LowRider88

The purpose of trying the test, is to confirm or conflict my assertions, not to post a YouTube video. I don't need to see the dot which is the F-5 in your video. I don't even need to see your video, unless you conclusively proof against me. Of course text icons have no bearing on FM. Any moron knows that. Are you afraid to get in a scissors fight with it without afterburner? So far you have not disproved anything to me. Even in your last video, the F-5 is out climbing you and recovering from dives better than you. Hey, you are a good snapshot fighter. Why don't you level up and turn off the text icons? And for the record, as I understand it, it is possible for DCS AI FMs to vary from player FM. You are putting in so much effort here because you are afraid I am trying to take performance away from your gameplay, which I am trying to improve the game in general. Don't take it so personally.

Congratulations on purchasing the 19. In my opinion it was the most maneuverable fighter of the Vietnam war, when considering both wingloading and thrust to weight ratio. For my testing, I do not use text icons, so I rely on pure visual. One thing I like about recent update is It is possible to easily lose F-5 visually, if you get too much separation. As a result of this, the F-5 got on my tail. I was able to get him forward in a scissors fight. However immediately after that, he blasts into the air and I cannot climb up to follow. This should not be the case when we are both at stall speed, he should not be able to climb faster with weaker engines. Also note, I did not use afterburner from the get go, as full max thrust (the other button) should be good enough to match the F-5's weaker T/W. I started at about 800km, about corner speed. i would be interested to see you catch up to him with no more than max thrust, once you beat him in a horizontal scissors fight. Also, I wonder if in some cases, particularly if you are using afterburner on an already weaker T/W opponent, if Ace level could be in this case easier than Trained or Rookie level. At work now and so can't try it out myself until weekend. Also, it would be interesting if you can compare scissors fights in the 19 against both F-5 and F-18 at Trained level, and clarify if you see a difference in their performance. As well, the purpose of this testing is to verify the AI FM, not to brag about a snapshot. Are you able to get a tracking shot, without afterburner?

Since you took care to clarify your stance, I took the times to watch your video just now. You did a missile kill, when the AI was running, maybe after losing you. All my tests are with guns only, when the opponent is actively maneuvering.

In that case, I take that back. Thanks for the clarity and I admire your balance. To answer your question, I am not certain. Given my available spare time, I have tested my described scenario several iterations with the same result, hoping to clarify if I am doing something wrong, or if this is an issue. What I do know is I held the control variable stable I.e. Player flies MiG-19. As I said if someone can explain why it is easier to catch and beat an F-18 at Trained level vs F-5 at Rookie level, then that would solve the question. From what I see now, the F-5 AI is inaccurate and stacked. I have tested MiG-19 take off distance at max thrust and afterburner and these seem true to the manual, so I am more confident in the 19 player FM than 5's AI FM.

Yes, I would say this is a bit off topic, and does not disprove my findings. I am also tempted to believe someone more when they own both blue and red for planes, so it is more evident they are more objective and not part of some multiplayer team bias.

