AFM for the F-16C?

There's been a lot of talk about AFM and SFM on the forums. I'm a big fan of the AFM in A-10c and I and about 90% of the community agree that we'd like to see more of the same fidelity. With the amount of countries flying the F-16C (and it's service life), it seems that an AFM would be possible. Am I wrong? And if so please tell me exactly what goes into make the flight model "advanced."

.....it seems that an AFM would be possible. Am I wrong?

At this stage, yes, no and maybe, depending on who you are referring to.

To quote:

Third party products to DCS are supported by ED and there are already several qualified 3rd party teams creating new aircraft that will plug into DCS World. In these cases we leave it up to the developer to decide the level of systems fidelity, but we do expect certain "DCS Standards" to be maintained such as detailed and accurate models and cockpits, mouse clickable cockpit controls, and 6 DOF view control. Third parties are provided access to our Standard Flight Model (SFM), which ED can assist to adjust and improve to suit the requirements. Given the extremely complex nature of our Advanced Flight Model (AFM) in DCS we are currently unable to provide a SDK for 3rd party use. However, 3rd parties are also invited to offer their own Flight Models should it prove to be satisfactory.

At this stage, yes and no, depending on who you are referring to.

 

To quote:

I don't necessarily dislike the idea of a SFM, especially if a 3rd party's project graduates over time from a SFM to an AFM :smartass:

If you are doing an F-16 then contact Mavjp from BMS and he could possibly help you make the FM AFM. He did the FM for BMS and it is more detailed than an Air Force F-16 sim FM.:thumbup:

Try the latest BMS and you'll see. He has FM data from wind tunnel testing done by Nasa so you cannot get better than that.

If you are doing an F-16 then contact Mavjp from BMS and he could possibly help you make the FM AFM. He did the FM for BMS and it is more detailed than an Air Force F-16 sim FM.:thumbup:

Try the latest BMS and you'll see.

Good luck with that, seems the members over there aren't real receptive to BMS doing anything with Eagle Dynamics...kinda sad actually...

If you are doing an F-16 then contact Mavjp from BMS and he could possibly help you make the FM AFM. He did the FM for BMS and it is more detailed than an Air Force F-16 sim FM.:thumbup:

Try the latest BMS and you'll see.

I don't even know how to code (in any language). BMS is great, my squadron is still flying it while we wait for the next DCS fighter. I asked the question because I really don't understand the code work effort that separates an AFM from an SFM. I'm inclined to believe its "secret stuff" that the Air Force gave ED about the A-10 that allowed them to create an AFM for that airframe. Which is why I feel like there are enough F-16 out there for the information to be in the public domain by now. Thats my theory. I could be wrong about several parts of it. The AFM might come down to lots of painful calculus and physics for all I know. I do agree though, if a 3rd party was to do DCS: F-16C instead of ED then it should be the fellas at BMS.

Well now with third party devs and keen DCS devs to move along all I can say please pretty please make this but better with AESA Radar true FM realistic avionics and the ultimate HD 3D clickable cockpit please better than this video

http://youtu.be/fOnaPStcNlo

And then onto this.....http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1475896&postcount=688

With high end terrain using tools like REX, ORBX, CryEngine etc Refer to this post

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1480548&postcount=30

:joystick::smartass::pilotfly:..... The best study sim ever topping the F4 concept http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falcon_4.0 :smilewink:

More here http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=73864 ......... ENJOY!:thumbup:

Thanks in advance .......... :thumbup:

I'd like to make a poll on that very issue I guess (don't think I can though: privileges maybe?).

Here's how I see it fleshing out:

Who should make DCS: F-16C???

Option 1: Only ED can make the sacred Viper!

Option 2: BMS (or insert other 3rd party) should make the Viper!

Option 3: I will never stop flying F4 so I really don't care!

Who should make DCS: F-16C???

 

There has already been an announcement of a pending F-16 development from a Community organisation, the VTAI.

There has already been an announcement of a pending F-16 development from a Community organisation, the VTAI.

Is ED on board with that though? Are they "sanctioned/approved" by ED?

I'm sure 3rd parties will riff on the SFM. But one thing I can tell you, I refuse to go back to scripted landings, no matter how advanced the avionics or sweet the ride.

Is ED on board with that though? Are they "sanctioned/approved" by ED?

I don't know - they have confirmed that they will be posting an announcement sometime soon so we will just have to wait and see.

