Leatherneck Simulations Monthly Update - January 2015

FSKRipper · January 22, 2015

And you?

No, I'm not. But reading this answer this is also true for you.

So no evidence from your side, nothing will happen to the FM. Maybe you can hand us out some first class documents or statements from actual pilots?

Originally Posted by =YeS=CMF

It is COMPLETELY wrong! I dont need to proove my opinion

So it's good for everyone that there are a lot of people with another opinion.

Edited January 22, 2015 by FSKRipper

Charly_Owl · January 22, 2015

It is COMPLETELY wrong! :) I dont need to proove my opinion - MiG doesnt fly like a plane on critical AoA now and it is very noticible.

There are ways to start a constructive discussion that actually leads somewhere.

This is not one of them.

January 22, 2015

:D :megalol:

You are laughing at yourself, because it is obvious that FM is not comlete at critical modes.

In that case - I don't need to prove my expertise also.

OK, if you cant fly MiG in your module and test it - I`ll make a video with some bugs and people will see "DCS level".

So it's good for everyone that there are a lot of people with another opinion.

It shows that all of them dont need realistic FM :doh:

Wait for video and be ready to laugh :thumbup:

There are ways to start a constructive discussion that actually leads somewhere.

This is not one of them.

I know it, but MiG`s FM condition doesnt require to explane what is wrong - just try to pull the stick to the end in your mig and watch what the plane will do (speed, G-load, roll and etc.). If you think that real plane can fly this way - read real MiG-21 flight manual.

Edited January 22, 2015 by =YeS=CMF

FSKRipper · January 22, 2015

You are laughing at yourself, because it is obvious that FM is not comlete at critical modes.

OK, if you cant fly MiG in your module and test it - I`ll make a video with some bugs and people will see "DCS level".

It shows that all of them dont need realistic FM :doh:

Wait for video and be ready to laugh :thumbup:

Do it!

But be sure that you show specific MiG-21 module errors and not limitations by the DCS engine which would make you look stupid!

BTW: Maybe you will wait for DCS world 2.0 where a lot of bugfixes will make us happy.

Edited January 22, 2015 by FSKRipper

Cobra847 · January 22, 2015

You are laughing at yourself, because it is obvious that FM is not comlete at critical modes.

OK, if you cant fly MiG in your module and test it - I`ll make a video with some bugs and people will see "DCS level".

It shows that all of them dont need realistic FM :doh:

Wait for video and be ready to laugh :thumbup:

Your posts are very disappointing.

You don't quite realize what the issue is;

Noone is saying the FM is perfect, noone is saying it will never change. We always listen and change things based on user feedback.

The issue is that you assert the FM is "Horrible"; and then when asked for input and feedback, you respond with "I don't need to prove anything".

Feel free to produce the video and highlight any issues you may find.

I guarantee you we will watch it; like we always do.

Python · January 22, 2015

Seems I'm late to this thread, out of interest, which advanced aircraft has been heavily hinted at? I recently bought the Mig 21 and I'm very impressed so count me in for future releases! :thumbup:

Buzzles · January 22, 2015

In that case - I don't need to prove my expertise also.
OK, if you cant fly MiG in your module and test it - I`ll make a video with some bugs and people will see "DCS level".

@ ==YeS=CMF,

You do know that Dolphin is not only the creator of LN's flight model, but is an actual military Mig21 pilot himself?

If I were you, I'd be supplying the data right about now to prove my claims.

xxJohnxx · January 22, 2015

Hi,

Concerning the maximum IAS, would you rather want to have irreparable engine or structural damage each time you excess speed limit, regardless whether the game is in the EASY FLIGHT or SIMULATIONS mode?

Just a short question beside the actual discussion: Would there be any possibility we could actually have that?

Given that you are in simulation mode and you got "simplified engine management" turned off, I would find it quit fair to get the punishment for taking the aircraft beyond it's structural and technical limit?

Not sure how far this is possible within DCS though.

I assume the engine will over speed at that high IAS, probably taking a toll on the service life. Kinda hard to simulate within DCS I guess?

What about other possible failures of the engine?

Or what would be likely structural failures? I assume some parts getting torn of first?

Best regards,

John

eekz · January 23, 2015

I'm not sure but is this correct stall behavior?

mig21_2.12.trk

Mike Busutil · January 23, 2015

LOL! Hahaha... Nice eekz.