Hi PetRock, Thanks for the question. I also did a run before the latest patching and found similar behaviour, but more subtle. Prior to patching, the F-5 was outrunning me in a 2 circle fight and also in climbs, when I used max dry thrust in the 19. As I mentioned elsewhere, this seems ridiculous since a 19 with max dry thrust still has better T/W than a 5 at afterburner. Before the patch I could eventually win if I turn on the 19's afterburner in the climb. That was with the 5 at Trained skill level. Now, after the patch, I turn on the afterburner and still can't catch it in a climb. I stall while it does two immelmanns. This is even when the 5 is dropped down to Rookie level. In comparison, the F-18 AI currently does not climb as ridiculously as the 5's AI. Instead it fight's a proper scissors fight. So how could a next gen Northrop plane be outperformed by its predecessor? If that was reasonable, why even bother building a Hornet? Just a side note, I also did AI runs with other aircraft, against the 19, all during holiday break time. The 3 with the most UFO like AI behaviour seem to be the F-5, the AV-8 and the Viggen. A Rookie AI AV-8 also outruns a 19 in a 2 circle fight. I admit the 8 has superior T/W over the 19, but with sub sonic max speed and much worse wing loading, this T/W advantage should equate to just faster acceleration, not better top speed in a turn. It should be able to get a way from a 19 for only a short burst, not out range it indefinitely. Some may assume the 8 may maintain speed in a turn due to its LERX. But I doubt it can out run a supersonic fighter with turning ability. I also tested the 8 against a human flown 5, which also has LERX, and same thing, the 8 out runs it. I challenge anyone to try shooting down a Rookie AV-8 AI. If you can, please share what you did, to prove this is not ridiculous. For the Viggen, it also behaves the same as the 8 and out runs the 19. Here, I admit the Vig has about the same wingloading as the Viggen. But it's T/W is worse. After watching the replay, I see the Vig AI is accomplishing this because it is pulling near 10 Gs for extended periods of time, I.e. more than the approx limit of 15 seconds a human can take. Just because it was designed for 12 Gs, does not mean the AI should fly it. I read elsewhere in this forum than real pilots were still constrained to 7, and even later 6 Gs in the Vig. I tested the Vig and 8 before patching, have not had a chance yet to retest. It may not be a concern for multiplayer, but for single players or campaigns, everything is flown out the window if either friendly or enemy AI wingmen are actually from Star Wars squadrons.

Completely 100% agree with you HWasp. Also, it's a pleasure to interact with the one who provided the experimental data to help with the recent FM tweaking

I just suggested above that you not quote me to pull me back into the debate again. And yet, here I am quoting you in return . Don't mean to be a jerk to you. Not to start another debate, but for what it's worth, I don't think the F-5E is being singled out and haphazardly targeted here. Although I have yet to rip the wings off the 5 during hard maneuvers in single player, I have noticed I am able to do this with the MiG-19 in single player. For the 19, it is even worse. They rip off right at the G limit of 8, and not 1.5 x that G limit, if I then fire the cannon. Or they rip off even lower, at 6 G, after having chased something in transonic speed. I doubt this is realistic as MiG are pretty damage friendly, where they can take hard landings on those very same wings. I haven't decided whether to raise this as a defect yet, since the 19's FM still appears to be early access, and so I assume the DM is likewise. Maybe what is missing is some indication and notification that the plane has accumulated some structural damage or is reaching structural limits, like the buffeting during corner speed high AoA. Then, wing damage like this becomes as manageable as something like a stall or spin, once we know how to avoid it. For now though I am not sure how resistance or notification like this would be implemented. For me if this new damage came with some realistic warning indication, I am all for learning a new realistic skill. This may be a bit off topic (don't mean to start another debate). It is debatable, and to some even controversial about using zoom while in the cockpit. For me, there is no such thing as air combat binoculars. Some say they are reasonable because the in game graphics don't do justice the quality of imagery in real life. I disagree with that. Why do I need to see the eye brows of the pilot? I notice the vast majority of youtubers all go nuts with the zoom, while some like GVad are able to do realistic BFM/ACM maneuvers without it. He sometimes loses the target, but that is what happens in real life. In comparison, I find his content far more believeable. To digress, if adding more realism requires learning more skills to cope with the addition of more real life simulated problems, I for one am all for it. It makes it more fun to learn something more in depth and play. Much like no one plays nowadays with the silly CoreBlunder style text icons describing the opponents distance and type at 100 nm away. Try it out yourself. I just did a realistic scissors fight in a 19 against a Trained level F-18 and won. Then try the same scissors fight with a F-5E at Rookie level. See the difference? The F-5E is a flying like an F-16, or rocket ship, or UFO. Maybe you should try it out before you comment. Not doing so just makes you seem emotional and shallow.

