Journey of a new pilot...

[Stuge]

If you have a good instructor, for the most part you won't have any innovating to do. Innovation is the discovery of new methods. You may discover something new to you personally, but that's not innovation any more, it's just reinventing the wheel.

 

I've never had any real instructors in the sim world. I had to reinvent the wheel through trial and error. But I like to think it's a little different wheel... after all, it's mine, right? :)

 

I don't see how this is relevant. RL fighter pilots are highly motivated people and they don't like leaving things up to emotion, psychology, luck, or art. Their lives depend on being on the ball.

 

Yes, their lives depend on it. Fear of death is a strong, possibly debilitating emotion. I don't think everyone is immune, since there is no way to really train for it. Another thing some pilots must feel is the need to spare their targets' lives. (be it an enemy pilot, or people on the ground). So obviously RL combat is totally different from simulated combat, from a psychological viewpoint.

 

Thanks for the interesting facts.. CCT is new to me, so are some of the other terms..

 

Without going deeper into the "art" thing, at least not now, since that will require definition of art in the first place, I will end with a quote from a fictional character in a certain TV show:

 

"A stroke of the brush does not guarantee art from the bristles."

 

Cheers :)

[Bushmanni]

I'm pretty sure air combat doesn't have pretty much any room for actual innovation (like GG said, re-inventing the wheel doesn't count) without technical innovation. In sim world it means that there's really no room for innovation (except for the short time the change is new and people aren't fully aware of all the implications) as all the technical changes are know and available to everyone to experiment with and figure out how to use it and how to work against it. This holds at least in theory assuming it's actually possible to experiment and figure out all the relevant moves and counter-moves for every plane and piece of equipment or obtain the knowledge from others or through experience. The question is how you cram all that information in your brain in a useful manner. How to train ie. program your brain so that you are as effective as you can be.

 

Now regardless of your style of brain programming, it will always happen through practice. The question is, what kind of decision rules you are going to learn ie. what kind of practice drills and scenarios you are going to use and how you are going to analyze and debrief them. My style of learning rules of thumbs stems from the experience with airsoft. All the strict procedure style guys were pretty much too slow to react to changing situations at best and often doing irrelevant stuff while all the best players were people who made decisions by instinct but did pay attention to the basic theoretical principles. Big problem for the procedure guys was the bloated need for internal coordination that took their attention away from the enemy if they played as a group. The worst players were people who just went with instinct (they really didn't have any idea what they were doing) or people who misunderstood the procedures (practically same problem as with pure instinct). Airsoft is in most situations lot more messier than air combat and you can't usually rule out innovations due to unknowns related to playing field so you can't make an apples to apples comparison in strict sense. So my question is, if anyone can answer it, what kind of style the best players use in flight sims?

 

I want to point out, that the well playing instinct guys did have lots of experience, drilling and practice under their belt so they had lots of memories of how to act properly in certain situations. The difference to the pure procedure guys was that their knowledge wasn't explicit, ie. they didn't have a conscious answer to every problem but more like a conscious simple rules of thumb for certain general situations and then they would instinctively recognize the situation and instinctively figure out the proper way to apply the rule to the situation. In effect they did have effectively the same information and most likely even more than the procedure guys but it was organized differently due to different way of thinking and training.

[GGTharos]

I've never had any real instructors in the sim world. I had to reinvent the wheel through trial and error. But I like to think it's a little different wheel... after all, it's mine, right? :)

 

I don't have much time so I'll be a bit blunt :)

 

Yes, everyone's bag of tricks can be different. It's all driven by training in RL.

 

Here we're talking about realistic training vs. gaming. There are some things you can do in a game that you can't do in RL - eg, some people will dodge high-energy missiles head on with a last-second pull. To put it mildly, BS, but it's the way the game works.

 

So yes, you can have your wheel, but it's based on the game. And that's fine.

 

Yes, their lives depend on it. Fear of death is a strong, possibly debilitating emotion. I don't think everyone is immune, since there is no way to really train for it. Another thing some pilots must feel is the need to spare their targets' lives. (be it an enemy pilot, or people on the ground). So obviously RL combat is totally different from simulated combat, from a psychological viewpoint.

