touch down speed, the F-5E should be able to hold about 10 degrees pitch up until the speed degrades from 135 to 100 KIAS. So maybe the problem here is the higher than expected stall speed. I plan to test the full flaps down stall speed of the F-5E some time this week, as well as if a 10 degrees pitch hold on landing roll is possible in a completely empty plane. Regarding stall speed < landing speed, this may be similar to what GVad says about approach speed, which may or may not be the same thing. GVad is a pilot of over 20 years.

Hi Flappie, Thanks very much for your quick reply. I had been doing much AI FM testing recently, so used the same simple custom mission: - default Caucusas map - two jet fighter planes added at about the same 2000 m altitude, set to fly straight at each other, about 30 km apart - missiles included -weather is standard, clear, sometimes 12pm, sometimes, sun is rising or setting (not directly overhead but to the side, so maybe 8am, 8pm). You can see this custom mission setup in the first few seconds of my video. The purple flashes on my windshield occur when the opponent AI fires missiles, usually AIM-9Ps, or R-3s, at short range, and seem to be a duplicate of the rendering of the missile launch smoke from near the launching plane. So we are usually about 2 mm apart. Most times, my plane may or may not be facing it, but my head (TrackIR) is facing the plane (see it as a dot). This does not seem to happen when I fire a missile. I suspect it does not happen with the AI fired mid range AIM-7,20s either. For the black flashes for the AI canopy ejections, I don't recall this happening all the time. Maybe you can set up a mission similar to the one in my video, and get the oppentint to eject?

My apologies if this has been reported already, as I am not sure what to search for, in order to confirm. I have noticed that when I play against an AI opponent in single player, if the AI fires a missile, I get a purple smoke bitmap on my windshield, even when the opponent is far away. It is very brief and appears as a flash. Also when the opponent AI ejects, I also get another flash. This time the flash is like a split second screen blackout. I don't have a video of the missile flash but I do of the ejection one, below. The flash appears after the F/A-18 crashes and ejects:

This can be seen in the last few minutes of this video:

Below are 2 videos I posted showing a comparison of the Ace AI FMs of the F-5E and the F/A-18C, against a player flown MiG-19P. In both cases, afterburner was not used, and at most Max dry thrust was used. The F-5E video shows the AI is able to meet every 1 or 2 circle fight with a head on pass, while the second video shows it is actually easier to get on the tail of the Hornet. This should not be the case, as the MiG-19P has both better wingloading, and thrust/weight ratio, over the F-5E. The F-5E is retaining too much speed in turns, recovering from dives better, and climbing better than both the F/A-18C and the MiG-19P. These comparisons are even more extreme when the AIs are set to the lower Trained level, as the F-5E seems to have less turning ability and decides to turn less, opting for even greater climbs, while still retaining too much speed, with such tiny engines.

Well then you should have said that in the beginning instead of being sarcastic. You didn't say any of this in your first post. In this case, you are right. I just felt the other guy could have approached it more objectively at the beginning as well. Instead he was trying to close off my question prematurely even before properly understanding the setup of my test, and I got sucked into the subtle oneupsmanship of his videos. Point taken.

No one said you had to read it. Instead you jump in with your own handbag. I am looking to address issues with the game. At least the other guy was offering some form of insight. You bring nothing. That is drivel.

Don't be sarcastic. If you mean to troll just admit it, instead of pretending to be nice. I have proven no less than you. You ultimately did not take up the replication of my scenario. So who are you? You have not proven to me that you are the definitive source to exclaim there is nothing to enhance in the AI FM. You just posted elsewhere that you admittted the AI FM is flawed. So what the hell is your stance? Where is your track? Where is your comparison between F-5 vs F18? I still haven't seen you in a low altitude, low speed horizontals scissors against either plane and the resulting zoom climb out of 400kph from either of them against you. In terms of ignorance. You numerous YouTube attempts shows you lack of understanding.

That is good to know. However, I point out my findings as some may not be aware of the plane vs plane or skill level vs skill level differences.

Hey PetRock, I suppose I might need some clarification on what you mean by run, and profile. I agree about the simplified FM, but that is my point. If they are inaccurate, understood. But they should scale across planes, so that a third gen plane should not fly with more capability than its forth gen successor. But on the topic, there is no reason why we can't ask for improved SFM? After all these years? As I mentioned this affects AI opponents and wingmen.

I also find it amusing, that you had to do so many videos. Who told you to knee jerk and jump right in emotionally and begin the test without first the basic step of requirements gathering? What scientific method are you accustomed to? Your first video was a waste because it was not even related. You send one was a waste because you were also using the wrong parameters. This video is exactly what I am referring to. How long did it take you? 13 mins with most of the time you being well far away, with the 5 out of your cone of fire. Because it is retaining so much more speed than you and climbing better with weaker engines. I flew the same with the 5. Then I flew the same with the F-18 and there was much less vertical and horizontal separation. Also, with your useless music, I can't hear anything. Can't tell if you used afterburner or not. If you are confident, post the track. Try it again now with the with the F-18. See whether it is climbing as high or takes as long to shoot down. And, BTW, if you have a shot, take it. I never said you couldn't. I just said it is pointless to proove you can get on its tail with ACM/BFM with wide angle snapshots. If you are behind the guy and tracking, just shoot. So far I saw you overshooting most of the time.