Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'w.i.p'.
-
Spotting dots are very large in VR. With my Valve Index, at certain ranges, both the dot and model are rendered. In this situation, the dot can obscure the aircraft, such that I can't see the aircraft model and its heading and attitude. I'd like to see some kind of slider to reduce the dot size. Dots disappear seemingly at random based upon where I'm looking and whether I'm using no zoom, VR zoom, or VR spyglass zoom. Aircraft at ~2nm (3.5km) only have the model rendered, no dot. With no zoom, aircraft can be extremely difficult to see at this range*. The abrupt change from a huge dot to a tiny model (or vice versa) is extremely jarring. Maybe add a slider to adjust the minimum dot range? *I'm a pilot IRL and I can easily spot tiny aircraft like the C172 at 2nm
- 116 replies
-
- 11
-
- investigating
- spotting
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Haven't try other modules, bnullut in the A10Cv2, the TGP is visible without NVG in IR and BTH mode. See attached screen.
-
Hi, first of all the new pilot model looks really great. So far I've already found some bugs: 1. When looking back, you "zoom out" of the head and the helmet obscures the view. This is actually severe, because as of now, you cannot look back in the Hornet it seems like (2D, don't have VR). 2. The (oxygen?) hose disappears when looking more forward 3. The cord runs through the belt
-
w.i.p Apache (George Pilot) ability to steady hover is very poor
mdee posted a topic in Bugs and Problems
Hi, I have quite severe issues with George AI when hovering, the hover is unstable and makes operating from the front seat very difficult, sometimes impossible. The heli oscilates from left to right, 10-20 degrees each side. I have tried all George modes, doesn't make any difference. I have tried with an empty heli. I am using latest beta, I have triple checked my controls, no trim, no wind. I can hold a stable hover from pilot seat. Any ideas? -
I recently did some comparisons between various aircraft in DCS as some people have stated that the efficiency of the JF-17 and the Hornet are quite high. To my surprise I found a very head-scratching engine economy and performance on the Hornet. All tests were at 30000ft, ISA-like conditions, full internal fuel and the default DCS loadout (pylons when applicable). The Hornet was the outlier across the board and did not even closely match the publically available and stated values I have found. It has by far the longest full AB time of all jets I have tested in DCS, much better economy and a much lower TSFC than most other comparable jets in DCS. Below are my test results. Especially in the chart above you can see the F110-GE-400/402's TSFC of 1,23 in FULL! afterburner. Publically available sources state a value of 1,74, which is mostly in line with comparable engines of similar thrust rating and size. Below is another picture showing a fuel flow of 22200 lbs/h in full AB at Mach 1.63 and 30000ft. I think GE would've won a nobel prize by now if they managed to develop such an efficient engine. Now, other aircraft such as the F-14B, and F-16C match the stated values very well, the 16C's fuel flow matches the real, publically available FF charts mostly within a margin of +/- 5%. I wasn't able to find any publically available fuel flow charts for our F/A-18C and I do know the document designation of where to find those values, however this very document seems to be classified. Now my question to ED - since your aircraft are built on publically available data, what source or data did you guys use to model this? Could you please reference a source that would back the current performance of the Hornet's engines? If not, would you please consider adjusting these values based on public TSFC values for dry and wet thrust? Currently the Hornet is way more efficient than the Tomcat or any other comparable jet- nothing of the "short legs" the US NAVY was talking about all these past years.
-
There seems to be inconsistencies with fuel flow which worsen as altitude and speed increases. As speed increases fuel flow starts high, dips, peaks, then declines again. There is also a disparity with the amount of lbs/nm of fuel being used in FPAS vs lbs/hr that is shown on the IFEI. The actual fuel usage appears to align with the lb/nm displayed in FPAS. This data was taken on the Syria map, 29.92 barometer, 20 degrees C, clean jet with no pylons, and 50% fuel load. Infinite fuel was used to negate any airspeed changes due to decreasing weight of the aircraft. The final mach number in each chart is the maximum speed attainable at that flight level. Y axis is lbs of fuel, X is speed in mach. IFEI lbs/hr usage is 100x times the value on the chart so an IFEI value of 142 on the chart = 14,200 lbs/hr and for FPAS a vaule of 42 = 42 lbs/nm. In most tests throttles were advanced at .4 mach and I started collected data at .5 to allow for engine spool time. The 40,000 test data starts at where the throttles were put into AB, this is due to the aircraft struggling to maintain attitude control below that airspeed at that altitude. Acceleration in full MIL at 40,000 feet was not recorded due to the aircraft needing nearly full MIL just to maintain altitude. Unfortunately, I am unable to go back to the prior version and run these tests in that environment. There are no tracks because each test was 100% just the jet flying in a straight line with me pausing every additional .02 mach to record data. I can't say I'm particularly knowledgeable of all the exact variables that go into calculating fuel flow vs speed and altitude, but something certainly seems off and there are usage shenanigans happening after the FM update. It doesn't seem logical that the lbs/nm burned should start to decline as if air resistance is falling off as the aircraft approaches the maximum speed for a given altitude, all while the IFEI fuel value keeps climbing. The transition point from where lbs/nm usage is increasing to it all of a sudden leveling and tapering down seems very suspect to me as well. FWIW, playing on Gray Flag prior to the update I would typically take off from an airbase and do CAP in an orbit up at 48,000-49,000 feet around mach 1 +/- .1 and with a loadout consisting of 3 tanks, 6x120C, and 2x9X. I would have a loiter time of 45 minutes to an hour before coming down to tank. I can't go back and check prior to the FM patch now, but I seem to recall up around those altitudes fuel consumption was something around 7 or 8 lb/nm in full AB. Now a similar loadout barely has the ability to maintain an orbit up around 43,000, is not able to reach mach 1, and fuel consumption is in the 40ish lb/nm range.