I don't know - they have confirmed that they will be posting an announcement sometime soon so we will just have to wait and see.

Hmm, I've never heard them... and I'll leave it at that. I doubt others will though. :music_whistling:

Hmm, I've never heard them...

Aye - I was the same with IRIS and RAZBAM :)

Aye - I was the same with IRIS and RAZBAM :)

Yep, ED set the bar high with their work. At least they know what to aim for.

I'm inclined to believe its "secret stuff" that the Air Force gave ED about the A-10 that allowed them to create an AFM for that airframe.

Afaik the desk top trainer that ED marketed to the air national guard didn't feature an AFM. It seems to be more of a switchology trainer, getting pilots used to the new MFCDS and HOTAS commands. The AFM, if I'm remembering correctly, came when they made the commercial product.

I think the latter part of your statement is the truth, a lot of complicated math and some extremely passionate and skilled devolpment=AFM.

...incidentally, the ANG trainer doesn't even seem to have a 3D pit...yuck :P

Afaik the desk top trainer that ED marketed to the air national guard didn't feature an AFM. It seems to be more of a switchology trainer, getting pilots used to the new MFCDS and HOTAS commands. The AFM, if I'm remembering correctly, came when they made the commercial product.

I think the latter part of your statement is the truth, a lot of complicated math and some extremely passionate and skilled devolpment=AFM.

 

...incidentally, the ANG trainer doesn't even seem to have a 3D pit...yuck :P

Ah, I was very wrong then and that's a relieve to know actually. Classified stuff killing my hobby always rubs me wrong. :)

Although I don't think it hurt that they had a lot of access to the inner workings of the jet, maybe that is the secret to a great AFM :D Maybe we'll never know!

...just kidding of course

PLEASE WATCH

THE Fighting Falcon - The VIPER is Sacred....... LoL

http://youtu.be/rOb79JrcNY0

http://youtu.be/KE4yG5qjWMA?hd=1

F-16 FCLS

F-16 AESA RADAR

F-16 Jammer POD

http://youtu.be/bSJDUABpXzI

F-16 SNIPER POD

http://youtu.be/mTFcmlbn1GQ

http://youtu.be/mpPudL-Ztdg?hd=1

Falcon 4.0

http://youtu.be/OCFMX5z-ed4http://youtu.be/hPNnXAKHDsE?hd=1

http://youtu.be/26k1LxYaAkc?hd=1

The F-16 BEST MULTIROLE FIGHTER THEN IN SECOND PLACE IS THE F/A-18E/F Super Hornet!

I can post more on the F-18 if you like gents, I have a whole collection of video downloads from youtube dont be afraid to ask.

Flight Sims, Da best!.................... :thumbup:

I think one of the mayor problems with all F-16 sims is people forget that because they are so many countries flying the F-16, they are so many version, mods ect. I just hope if anyone decides to make a F-16 the stick to an specific tail number, at a specific time, otherwise, is never going to be accurate. I hope whom ever does this, models a block 30 or 40, early 1990's.

I'm inclined to believe its "secret stuff" that the Air Force gave ED about the A-10 that allowed them to create an AFM for that airframe.

Data-logging control inputs (it's digital fly-by-wire after all), combined with multi-axis inertial data-logging will give a real clear mirror of how the aircraft actually moved, and responded in common manoeuvres at a range of speeds and loads.

If I remember correctly, when FC came out they made a thing out of the flight model being constructed from actual flight data. Not guesstimated. I expect that's the standard each dedicated DCS aircraft must conform to (DCS F-15E will be interesting).

But does engine performance in DCS aircraft mirror the real-world change in engine performance as atmospheric conditions, altitude and speed change? Anyone know this?

Yes it does the KA50 performance changes with altitude and atmospheric conditions.:thumbup:

FBW is something that is not yet modelled in DCS. SAS yes but not digital FBW like the Superhornet.

Even the SFM one does.

But does engine performance in DCS aircraft mirror the real-world change in engine performance as atmospheric conditions, altitude and speed change? Anyone know this?

Good, hope we'll get the full repetior of engine go in a DCS fastjet.

I think one of the mayor problems with all F-16 sims is people forget that because they are so many countries flying the F-16, they are so many version, mods ect. I just hope if anyone decides to make a F-16 the stick to an specific tail number, at a specific time, otherwise, is never going to be accurate. I hope whom ever does this, models a block 30 or 40, early 1990's.

I agree!!!