DCS 1.2.11 Discussion

[BIGNEWY]

Anyone else having issues

 

 

C:\DCS World OpenBeta find your autoupdate_log and attach it.

 

we need help to help you :)

 

but having the openbeta installed works to :P

 

http://updates.digitalcombatsimulator.com/

[BadK]

Any info on the HUD repeater Mod? Sounds interesting.

[NRG-Vampire]

testers, please put these bugs to the appropriate sub-forum

 

missing texture for the 6er bomb rack and fully lowered AI flaps (almost vertical)

and after the first usage of brake-chute the tube cover-cone always opened under 180kmph speed, (when the brake-cute is available again/after rearm is the same)

 

Edited November 6, 2014 by NRG-Vampire

[Suchacz]

Thanks!! Wow, are you guys on alert 5? Great response time ;)

They are AI ED forum bots :D:thumbup:

[NineLine]

This.

 

The FM definitely needs work. The su27 is very unstable in general, not even talking about the cobra.

 

Please spend more then 5 mins with it, then supply a reasonable bug report, this comment tells me nothing of the issues you are having.

 

How long does it take a pilot in real life to adapt to the Su-27?

[Raven68]

This.

 

The FM definitely needs work. The su27 is very unstable in general, not even talking about the cobra. (try the cobra at 1000 km/h LOL)

 

I agree with this...:shifty: because I have actually flown an Su-27 :music_whistling: ....................NOT!!

[NineLine]

The same weird stuff that you can do in a f15 without damaging anything. Really, try a cobra at 1000 km/h full elevator.

 

Why would you do a cobra at 1000 km/h?

 

Try flying the plane into the ground, acts real weird....

[combatace]

Ah, thanks - I knew that from the older russian planes but thought maybe the SU27 had toe brakes.

 

It has toe brakes. I saw them talking about the change from stick brake to toe brakes in the video about Su-27 development pragram.

[NRG-Vampire]

Try flying the plane into the ground, acts real weird....

 

:rotflmao: you are awesome Norm :thumbsup:

[NineLine]

Yea yea... as I said, keep all the flight models as they are right now... it'll be a huge fun in multiplayer...

 

Seriously why would I ? It's part of the testing to push the aircraft to the limit, isn't it ?

 

You can not complain about something a real pilot would never do... if you would like to test the aircraft within the real world limits and find something wrong, please open a new thread with issues you find, but if you fly it like an escaped asylum patient chances are it wont operate the way it is supposed to....

 

Show me where a Su-27 performed a cobra at 1000km/h and I will submit a report for you for it not acting correctly...

[Jumbik]

Am I missing something or are the new training mission not yet put in?

[Agg]

It's going to take some more testing, but I actually think the Flanker's flight model feels quite good. It feels rather heavy, as I would expect from such a big aircraft.

[Flagrum]

You can not complain about something a real pilot would never do... if you would like to test the aircraft within the real world limits and find something wrong, please open a new thread with issues you find, but if you fly it like an escaped asylum patient chances are it wont operate the way it is supposed to....

 

Show me where a Su-27 performed a cobra at 1000km/h and I will submit a report for you for it not acting correctly...

I am with secret1962 here - and would I complain as well. The goal is not to fly the aircraft exact to the point as specified in some manuals, etc. If that were the case, it would not have to be simulated, it could simply be scripted.

 

The goal is to replicate the behaviour of the aircraft in it's environment by applying the same rules and logic that the physics in the real world show. And when I do funny stuff with the aircraft, I would expect that funny things happen - similar to what in the realworld would have to be expected ... even if it no sane man would ever actually do.

 

That flight parameters well outside the documented envelope are perhaps hard to get right is obvious and differences to the real thing would have to be expected. But a behaviour that very obviously not following the (simulated) real world physics should be investigated.

 

(disclaimer: I am not commenting on the observed issue as such - that is beyond my knowledge. Just talking about what a "sim" is and should do in my opinion)

 

edit:

That the Cobra does not work "correctly" at 1000 km/h is not the issue, if I understand the OP. The issue is that the behaviour of the aircraft while failing to do a proper textbook cobra is not what the real aircraft would show while failing to do a proper cobra at that speed.

Edited November 6, 2014 by Flagrum

[cichlidfan]

That flight parameters well outside the documented envelope are perhaps hard to get right is obvious and differences to the real thing would have to be expected. But a behaviour that very obviously not following the (simulated) real world physics should be investigated.