-
So, for the last few versions I have started to get an issue with the Power Levers when in the CPG cockpit: I have "Power: Both" bound to an analogue axis for AH-64D CP/G There is no other axis bound to that function for AH-64D CP/G There are no DirectX button binds for any of the Power Lever actions There are no axis binds or DirectX button binds for any of the Power Lever actions for AH-64D Pilot. The axis input shows as smooth and non-jittery under Tune Combo Axis, so I don't think there is any real noise. When the Power Lever axis is at 100%, the lever is stable and in the "Fly" position. If I position the Power Lever axis anywhere between 100% and 0%, the lever position in the cockpit jitters by maybe 10-20%, and always towards the FLY position from where I have the lever actually set. If I pull the Power Lever axis back to 0%, the Power Lever position jumps immediately up to the FLY position and stays there. It is acting as if some other binding is trying to push the lever to 100%, but as I said, there does not appear to be any other binding for that axis. Furthermore, if I remove the CPG binding, then go to the pilot position and re-bind the same axis in the same way for the pilot's Power Levers, they work fine and smoothly - the problem seems to be unique to the CPG position. I wonder if George-as-pilot might be trying to push the levers up to 100% when they shouldn't be allowed to? If while CPG I hand control over to George-as-pilot, he certainly does push the power levers back up to FLY immediately (but then I'd expect him to do that) My CPG axis bindings, just for reference...
-
So we have big black blobs that turn into invisible objects when in combat range and its near impossible to pick them out . When is there going to be a patch to clear this LOD up . its getting very frustrating now . Also ground targets seem hidden until close or near at tree top lever . Constant flying in circles looking for a hint of ground target . In bad weather we as a pilot cant see any hint of target but the AAA and ground units see every thing . Even Tanks are getting dead eye hits . When is this going to be fixed . ?? Also bombs and rockets seem to hit targets yet remain alive or look alive . . Where are the secondary explosions or damage with in distance gone . !!!
- 116 replies
-
- investigating
- spotting
-
(and 1 more)
Tagged with:
-
Hi, DCS 2.9.0.47168 Open Beta -- mentions only one known issue: Added New pilot model from first person (Work in progress). Known issues: The salute command doesn't work when using option Afterburner detent. However, another one is the kneeboard that seems to skip on displaying pages from the or the information brought by the past update (DCS 2.7.14.23966 Open Beta): Added Additional carrier data to the kneeboard - ATC frequency, TACAN and ILCS channel.
-
I love the view of the new 3D pilot, good job, but I normally fly with the pilot enabled and now the helmet prevents me from seeing what I have at my six, or checking the status, position and operation of the ailerons. A first-person view of the pilot is not supposed to show the pilot's own head.
-
Hi, I use track ir to play DCS F-18 and I have observed that when turning my head to the left or right when reaching the limit, the helmet of the new pilot introduced in the 2.9 hot fix appears. The helmet of the previous 2.8 pilot did not appear. This creates a sensation as if I were outside the pilot's body, which does not happen when looking straight ahead.
-
In many cases it's so difficult to boresight the Maverick, because of the font color on the display. Check how is the font color compared to the sky in the background. Impossible to see anything. Can the font color be changed to something different? null
-
When George has been in control of the controls, he will have reset trim to center. When taking back control from George the controls will initially be at the position George last left them, but not trimmed for this position. Hence when you take over control from George again, unless you happen to be able to put your controls in the exact same position as George is holding his when taking over, you will be left fighting to get the helicopter under control again. George should leave the helicopter trimmed for his last control position, so that the player can just leave his controls centered to continue flying with George's last control position. This will make the handoff of controls much less stressful, particularly in low level flight!