GUMAR · January 23, 2015

Concerning the maximum IAS, would you rather want to have irreparable engine or structural damage each time you excess speed limit, regardless whether the game is in the EASY FLIGHT or SIMULATIONS mode?

Of course, I would. Irreparable, you mean by ground service? Anyway it is better. It's pilot's job - to deal with limits.

As for the "acceleration graph", I modeled accelerations according to telemetry data retrieved on multitude of real aircraft test flights. Acceleration time from 0.5 to x.x M (depending on the engine setup) is almost perfect match to the averaged data set I have, and data itself vary from aircraft to aircraft a bit; they also deviate from published data a bit, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse.

That not just acceleration, this graph shows you were you airplane has maximum excess of power, ability to climb with the highest possible vertical speed. If you measure it for different G-loads, you can see the optimum speed for maneuver without losing speed. Also, it shows accuracy of flight model...

Sorry, cannot confirm. At timestamp 05:02:08 in the Tacview my GS is shown as 375,6 m/s. This was the instant action "start from runway" Mission.
SARPP file reads: 120.000000 512.033188 1305.819483 0.855956 -0.186939 100.004000 -2.425783 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000
I will admit that speed seems to get near a limit but the mentioned magic 1299km/h limit is simply wrong.

There is a kind of barrier, look what I had.

Time H (m) IAS (km/h) G_vert G_horiz RPM AoA Hydro_m Hydro_b SAU Fors Trigger

61.000000 1725.303651 1299.677657 0.978304 -0.192298 99.980000 -2.097842 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

62.000000 1720.428413 1299.547817 0.967446 0.073133 99.992000 -2.099946 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

63.000000 1715.234078 1299.552912 0.967434 0.073437 100.004000 -2.101469 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

64.000000 1709.751255 1299.666748 0.959507 -0.187518 99.962000 -2.136824 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

65.000000 1703.610502 1299.547837 0.857199 0.076338 99.974000 -2.314049 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

66.000000 1696.044064 1299.732449 0.758846 -0.138557 99.986000 -2.493549 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

67.000000 1686.428151 1299.584411 0.867425 0.075018 99.944000 -2.287591 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

68.000000 1672.414872 1299.569551 0.808943 0.080891 99.956000 -2.393033 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

69.000000 1649.450547 1299.639507 1.196085 -0.232799 99.968000 -1.725530 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

70.000000 1614.559149 1299.735451 1.247779 -0.241414 100.040000 -1.648213 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

71.000000 1565.375099 1300.225602 1.233122 -0.237105 100.052000 -1.691845 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

72.000000 1501.870212 1302.471378 1.256738 -0.257049 99.950000 -1.676750 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

73.000000 1425.493677 1305.904922 1.293948 -0.287168 100.022000 -1.645752 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

74.000000 1337.218523 1310.045594 1.347217 -0.326150 100.034000 -1.594909 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

75.000000 1241.298551 1314.420282 1.143494 -0.301342 100.046000 -1.973277 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

76.000000 1143.485057 1320.485860 0.967853 -0.285120 100.004000 -2.321677 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

77.000000 1043.740808 1327.318959 0.915744 -0.305309 100.016000 -2.453036 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

78.000000 942.823870 1332.458780 0.956487 -0.353093 100.028000 -2.418757 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

79.000000 842.262072 1336.636060 0.906691 -0.367687 99.986000 -2.531584 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

80.000000 740.909339 1339.970553 0.995850 -0.428592 99.998000 -2.418387 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

81.000000 641.197247 1337.157375 1.735170 -0.663515 100.010000 -1.293578 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

82.000000 549.071088 1331.919039 1.582846 -0.553556 99.968000 -1.530262 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

83.000000 463.697827 1326.491790 1.874586 -0.574963 99.980000 -1.121716 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

84.000000 386.992487 1320.984363 1.804351 -0.496877 99.992000 -1.229267 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

85.000000 319.502791 1315.733973 2.089246 -0.488460 99.950000 -0.836462 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

86.000000 262.041181 1309.590275 2.268315 -0.449842 99.962000 -0.570262 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

87.000000 217.897039 1300.613627 2.153962 -0.326383 99.974000 -0.742752 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

88.000000 185.540905 1299.718949 1.861483 -0.265622 100.046000 -1.186708 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