Although I don't disagree with the wing damage, maybe what might be missing is the notification you refer to. When we are flying at corner speed, high AoA, and try to pitch in the turn more, there is some buffeting before stall. This resistance serves somewhat like a built in warning to us to put a cap on going over the limit in our maneuvers. Here, with regards to suddenly jerk pulling the control column at transonic speed, I imagine there should likewise be a similar level of resistance, or some warning before the wings tear off. Other commenters in the forum here said there is no resistance because of the hydraulic or electrical control surfaces, which allow the over limit inputs. But if this is the case, why do we get the resistance and buffeting at cornerspeed high AoA? If the wings ripping off are due to acculumlated damage, and as some have suggested could be due to some incremental damage in multiplayer due to repetitive spawning, then another possible notification could be that a less than brand new plane post spawn could be represented with some creaking or cracking sounds during moderate maneuvers. This kind of remind me of such sounds in iL-2 1946. Although, since DCS seems to mute out a lot of the sounds when realistic helmet audio is enabled, this might not help much. i like the fact that the plane may be more realistic with limitation damage, but it does seem reasonable that notifications or resistance be investigated, and added if applicable. If that resistance or notification is added, rather than being a pain point for most players now, the wing damage then becomes something manageable like a stall or spin. Something to be careful about but is manageable. Then it's just an additional spice in the game, once we know how to master it.

I just updated to the latest version. The new F-5E AI FM seems to be way off. Flying against it with a MiG-19, and the Rookie F-5E is a fighting like an energy fighter, with 2 circle fights, and out climbing the 19 in a straight up vertical and stalling later than the 19, despite having piddly wings and engines. The 19 at max dry thrust has a better Thrust to Weight ratio than the F-5E at full afterburner. Why with every update we are getting even more UFO behaviour, rather than less? In my quoted post above, according to the article the 5 should beat the 21 in under 4 mins. This should be via a low slow turn fight, but in the quoted post's test, it always flies an energy fight. So why is it do this with both the 19 and the 21 which both have superior T/W? For the record, flying the 19 against the 21 both before and after my update doesn't not seem to have any change. So it seem s the 5's FM just went UFO arcade on its own. No point in doing any more experiements on questionable, moving target AI FMs, with no explanantion as to why they are changing for the worse.

Not for me. I do all sorts of BFM/ACM maneuvers. Look up GVad's YouTube vids. I just don't expect to break rules of physics like some multiplayers do. Sorry, I'm still not convinced. If you don't care, don't quote me.

What does that's have to do with Burt's comments about the wings? And no, I disagree, especially when there are people in multiplayer who think they can do scissor fighters at 10 Gs.

It may be a multiplayer bug. Has never happened to me in single player. I suggest slowing down and fighting at corner speed.

You are absolutely right, rossmum, my bad. After properly updating, the SPO is working for me now. Thanks for the clarification!

Oh really? I just updated and that was what was downloaded. Actually, I ran a "fix", so maybe that is why. Okay Thanks Rossmum for the clarification. I will try this later today.

I am on version 2.7.6.13436. Just updated a few days ago, and retested. Still an issue.

Hi jonatron5, For me the 2 main points for fighting the MiG-21 in an F-5 are: - When the 21 goes vertical, use lap pursuit, I.e. Don't climb up to its level during the chase. When it loops back down, use lead pursuit, I.e. Find a way to point the nose ahead of its pull up from its dive, in order to close the angle off your nose, for a better shot. - In a rolling scissors, use your better maneuverability and speed retention in a turn to execute a tighter roll, I.e. Be inside his rolling scissors. This is will also lead to a better shot opportunity. This should be done less by pulling hard on the stick, but instead by picking a better line, i.e the same concept in the first point above with lead and lag pursuit. Your post is interesting. I have had the 21 for so long and never flown it because of the complicated and messy cockpit arrangement. But because you mentioned you usually fight in the 21 against the 5, I got interested and took the time to learn the 21. What I found is that I can get behind a 5 in a 21, and stay there, but it is hard to pull off a shot due to the Gs required to stay there in the chase, and the low muzzle velocity of the 23mm cannon does not allow the pipper to stay on target during the Gs, and the 5 is always just out of range. Since you are an expert in the 21 vs 5, and since we are trading techniques, are you able to clarify how you can beat the 5 in a 21? Are you able to pull off a guns kill, and if so, how do you get the piper on him while pulling Gs? BTW, I was using "Trained" skill level for the 5. Great talking to others here who also play against the AI