- 45 replies
-
- 10
-
Hi @BIGNEWY / @NineLine ! I would like to send a question to ED team with hope to get an answer at the end. Its about Hornets vital systems: FUEL - HYDRAULIC - ELECTRICAL POWER SUPPLY - ENVIRONMENTAL - FLIGHT CONTROL - AVIONICS systems and backup systems. Many enthusiast interested in DCS Hornet flying have their copy of Hornet NATOPS Flight Manual downloaded and some of them also did study some of the topics like Hornets performance, procedures and how the systems works and how to operate them (including emergency procedures). I did that also, with in some limited extend of chapters I found interesting. After some quick testing and system failures set in ME. I found that DCS Hornet systems/subsystems (depends on which one) works only roughly or some not at all like described in NATOPS FM. I will not go here to the details of what I have found wrong or incorrectly simulated, because I really don’t want to make this topic to go off topic just after created. So my key question to the team is: "What is the current state of Hornet FUEL, HYDRAULIC, ELECTRIC, ENVORONMENTAL, FLIGHT CONTROL, AVIONICS systems, or how accurate are these system modeled, when compared to Hornets NATOPS FM, and what is planned to fix / add in future of this great DCS module? What are the player possibilities to solve emergency procedures according to NATOPS flight manual if being hit in mission or when player made his Hornet systems failure setup in mission editor to practice emergency procedures." "Will there be any EMERGENCY Guide made by ED for the Hornet module in future? Fuel Motive Flow Feed, Transfer, Gravity with its valves and pumps (depicted in NATOPS A1-F18AC-NFM-000 Figure FO-11. Fuel System (Sheet 2 of 3)) Fuel Motive Flow System with its valves and pumps (depicted in Figure FO-11. Fuel System (Sheet 3 of 3)) Hydraulic system with its valves and pumps (depicted in Figure 15-5. Hydraulic Flow Diagram) Control surfaces affected by hydraulic system malfunction (depicted in Figure 15-6. Hydraulic Subsystems Malfunction Guide) Flight Controls (depicted in Figure 2-12. Flight Control System Functional Diagram) with its backup control 2.8.2.10 Mechanical Linkage (MECH) Avionics systems (depicted in Figure 2-20. Mission Computer Functions and Multiplex System (Sheet 4 of 5 and Sheet 5 of 5)) Electrical power system (depicted in Figure 2-9. Electrical System (Sheet 2 of 2)) Environmental Control System (depicted in Figure FO-12. Environmental Control System)
-
Greetings, In training mission for the F-16C "Lesson 24 - JDAM Employment" at the very beginning of the mission when he says to switch to the CNTL page on the SMS and then select the OSB that has AIR next to it and change it to Ground mode, the button does nothing, it doesn't change. Is anyone else experiencing this issue? I went to WAGS Youtube videos and it's working great in all his JDAM videos on his SMS page, so I don't know if it's isolated to me or if nobody has noticed this isn't working anymore. Thanks everyone,
-
Hello Problem: anytime i refit and refuel, i stArt getting bit failures. I start the process to fix them, holding down rest while clicking bit on the right screen and I am stuck with: FCS-MC: Go Sensors: not ready stores: not ready Comm: Not Ready Nav: Go Displays: not ready Status Monitor: Not ready EW: Not ready Not sure what i am doing wrong since the process worked prior. Kindly advise
-
Noticed a few possible bugs here: A) On Air start missions the Hind will add some yaw corrections to the rudder even if rudder assists are disabled, I have to reset trim to cancel the input other wise they will stay offset. This happens in self made missions and the instant freeflights where you start in active pause. General Yaw autopliot: B)If engaging the yaw auto pilot once the pedals are offset these will not return to center when yaw auto pilot disengaged. You have to reset trim. This is not a problem in forward flight but if using the Yaw auto pilot in auto hover it can become a problem, as when you want to center the pedals after YAP disengaged you have to do a trim reset which also cancels the cyclic trim. This can lead to some messy situations. Shouldn't the pedals return to Centre after Yaw auto pilot is turned off ?? It is no longer getting inputs from the FCS. Turning off the pedal damper has no effect. C) If taking over from the AI pilot the pedals can be offset (regardless of YAW AP) , only way to centre pedals is to reset trim which again is tied to cyclic, not ideal if low and slow. I do not have any rudder assistance selected in game menus and all game avionics modes etc.. are de selected. I do not have sync hotas at mission start as the latest update is creating issues with the joystick (TM HOG), the stick will go full forward and to the left on mission start (not a Hind issue) happens in other birds until I force back control and then it centers, but even if do have sync selected and let the cyclic do its thing the pedals are are still the same as part A on mission air starts. Edit: Added to tidy up the topic. So more playing about today and to highlight the issue I am talking about. I have been testing the AI handover between seats and as mentioned in this thread the pedals create issues under certain cumstances. Simple Test: (no rudder helper selected in game options) Go into a stable hover , switch to front seat, let AI settle the hover, switch back to the pilots seat and then perform a 90 degree turn to the left and maintain stable hover (something you might actually do) Result: When you take back over the