89.000000 159.170837 1299.532598 1.807799 0.104146 99.944000 -1.263420 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

90.000000 140.485438 1299.112519 3.801015 0.140500 99.956000 1.625340 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

91.000000 139.932290 1299.698239 0.752631 -0.065169 100.028000 -2.775170 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

92.000000 141.533528 1299.592669 0.852886 0.117175 100.040000 -2.659295 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

93.000000 141.402364 1299.577865 0.931448 0.117329 100.052000 -2.544680 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

94.000000 140.033063 1299.666646 0.886270 -0.085613 100.010000 -2.609590 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

95.000000 137.195413 1299.663632 0.627252 -0.033239 100.022000 -2.985136 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

96.000000 131.900611 1299.523643 1.342333 0.108917 100.034000 -1.916012 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

97.000000 129.336291 1299.654914 1.333013 -0.169713 99.992000 -1.981654 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

98.000000 129.990343 1299.736926 1.127733 -0.122678 100.004000 -2.280196 210.000000 210.000000 0.000000 1.000000 0.000000

After your post I hoped that something changed, but unfortunately it isn't.

You can excess that speed, but if you are accelerating in horizontal flight you will never do it.

YOu can look at my track. There is also s very strange high AoA stall with speed rising to 1000km/h. It is impossible for stalling aircraft to fall with such high speed and pito tube can't measure anything at such AoA.

And a huge amount of work about avionics. RSBN, radiomarker receiver and ARK particularly. They are tuned to a certain point at DCS map, not to a raiostation itself. For example, in Mozdok with active RW heading 083 you can hear middle marker signal when you've already overflown it. And it is same with inner marker. Because it is simply made to work at certain distance, not radio equipment.

Btw, thanks for "wind coorrection". Now it is not subtracted, or added to IAS.

MiG21_strange.trk

SARPP_DATA_2015_00_23_16_39.txt

Edited January 23, 2015 by GUMAR

mikiintruder · January 23, 2015

Is this also a bug?:D

NaCH · January 23, 2015

Is this also a bug?:D

Ah! those M5 Daggers / Nesher .. A real adversary for the MIG21!

That should be the next Leatherneck plane!

Golo · January 23, 2015

There is a kind of barrier...

Yes there is, its called drag.

NineLine · January 23, 2015

You may have some good points, and you might be able to be helpful, but your approach is wrong... please be a little more respectful, and as a Tester, I am sure you know what is required to report a bug.

You are laughing at yourself, because it is obvious that FM is not comlete at critical modes.

OK, if you cant fly MiG in your module and test it - I`ll make a video with some bugs and people will see "DCS level".

It shows that all of them dont need realistic FM :doh:

Wait for video and be ready to laugh :thumbup:

I know it, but MiG`s FM condition doesnt require to explane what is wrong - just try to pull the stick to the end in your mig and watch what the plane will do (speed, G-load, roll and etc.). If you think that real plane can fly this way - read real MiG-21 flight manual.

King_Hrothgar · January 23, 2015

Concerning the maximum IAS, would you rather want to have irreparable engine or structural damage each time you excess speed limit, regardless whether the game is in the EASY FLIGHT or SIMULATIONS mode?

As for the "acceleration graph", I modeled accelerations according to telemetry data retrieved on multitude of real aircraft test flights. Acceleration time from 0.5 to x.x M (depending on the engine setup) is almost perfect match to the averaged data set I have, and data itself vary from aircraft to aircraft a bit; they also deviate from published data a bit, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. Concerning the graph itself, there are other graphs which are more illustrative to that problem.

In general, my impression is that the finesses are represented here as "horrible" which they are not.

I have noticed that hard speed limit at low level and it struck me as odd. I would rather have structural and engine limitations modeled. Nothing says fast like melting your own nosecone with air resistance. :D

With that said, why can't such damage be disabled for easy flight mode? Never played in that mode, so I don't know what all it does but I really don't think restricting the regular FM should be done to cater to the easy one. I doubt very many people use it tbh, if anyone at all.

GUMAR · January 23, 2015

Yes there is, its called drag.

At M 1.09 there is no drag and at M 1.11 it happened! Suddenly! :megalol:

There is almost constant increment of speed at M .9 to M 1.1 (btw where is rapid increase of X at subsonic speed?) and it suddenly stops. Look my track.

