SCPanda
-
Posts
714 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SCPanda
-
-
I have the same issue. Can someone from Razbam confirm how the radar elevation works on the real SE throttle? Is it like the Hornet that the rotary dial is spring loaded and it auto centers after you release it? If it is, can we have an option in the special menu to bind it as a slider axis or an actual rotary dial that doesn’t center? Because most consumer hotas on the market has a rotary dial that doesn’t auto recenter unless you buy the F-18 throttle from Winwing.
-
1
-
-
On 6/23/2023 at 8:18 AM, Timghetta said:
If a person who wants to setup their VR to the exact spot in the model we have it set to default at 8cm and go to 10cm as personal preference.
For the "Monitor Eyepoint Offset this defaults for none Track IR users are able to move to the desired position or to the correct 3D Model eyepoint of 8cm as well.Hi Tim,
First, thank you for the explanation. But the quoted text above is where I am a little confused.
You said default for VR is 8cm. In the special options, the default number for VR is set at 5. So 5 in game=8cm?
The default for track IR is set at 0 in game. As a track IR user, how should I change to number to match the 8cm realistic eyepoint position. Is there a recommended number for track IR?
Thank you in advance.
Best,
Nick
-
1 hour ago, draconus said:
Yeah, from the pilot pov moving the coolie left is outboard (toward the left aircraft side). I bet page 326 is mistaken in "coolie outboard (right)" @baltic_dragon
Thank you sir
-
So the radar elevation rotary knob on the Strike Eagle works like the Hornet? It actually doesn't work like a knob/slide but a spring-loaded switch that centers after you release it? I tried to find the answer in the manual but it doesn't really explain it.
On my HOTAS, my radar elevation is a rotary knob, so if it's not centered, the elevation setting in the jet will just keep moving up or down, which is kind of hard to use. Could RAZBAM add a special option to make the radar elevation knob works like a slider like on the F-16?
-
5
-
1
-
-
F-15E and IFF
I understand you use the Coolie switch on the throttle to iff interrogate, but I’m confused about whether it’s coolie left or right or what should I bind to my controls.
In the IFF section of the manual, page 326, it says use coolie outboard (right) to iff.
In the HOTAS section, page 73, it says coolie right is inboard and left is outboard. So the manual is contradicting itself.
When I fly the jet, pressing coolie right in game doesn’t iff, but pressing coolie left does.
So the iff section is wrong? You should be using coolie left instead of right?
Also the left and right could be confusing, since the coolie is on the back of the throttle, so whether it’s left or right depends on how you are looking at it. So what is outboard and inboard? Is outboard moving the switch away from pilot and vice versa?
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:
Have ED figured out if this is just a problem for those that bought the 9.99 upgrade pack 2 or if it also affects those that bought the 14.99 upgrade pack 1?
I bought the 14.99 upgrade pack since I only had Normandy 1944. Same problem for me.
I think it doesn't matter which upgrade pack you buy. As long as you are on Steam, you will get this issue.
-
2
-
-
It's so frustrating for us Steam users that after 16 hours of the Normandy 2 launch, we still can't enjoy the DLC we purchased.
I wonder how long will take ED to fix it this time...
-
1
-
-
I only edited my chaff and flare programs in the countermeasure file for the F-16 and the game tells me I broke IC. Now, I cannot even join most of the servers like the Growling Sidewinder PvP server and dogfight servers.
ED broke it again...
-
On 7/29/2022 at 10:37 PM, skywalker22 said:
That video from few posts above is over 3yrs old. It makes no sence...
Very Interesting. I checked the date again, the video was posted on YouTube in April 2019, which was even before the release of DCS Viper.
So basically ED has no proof.
Just a side note, it took us years to convince ED the FLCS and FM were wrong. And they moved this thread to Controller Questions and Bugs section so people can't see this...
-
2
-
-
On 7/29/2022 at 11:45 PM, NineLine said:
As I stated, the best info we have is T-day's feedback, the roll is correct to that feedback at this time. We (ED) believe him and believe it is correct.
Well that's clearly not enough. So you guys just had T-day flew it, a former F-16 pilot indeed, but how the jet feels in the real cockpit is way different than how the jet "feel" in a desktop sim, unless you guys built a full motion sim for him to replicate the exact feel he had in the real jet, which I don't think you did. And, without researching FLCS documents, reaching out to multiple sources, and clearly ignoring real-life cockpit videos, you just jumped to the conclusion. I am sorry I just can't believe ED's thoughts on this is correct. If that's your apporach to this, anyone could have asked a real pilot and build a FLCS in any sim and say that's how the real F-16 handles.
-
1
-
-
On 7/27/2022 at 1:21 AM, Valk said:
Hope ED can sort it out, now they see that there are multiple people experiencing the same problem
Now they are saying the roll inertia is correct....