 

(disclaimer: I am not commenting on the observed issue as such - that is beyond my knowledge. Just talking about what a "sim" is and should do in my opinion)

 

Agreed. :thumbup:

[NineLine]

Its not open for discussion, I have told you guys what we need for a decent bug report, if you are not interested in that, then dont post about problems. I am certain that you guys havent clearly identified any issues with 5 minutes of flying it, and flying it outside normal flight conditions....

 

I am with secret1962 here - and would I complain as well. The goal is not to fly the aircraft exact to the point as specified in some manuals, etc. If that were the case, it would not have to be simulated, it could simply be scripted.

 

The goal is to replicate the behaviour of the aircraft in it's environment by applying the same rules and logic that the physics in the real world show. And when I do funny stuff with the aircraft, I would expect that funny things happen - similar to what in the realworld would have to be expected ... even if it no sane man would ever actually do.

 

That flight parameters well outside the documented envelope are perhaps hard to get right is obvious and differences to the real thing would have to be expected. But a behaviour that very obviously not following the (simulated) real world physics should be investigated.

 

(disclaimer: I am not commenting on the observed issue as such - that is beyond my knowledge. Just talking about what a "sim" is and should do in my opinion)

 

edit:

That the Cobra does not work "correctly" at 1000 km/h is not the issue, if I understand the OP. The issue is that the behaviour of the aircraft while failing to do a proper textbook cobra is not what the real aircraft would show while failing to do a proper cobra at that speed.

Edited November 6, 2014 by NineLine

[Jumbik]

Can I download the new training missions for SU-27 somewhere so I could test them? Or its reserved for the release next week?

[NineLine]

Can I download the new training missions for SU-27 somewhere so I could test them? Or its reserved for the release next week?

 

If they arent in this release then they were ready for public consumption yet.

[71st_Mastiff]

I see they added the separate wheel controls for the F15C, but what happen to the SU-27/33, MiG29, DCS Flaming Cliffs

New flight dynamics of Su-27

HUD indication of russian fighters are improved

Added HUD repeater mod on the HDD of MiG-29 and Su-27/33

F-15C, Su-27. Wheel brakes in controls indicator are added

Added electric power switch [RShift-L] to all FC aircraft

Su-27 AI. Flaps deflection is corrected

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

Can someone test if taking off in the Dora, or P51d, with a strong x-wind from left, still causes the aircraft to veer right during takeoff run?

 

Thx

[Solty]

The DM is a major overhaul to the entire sim, dont assume you will see that till we are into 2.0 I am sure...

OK:(

It is just so crucial to the dogfighting feel... I hope ED can see that as well. I know they know about it... but do they feel it is vital for the combat aspect of the sim.

 

It is called DCS (Digital Combat Simulator) for a reason.

[NineLine]

OK:(

It is just so crucial to the dogfighting feel... I hope ED can see that as well. I know they know about it... but do they feel it is vital for the combat aspect of the sim.

 

It is called DCS (Digital Combat Simulator) for a reason.

 

They have acknowledged it needs work, that said, it hasnt really limited your ability to have "Combat" in the sim...

[Cnuke]

:thumbup::clap_2:

 

Thank you ED for the wonderful beta update for the Su-27 !!

The fixes in the patch as well.

[Aeons]

Its not open for discussion...

 

:megalol:

 

 

i would take the feedback (negative etc) as an opportunity to get external (paying customers) feedback to improve the game and to show all comments are welcome. not to just keep telling people to fly longer than 5 mins the submit a bug report. maybe you are a tester for this module and take it personally that some things aren't right?

 

 

either way, after sitting in the mig-21 cockpit (best module ever made :thumbup: ) i don't think ill ever fly anything else!

[sobek]

i would take the feedback (negative etc) as an opportunity to get external (paying customers) feedback to improve the game and to show all comments are welcome

 

It's an open beta and people choosing to participate in it are asked to commit to meaningful bug reports. Things like "OMG this is so fuxxord because my aunt has an uncle who read off the burnmarks on yesterdays morning toast that the corner speed of the Su-27 in DCS is a quarter of an inch too purple" is just wasting precious ressources.

 

See this on how OB were handled in the past.

[NineLine]

It's an open beta and people choosing to participate in it are asked to commit to meaningful bug reports. Things like "OMG this is so fuxxord because my aunt has an uncle who read off the burnmarks on yesterdays morning toast that the corner speed of the Su-27 in DCS is a quarter of an inch too purple" is just wasting precious ressources.

 

See this on how OB were handled in the past.

 

Exactly, and this was what my "Not open for discussion" comment was in reference to, reporting of bugs needs to be done similar to what was posted in that link....