It's an interesting issue. I still suspect the long term fix is the data.lua file, since it does contain a default section for controls and different entries for other market Rudder vendors. But I am happy with this workaround since I can fly now, without the initial kick. Do you know what the purpose is for that checkbox we disabled and when it is useful to enable? Thanks again for your advice. You made my New Year's Day BTW, Happy 2022!

Hey, you fixed it! Thanks very much! Lange_666 for the advice. It seems to work now. I am still testing but this seems to be the solution Thanks St4rgun also for sticking with it thus far. Great to have proactive, helpful people on this forum!!

Yes, I also have the same type of file like you have which is specific to the TPR. It is this file which DCS looks at once I move the TPR Rudder Axis. But before I move it, DCS seems to first rely on the Default in data.lua. So at the start of the game, before touching anything, I am almost thrown into a spin because of the kick left due to the default mapping to JOY_RZ. If you are out of ideas, Thanks anyway for all of yours thus far. It helps future people to distinguish between the different cases. I believe now this is something for DCS to add to the default.lua file, I.e the vendor named TPR default entry.

Thanks again St4rgun. I cannot confirm how the driver works. However, the Thrustmaster software I see (and as shown in your screenshot) makes no reference to the JOY_RZ Axis. I am at work now and can't find the data.lua file path I am referring to but it should not be hard to find, if you do a windows file search on the DCS World sub directory for *.lua. If you find it, you can open with Notepadd++, and see the default vs market axes assignments which I am referring to. One is general, and is meant for joystick setups which include the stick, throttle and Rudder all in one, and so assigns the Rudder to JOY_RZ. Since there is no TPR entry, the TPR seems to default to this, until you actually move it, then it takes the custom manual setting set up by user (me).

Thanks St4rgun for the deeper dive into my question. To answer yours, yes, I manually assigned the axis for the Rudder. There seems to be only 3 axes for the TPR, 1 for the Rudder, which I assigned to JOY_Z, and 2 for the toe brakes, which I manually assign to JOY_X, Y. There should be no Axis for JOY_RZ, but this is what keeps getting reassigned to the Rudder Axis as default at the start of each mission, and only reverts to what I assigned to it, JOY_Z once I move the Rudder. When I go to the Assign Axis view, both JOY_RZ and JOY_Z appear in the drop down, with the former appearing as default. I can reselect JOY_Z, save it, go back and Assign Axis view will once again show JOY_RZ as the selection. Something keeps defaulting the TPR to JOY_RZ. I believe this is the data.lua file, since there is no explicit conditional default specifically for the TPR, while there are for other market rudders.

I should also mention that when I plug in both the TPR and my old CH Pro rudders, the latter is able to keep the default on JOY_Z before the TPR's Axis is used, and as a result prevents the TPR's initial kick left due to it defaulting to JOY_RZ.

Just tried it now. I did see the Rudder in the Settings > Devices view now. So it is properly removed now. Did all the other steps as you specified. However, it still looks like it did not fix the issue. After using the Rudder, the next mission causes the JOY_RZ Axis to be default again. I was really hoping you were right But it looks like it may be the default settings in the data.lua file that needs to be updated with TPR specific settings, I.e. Rudder Axis needs to be explicitly set to JOY_Z.

Thanks very much St4rgun for your willingness to help. Okay I will try step 2 again after work. Regarding your tests of my request, for me after mission start for the first time after launching DCS, the Rudder will sometimes not kick left. However, it will always after this initial start if I move the Rudder axis during this mission instance, stop the mission and restart it.