-
1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:
The interview is there to give you some context of who T-Day is, but you do not need to listen to it.
We are happy with the inertia roll, a very experienced Viper pilot is also happy.
If you are not happy that is fine, we can not make everyone happy, but please dont call the team lazy, it is not constructive.
It's not about who is happy or not. It's about making the module as realistic as possible.
As you can see by reading the previous posts in this thread, you guys have tested with the internal build and said there's no roll inertia and said "Just to be clear, there should not be any inertia." Now you guys are saying the current roll inertia is correct, which is very confusing.
Regarding the interview, I apologize for calling the team lazy, but it just seems to me that by posting an youtube video (with only audio) is not a solid proof or an appropriate approach to show you have resolved the problem you have previously acknowledged. It's basically like: We saw the problem. But we had a former pilot flew it in DCS, now the problem is gone.
Just to be clear, this thread was started way before the FLCS update when there was no roll inertia at all for the DCS Viper, which you marked it "correct-as-is." Now after the FLCS update, with heavy roll inertia introduced, you now are saying the roll inertia is correct? It feels like ED's position is basically: what we have in DCS is correct, and we are not just going to change it.
-
4
-
-
9 hours ago, NineLine said:
Hey guys, today Wags had Colonel Mike “T-DAY” Torrealday over to his house to go over the Viper, T-Day has over 4000 hours on most every F-16 block out there.
You can see an interview with him here:
Anyways, they used the current Open Beta version and reviewed the current roll inertia using a FSSB stick with the force settings set to roll of 8.13 lb and pitch of 11.65.
With these settings T-Day was very happy with the results and felt it was quite accurate.
Thanks all.
It's an interview with audio only and over 1 hour long....
And, how he feels is not a valid scientific proof that the FLCS behavior/roll inertia is accurate. He could just be nice to you ED guys or not providing serious evaluation of the FM and FLCS for DCS Viper.
First, you told us there shouldn't be any roll inertia, and told us you tested the tracks and observed the roll inertia we talked about. Now, are you telling us the roll inertia we have in our DCS Viper is correct? Please don't take the lazy route and make this problem go away...
-
4
-
-
20 hours ago, razo+r said:
You still need to add it to the aircraft by rearming the smokepod.
But no, no switch in the cockpit for smoke.
Just curious, if there's no switch in the cockpit, how does Thunderbirds pilots enable and disable smoke in real life?
-
6 hours ago, Valk said:
There is an update in that other post. Now the current "as is" FM behaviour is considered correct although it's quite the opposite of what was initially considered correct. I hope ED sheds some light on how they came to that new conclusion, because it baffles me.
Thx. I see they are at least looking into this. Nineline is asking for a track. I will see if I have time to make one using my FSSB after I got back home from work today.
BTW, just a side note, have you tried flying the Mirage 2000 with FSSB? I know it's a different jet and it doesn't even use force sensing stick IRL, but that jet just stops the roll so fast when you let go the stick. Mirage 2000 feels more like what Viper used to be before the FLCS update.
-
On 7/25/2022 at 1:53 AM, SkateZilla said:
Letting go allows the stick to center... on a Distance from 0 Control, a Pressure control, letting go removes the pressure.
The Stick in the F-16 is pressure driven, there's hardly any play in it at all, so letting go is return to center.
At which point the FCS should take it as "Stop roll" and automatically compute the control surfaces to do so.
Most Desktop HOTAS, use distance from 0 Axes (using MAGs or POTs) instead of pressure.
So the let go stick return to 0 on axis time depends on travel and springs,
vs a Pressure Force Sensor, the let go pressure return to 0 is nearly instantaneous.
I'll have to give this some test runs, but it would seem if you want to quickly stop the roll with a distance from 0 stick, you'd have to center it quickly.
There shouldn't be any countering done by the user, the FCS should do that based on 0 roll, but a lot of users have the muscle memory to do so.
If you look up say Blue Angels Cockpit Videos, they counter to stop in the Legacy/super hornets,
The Thunderbirds they simply squeeze pull the stick to apply Pressure then release, there's no counter movements, the FCS does them automaticallyI have FSSB R3L which is force sensing like the real Viper stick. I still feel VERY strong roll inertia after the FLCS update. Before the FLCS update, with my FSSB, the jet stop the roll immediately after I let go (putting the pressure off) of my stick.
-
2
-
-
Now after the FLCS update, the jet has too much roll inertia. So which is correct ED? The one before the one we have right now???
-
1
-
-
On 7/15/2022 at 1:51 AM, Invisibull said:
Interestingly, a couple of years ago someone complained about how quickly the roll stopped and the post was marked [CORRECT AS IS] So, the fact that that's obviously been changed recently means it must be incorrect as is, right?
Interesting indeed.