 

The USAF, for example, has so few slots and so many applicants, they'll reject you because you can't recall the punctuation on your emergency procedures. You're not dealing with the average person.

 

Without going deeper into the "art" thing, at least not now, since that will require definition of art in the first place, I will end with a quote from a fictional character in a certain TV show:

 

"A stroke of the brush does not guarantee art from the bristles."

 

Cheers :)

 

No brush, no cigar. There's very little art if any in this. Most things IN GAME are game-isms that people exploit heavily. Can't complain about it, but it doesn't give you a realistic picture of air to air - I refer in particular to BVR, and in some cases WVR (especially now, the F-15's PFM has problems in a regime where the F-15 is supposed to excel).

 

In the end yes, it is all about how you want to have fun. Me, if I critique a dogfight, I look at it from a particular perspective. Others look at it from another.

 

However, when it comes to correctness, I'll try to give correct answers. They might be vulnerable to game-isms, but game-isms can be vulnerable to being phased out.

[Buckeye]

 

However, when it comes to correctness, I'll try to give correct answers. They might be vulnerable to game-isms, but game-isms can be vulnerable to being phased out.

 

 

Here's to hoping so, the more similar it becomes to reality the better.

[Stuge]

 

However, when it comes to correctness, I'll try to give correct answers. They might be vulnerable to game-isms, but game-isms can be vulnerable to being phased out.

 

What you refer to "game-isms"... once one has experience from a dozen or more different flight sims.. and then some RL aircraft (in a peaceful way:)), most important things are universal. And then comes the ability to adapt.

 

Adaptability means that game-specific details can change or phase out as much as they want.. it doesn't matter in the big picture :)

[Stuge]

I can't freakin wait to be able to do it online against other human pilots, that will be a huge rush -- although I know I will again feel like I'm helpless at first

 

Don't worry, there are always human pilots who present an easier target than the AI does..

 

we all know the AI sucks anyway.

 

It doesn't suck at receiving gun hits. Practice your gunnery! Remember, a lethal gun shot is possible from any angle! (In theory :P)

[GGTharos]

Yep, game-isms are very game specific usually. They're also bad habits that are very hard to get rid of. If it's easy for you to get rid of them, that basically makes you special.

 

The biggest game-ism in DCS is low altitude flying and head-on (radar) missile dodging. Once you have a bandit tracking you within 20km, turning into him should be fairly suicidal. Not so in this game - just as an example :)

 

What you refer to "game-isms"... once one has experience from a dozen or more different flight sims.. and then some RL aircraft (in a peaceful way:)), most important things are universal. And then comes the ability to adapt.

 

Adaptability means that game-specific details can change or phase out as much as they want.. it doesn't matter in the big picture :)

[Buckeye]

Don't worry, there are always human pilots who present an easier target than the AI does..

 

It doesn't suck at receiving gun hits. Practice your gunnery! Remember, a lethal gun shot is possible from any angle! (In theory :P)

 

Very valid point and my gunnery isn't something I had been placing a particular focus on.

[USARStarkey]

I don't have much time so I'll be a bit blunt :)

 

Yes, everyone's bag of tricks can be different. It's all driven by training in RL.

 

Here we're talking about realistic training vs. gaming. There are some things you can do in a game that you can't do in RL - eg, some people will dodge high-energy missiles head on with a last-second pull. To put it mildly, BS, but it's the way the game works.

 

.

 

Are you talking about Radar missiles here? What is last second? Im only asking because I feel like head on against IR missiles the modeling is fairly accurate. I find that they are very hard to dodge but you can do it if you have enough E and make a very sharp turn in a high aspect situation since the missile doesn't have time to maneuver because of the closure rate. The R-73 is alot harder, but it can be done.

[TAW_Blaze]

IR head on are insanely easy to dodge.

[USARStarkey]

I think it really depends. If they fire at you within 2nm and your not fast, you are trouble. You can still defeat it, but its not easy.

[TAW_Blaze]

It's all a matter of having flares and seeing it. I can't remember being hit by any in this type of situation when I actually spotted it and I had flares in the past 3-4 months. I guess it's kind of hard if you're stuck at 200 knots trying to dodge it but why they hell would u be at 200 knots?