pilots seat the all the controls controls are trimmed, obviously this is good as you don't want to crash on take over. The problem becomes the pedals, when I do 90 degree turn I am fighting this offset left by the AI, once my turn is complete I am having to dab left rudder now to maintain a heading. While doable this starts becoming extremely awkward as my brain/muscle memory is telling me I need to right rudder in a hover plus I am only having to lightly feather left which is also awkward. My pedals being center spring (VKB's) are now completely out of wack to the helo controls. To combat this you can reset trim, however as mentioned already the trim reset also zeros cyclic. I have managed to catch it and go back into hover but again this is making a simple task more difficult, resetting cyclic trim near the ground is not a good idea really. Would this be an issue at 300m in forward flight, no, but it can be an issue else where. The above is linked to the same prob with turning off Yaw AP, your pedals are stuck until you reset which cancels any cyclic trim. While resetting the pedals may not be accurate neither is the current system but rather it is just tied to re-setting cyclic. Possible Solution: I would assume there are different ways to to implement how the pedals work but adding a extra separate bind to re set the pedals would be easiest I would guess. This way you do not have to change the current behavior of the 2 ways to reset trim (double tap trim or trim reset) You could double tap set-trim to reset all, current re-set trim could still be used to cancel both cyclic and pedals, plus the extra reset pedals only needs be used if a player wants. With those 3 options it would cover all bases IMHO with out effecting currently how the module works. I would hazard a guess for those that like flying with the rudder helper, having a separate pedal re-set could also be useful. With the above , on my cyclic I would map ''set-trim'' and ''pedal reset trim'' as "set-trim'' does 2 functions.
-
The FCS BIT test seems to always show ready after a cold start now ? is this new behaviour intended?
-
Viper is limited to 800kn VNE under 30k feet. There are charts, I'm pretty sure ED has them, your SME's should also know this limit rather well. The fact I can routinely go to 900kn clean without the engine blowing up is a bug. Here is also a track HyperViperbug.trk
-
Posting this pre-2.7. Not really a bug, but either ED is gaslighting me, or 'CPL' sometimes flashes up on the blank lower position of the UFC (below RALT). Please someone else say you've seen this as well....
-
I noticed something funny after shooting as titled. I saw there was a post prior about something sort of this nature, but was labeled previously reported and with@bignewy saying to wait for the next update, which was already released since then and topic closed. What happens is when you have bugged an L&S get with in the launch range and shoot, if you bank either left or right more than 30-45 degrees to notch, the radar loses track until your bank gets back to below this value. I’m not sure if it is affecting the success of the kill or not, but it seems to be pretty evident when you bank and you see “LOSE” on the fly out symbology, but yet it comes back and continues to count to pit bull. I will provide a track if requested since it seems pretty easy to replicate. I don't know why I said that, here's a track. https://www.dropbox.com/s/4oeqyuzphcxrgmh/TWS120.trk?dl=0 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
-
So im currently making a single player mission.. the objective is to destroy a group of ships, ive been testing damage output of weapons vs ships and it seems even the small FF type ships and DD have around 1000 hit points or so.. This cant be right, its this being worked on or is this just DCS ships ? Seems pointless attacking a FF even when dropping a GBU 24 doesn't destroy a small FF ship ??? Ive decided too use triggers to help kill the ships as I think a 2000IB bomb would devastate even a destroyer type ship. And the Harpoon/mavericks damage vs ships is laughable..
-
It should switch transponder to transmit 7700 code, like it does in A-10C or Huey. Here it does nothing.
-
Hornet rudder movement is seriously overcorrecting and flapping hard when there is light wind and turbulence. This starts when the FCS is in landing mode -> when flying on speed AoA. The shaky movement is unrealistic for any actuator, and sometimes it can actually make your landing worse by moving the plane sideways. In the track there is a "realistic" turbulence and weather setting but the rudders move unneccessarily fast which makes the approach and landing shaky. In the video you can see how smooth the movement should really be. There are plenty of landing videos on Youtube for reference material. I also want to emphasise that I do know that there needs to be large and quick corrections when there is wind and turbulence but currently the rudder is overcorrecting and shaking a lot. The movement just needs to be dampened quite a lot. rudder movement.trk
-
I found a bug where you can get a non functioning a/g radar that doesn't do anything and seems to have TGP functions. To get this bug to happen simply press air to ground master mode on the ICP then the FCR should auto open on left MFD. Next press the FCR osb button on the bottom, then re open the FCR page but press the osb button at the top left (has to be top left). You should then have this weird looking radar display. Let me know if further instructions needed or a .trk file. Thanks