Nothing says fast like melting your own nosecone with air resistance. :D

Yeah, I like it :thumbup:

Erdem · January 23, 2015

Is someone wrong on the internet again?

January 23, 2015

You may have some good points, and you might be able to be helpful, but your approach is wrong... please be a little more respectful, and as a Tester, I am sure you know what is required to report a bug.

Yes, I understand it. My apologies. :(

But take a look at the situation from my position - LNS has obvious problems with there EFM and at the same time what we see at MiG perspective:

- New AAA quality pilot model in the cockpit

- 10+ New default liveries

etc.

And no any word about FM improvements. I am exceedingly concerned about MiG-21 in DCS! :)

P.S. I am tester and trying to find bug before it appear in release, I dont represent ED (It was said for community)

My video with major bugs in FM almost ready! ;)

Edited January 23, 2015 by =YeS=CMF

NineLine · January 23, 2015

Yes, I understand it. My apologies. :(
But take a look at the situation from my position - LNS has obvious problems with there EFM and at the same time what we see at MiG perspective:
- New AAA quality pilot model in the cockpit
- 10+ New default liveries
etc.
And no any word about FM improvements. I am exceedingly concerned about MiG-21 in DCS! :)
P.S. I am tester and trying to find bug before it appear in release, I dont represent ED (It was said for community)
My video with major bugs in FM almost ready! ;)

You should start a separate thread for these FM problems, it will just get lost here and is really off topic. You can only report these bugs and trust the devs will fix them, harassing them does no good, not to mention they have not given any indication they are not willing to fix things that us users find.

If you decide to start a thread, include any available information you have, and examples of the problems, and do it respectfully and I am sure you will find these boys are more than willing to listen to your concerns ;)

January 23, 2015

You should start a separate thread for these FM problems, it will just get lost here and is really off topic. You can only report these bugs and trust the devs will fix them, harassing them does no good, not to mention they have not given any indication they are not willing to fix things that us users find.

If you decide to start a thread, include any available information you have, and examples of the problems, and do it respectfully and I am sure you will find these boys are more than willing to listen to your concerns ;)

OK, I`ll do it the way you say. :thumbup:

FSKRipper · January 23, 2015

At M 1.09 there is no drag and at M 1.11 it happened! Suddenly! :megalol:
There is almost constant increment of speed at M .9 to M 1.1 (btw where is rapid increase of X at subsonic speed?) and it suddenly stops. Look my track.

Ok, after monitoring several threads for some days here comes my conclusion:

1. the wrong way: "The FM is crap", "it's horrible", "completely unrealistic" with no proof in most circumstances

2. the right way: "There seems to be a speed limit in level flight" + track

-> "Ok, there is some kind of barrier, but why?"

-> answer from a developer -> constructive disscussion

In this special case Dolphin gave us an aswer: Most important, no bug but a compromise.

Pros: A solution for the "Arcade Players" (I can hear them cry when their engine is melting). It seems currently not to be possible to seperate the FM between the two game modes.

Second, as long as DCS has no dynamic character, in which your engine state can be passed over to the next mission, it is impossible for the developers to punish pilots for excessive engine mismanagement or over-G. Imagine your crew chief will ram his boots in your a.. because he has to change your engine for the second time this month. I don't think your Commander will let you take off again if you show such a ressource management.

Edit: I'm not talking of reduced lifetime in terms of weeks or months, more days or hours... In case of radical over-G, you can get of your plane and send it to a museum.

Contras: An artificial barrier in high speed performance. Degraded realism to say it rude.

Feel free to discuss, I can go with the current implementation hoping that there can be another solution in the future. Remember even ED is just starting to develop a supersonic FM for it's F-18.

For the Avionics part, I'm simply not deep enough into it but I remember reading in the Hawk Forum, that some modules have a seperate file in which navigation points (NDB, ILS?) are stored. If i'm not totally wrong, uboats corrected some coordinates by hand after the Hawk release because of some little mistakes which lead to missleading gauges. Feel free to correct this one :thumbup:. If it would be true, I would call it a minor bug which goes to the bug section and can be corrected.

Edited January 23, 2015 by FSKRipper

MiG21bisFishbedL · January 23, 2015

Hi,

Just a short question beside the actual discussion: Would there be any possibility we could actually have that?
Given that you are in simulation mode and you got "simplified engine management" turned off, I would find it quit fair to get the punishment for taking the aircraft beyond it's structural and technical limit?