-
14 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:
The flutter-answer really is the correct and most important one. If you have any weight on your wing, put it the farthest way out. It not only helps flutter, but designers could also make the wing-structure lighter, as the weight out there will reduce the torque- and bending-loads*. Now, the wing wasn't structurally lightened on the Viper when the 120s came around, but at the same structural weight, you'll have a longer structural life-time available, as the heavier load on the tips will decrese aeroelastic flutter** and cycles (which are more important).
By the logic of the post you quoted, squeezing off just one 120 at BVR maximizes your stores-asymmetry for the follow-on WVR engagement.
___
* Let's go on a tangent for a minute: The two-engine A330 and four-engine A340 share a very similar wing, yet the A340 (four engines, higher MTOW) actually has the lighter wing, because the several tons of engine-weight on the outboard wing are reducing bending and torsionary loads resultant from the lift-distribution. Also, the higher weight of the engine will act as a damper for oscillations like gust-response (turbulence).
** Flutter normally is an undamped divergent vibration/ oscillation that will destroy your structure quickly. But the term is also used in the sense of damped oscillations that won't destroy your structure right now, but will significantly fatigue it over time and the number of cycles it went through. Reducing this kind of flutter-mode will be incredibly beneficial for the life-limit and associated maintenance/ life-time-enhancement costs. Some F-16C Block 50s already have more than 10,000FH on them, which is a tremendous achievement for a "lightweight fighter".
I have also heard on f-16.net that 120 on the outboard stations and aim9s on the inboard stations gives the jet lower drag index thus more aerodynamically efficient.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Hawkeye91 said:
Also fun fact. I watched a Viper pilot do his air show spiel and one of their common modern loudouts is 5 amraams with only one Aim9x.
Totally true. They also bring ECM pods (the long one we have in the game) as a routine.
"Each jet was armed with five beyond-visual-range AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles and a single short-range AIM-9 Sidewinder"
"Under the belly, each aircraft was fitted with an AN/ALQ-184 electronic countermeasures self-protection pod."
Btw, we also have the exact same livery you see in this article for our Viper in DCS.
I do have a question tho. The pic shows the Viper also brings HTS pod (the article mentioned this as well) even when they are doing CAP missions. Why do they bring HTS? What's the tactical advantage of bringing it since they won't be firing any HARMS?
-
8 hours ago, Flappie said:
Even after your answers, I was still at a loss because I haven't felt the desync you described. And then I read again this comment:
I then used my Warthog throttle Slider which had a middle 'stuck' position to control antenna elevation, insteaf of a 'smooth' axis. And then I saw the light!!!
Bug reported.
Thx Flappie. Glad my comment helped
-
On 6/26/2022 at 10:13 AM, Frederf said:
Track provided. Behavior is that after pilot-initiated undesignate in TWS (also RWS) the antenna remains at the elevation commanded by TWS when target was bugged.
Observations:
- If antenna elevation knob is adjusted while TWS is automatically setting antenna, upon undesignation antenna immediately returns to position according to elevation knob.
- If antenna elevation knob is not adjusted while TWS is automatically setting antenna, upon undesignation antenna elevation remains at the contact's last value.
- If after condition #2 a sufficient number of TMS down presses will cause antenna to resume elevation according to knob position.
I haven't checked what happens on non-pilot-commanded loss of target. I feel it's probably not right that there's a difference in unlock behavior if/if not knob was moved during track. For uncommanded loss of track I'm sure radar maintains antenna elevation as long as knob isn't moved to help re acquisition. But that could be different for TMS down commanded unlock.
F16 TWS after undesignate antenna elevation.trk 34.8 kB · 3 downloads
Thank you
-
On 6/24/2022 at 2:47 PM, darkman222 said:
The viper starts to feel like ED took the "wobbling" part of the F18 flight model and brought it over to the viper.
On 6/24/2022 at 7:30 PM, Burt said:It seems that way to me also.
I feel the same.
On 6/23/2022 at 6:39 PM, darkman222 said:New patch has been rolled out. How is it? Has it been addressed? I can't try for myself in the next days unfortunately.
Unfortunately, no change for the issue described in this topic. FLCS response feels very wobbly.
-
5 minutes ago, falconzx said:
The stuck issue maybe is fixed, but not the re-zeroing/centering on a wrong absolute physical axis value. (I described the re-centering antenna "way to reproduce" in this thread) It continues to happen.
When you reproduce with the described steps(or just loosing the target in a real combat situation), the physical axis center doesn't match the FCR gimbal center, and the physical axis gimbal doesn't match the FCR elevation gimbals.Nice description.
Supercruise?
in F-15E
Posted
6 120s, 2 9Ms, full internal fuel, no tanks. I found I was able to fly at M1.0 somewhere around 20-30k. Fuel is obviously not full since I had to takeoff, climb, and accelerate to that speed.
So I am pretty sure you can supercruise with a clean jet.