[USARStarkey]

Usually because I just dodged his first few shots, or his wingman was also shooting, or a mountain or something forced me to slow down etc. I get you, and I'm normally fast, but there are all sorts of ways you might be forced slow.

 

Isnt the IR missile modeling pretty accurate though, could have sworn someone said on here it was some time ago.

[TAW_Blaze]

I don't know how accurate it is, all I'm saying it's extremely easy to dodge any of the IR missiles provided you have flares, you have some speed, you know how to do it, and it's coming from the front. The ones that come behind your 3/9 are usually more dangerous because they'll see your engines pretty well.

[USARStarkey]

Yeah I dont disagree. Even without flares, if you have the E to do it.

[GGTharos]

Yes, radar missiles. The closure should be a problem for you, not for the missile. Just about everything the missile does, it should be doing it faster than you are. Missiles should be 'easy to dodge' when low one energy ... not when they're able to haul g like nobody's business.

 

Are you talking about Radar missiles here? What is last second? Im only asking because I feel like head on against IR missiles the modeling is fairly accurate. I find that they are very hard to dodge but you can do it if you have enough E and make a very sharp turn in a high aspect situation since the missile doesn't have time to maneuver because of the closure rate.

[Buckeye]

It's all a matter of having flares and seeing it. I can't remember being hit by any in this type of situation when I actually spotted it and I had flares in the past 3-4 months. I guess it's kind of hard if you're stuck at 200 knots trying to dodge it but why they hell would u be at 200 knots?

 

 

...bc you suck at energy management like I still do.

[Maximus_Lazarus]

Quick poll , if i may hijack this thread for just a brief second (don't think a thread is necesarry for my one question)

 

What seems most efficient , when starting to practice WVR combat: labels on or off

[karambiatos]

Quick poll , if i may hijack this thread for just a brief second (don't think a thread is necesarry for my one question)

 

What seems most efficient , when starting to practice WVR combat: labels on or off

off

[Maximus_Lazarus]

yeah, i tried again and i agree. Must train the eye in spotting the plane as well.

 

Having said that, i'm kind of beginning to like flying while looking anywhere but my hud and looking at the enemy.

Gives a different sensation, and i'm liking the feel of it.

[winchesterdelta1]

Yup Labels off. Learn it the hard way :)

[Stuge]

Visual spotting and tracking skill must be at expert level for achieving great success.

 

However, if visual spotting and tracking seems overwhelmingly difficult, maybe turning labels on helps. Try labels off, and if it presents great difficulty, then back to labels on.

 

I personally dislike labels in DCS.

 

But in my young days when Microsoft Combat Flight Simulator 2 was quite popular online, most of the fights were conducted with labels on (labels off -games were rare)

 

However, most importantly(!!!) if you are having trouble seeing your target in a dogfight scenario, make sure your hardware is up to the task too. I have an old school CRT screen and play in 1600x1200, that gives me no problem whatsoever. But if the resolution you play in is much lower than that, it may present a problem.. Also pay attention to how other graphical settings may affect visibility of planes.

 

CFS2 is the game that trained me into dogfighting. After that, it was no problem getting into IL-2 multiplayer and eventually Falcon 4.0 and Lock On and DCS.

[GGTharos]

Labels can help with training when you're not fussed about having to maintain sight. They work great, and if you do things right, you'll learn how big things look at different distances as well. Labels let you focus on the BFM itself.

 

And yes, keeping sight is too hard in DCS - it is an artifact of representing things on a 2d screen that's less than the resolution of your eyes, and more importantly, attempting to put an FoV somewhat equivalent to that of your eyes in a much smaller space.

[Buckeye]

The first week or two I had labels on, I have since taken them off. I am slowly improving at keeping visual of the bandit, as well as when I lose visual because of flight patterns in a turn, etc., I have gotten much better at relocating them. I've still got a ways to go with both of those though to get to where I am anywhere close to where I need to be.

 

Do you all think a 23" monitor (1980x1080 res) is too small for efficiently tracking enemies visually? I find I have to use my zoom in and off quite a bit to keep track of the enemies...however, I'm struggling to let myself upgrade to a 27"+ or 2/3 monitors with the Rift coming out soonish. Just curious if you all think a 23" monitor is too small?

[GGTharos]

My 46" monitor is too small.