Not sure how far this is possible within DCS though.
I assume the engine will over speed at that high IAS, probably taking a toll on the service life. Kinda hard to simulate within DCS I guess?
What about other possible failures of the engine?
Or what would be likely structural failures? I assume some parts getting torn of first?

Best regards,

John

Therein is a limitation of flight simming itself; it's entertainment.

We're not modeling the entire service life of an aircraft, just a few spikes of activity here and there between what may even be different aircraft.

I don't know if it should be a high concern unless this would precipitate immediate degradation or impact on performance.

Though, that would be a cool option to have; being able to model engine and airframe time in measurable ways. I haven't fooled around with the service life options in Mi-8 or Huey, so I'm not sure what that does, but I suspect it's similar to what I'm trying to get across here.

GUMAR · January 24, 2015

Edit: I'm not talking of reduced lifetime in terms of weeks or months, more days or hours... In case of radical over-G, you can get of your plane and send it to a museum.

Look how it is made in Mi-8, Ka-50 (quite long time ago). And Sabre can have deformed wing after exceeding G-limits.

Contras: An artificial barrier in high speed performance. Degraded realism to say it rude.
Feel free to discuss, I can go with the current implementation hoping that there can be another solution in the future. Remember even ED is just starting to develop a supersonic FM for it's F-18.

The highest level of flight model accuracy is PFM. F-15, Su-27 already have it.

But PFM is too complicated, so AFM was chosen for MiG-21 (as dcs site tells), and thats also nice. But look at the behaviour of Su-25 - it can be overspeeded untill you cant pull up from that dive - and there is no any compromise.

Why there should be any compromise? It is AFM, or it is not. If structural damage can't be modeled in 1 hour flight, why it should? P-51's Merlin after flying on WEP has to be overhauled or somehow maintained. But it is MADE. And If you are lucky, you can fly the same aircraft for 2 hours using WEP sometimes.

MiG-21 is an aircraft, that has (as all others ) factor of safety for everything. Max. allowable AoA, G-limit, and speed. Take it into account.

For the Avionics part, I'm simply not deep enough into it but I remember reading in the Hawk Forum, that some modules have a seperate file in which navigation points (NDB, ILS?) are stored. If i'm not totally wrong, uboats corrected some coordinates by hand after the Hawk release because of some little mistakes which lead to missleading gauges. Feel free to correct this one :thumbup:. If it would be true, I would call it a minor bug which goes to the bug section and can be corrected.

It cant be fixed in such way, because every(almost) RWY has 2 landing directions. So there must be 2 sets of PRMG equipment. But in that file there is 1 POINT in the middle

And ARK, that is normally tuned to collocated with MM NDB, is made to show me direction to NDB somewhere on the map. What for? I need directions to an airdrome, if RSBN fails or there is no RSBN. Again look how its made in Mi-8, F-86. Yes, ARK frequency cant be set in cockpit. But make ARK channels be "tunable" in mission editor!

We have made many bug, errors, whatever, reports here http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=131378

All that our community is asking - put EFM in priority, improve aircraft systems modelling. Make it suitable for DCS level. We want DCS level MiG-21. Now it is not, unfortunately, and ED itself, or Belsimtech won't do it, they won't do DCS level MiG-21 with PFM! So understand it.

Flycat · January 24, 2015

I can fly the aircraft without canopy over 40,000 ft on pony, even reach 50,000 ft on saber and fishbed. I don't know how it going on in real life, but it's a little strange.

This discussion is very interesting for the player, very healthy.

And at the last, there are many module is still in beta version, everything will be better, realistic, completed and subject to change.

:)

Sign In

Leatherneck Simulations Monthly Update - January 2015

Recommended Posts

FSKRipper

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Charly_Owl

Guest =YeS=CMF

FSKRipper

Cobra847

Python

Buzzles

xxJohnxx

eekz

Mike Busutil

GUMAR

mikiintruder

NaCH

Golo

NineLine

King_Hrothgar

GUMAR

Erdem

Guest =YeS=CMF

NineLine

Guest =YeS=CMF

FSKRipper

MiG21bisFishbedL

GUMAR

Flycat

Recently Browsing 0 members