Topgun style dogfighting online?

[Fri13]

A simulated dogfight in a simulation! Haha. The better idea would be to create a server with air starts near the action. In reality top gun style dog fights are usually pre set up with the objective to teach rather then to see "who's better". After a few "knock it offs" and resets everyone would get together a debrief shots, weapon peramiters and proper defensive actions. While this sounds like a blast in real life, i don't think it would be much fun in a simulator.

 

For that reason I would love to see possibility to reset the mission with trigger.

 

Other things what I miss is to spawn a template, group, mission again and again and again with a trigger, radio call etc.

 

And dream to come true, record a flight maneuver by starting it press of a button, ending by pressing again. Then importing that data to script or even replay it again and again. This way training alone against specific kind maneuvers would be very easy.

Like some car racing games has ghosts to compete against, beat your own record etc.

[rrohde]

The information about our ways of training is on the "need-to-know" basis, which means that you would have to train with us.

 

I can say that we have some ex-military fighter pilots and some active duty personnel among us, therefore we use some real Air Force know-how. Despite some real problems and limitations, DCS World can be used as a very efficient training tool, combined with some key add-ons, like TacView and LotATC.

 

We usually start our training fights in the air, because it saves a lot of time and when the engagement is over, we can start a fresh without any delays. In basic BVR training, it's better to use (as GGTharos said) Immortal and Unlimited Weapons, just to understand the tactics and mechanisms involved, hits are evaluated later.

 

When our trainees go past this, we always use live ammo and "one life" to implement the psychological stress from "real" combat.

 

If you like to elaborate this a little further, please let me know.

 

That already sounds like an impressive approach to learning BFM in a team, along the lines of what I was imagine. Nice!

Would be nice if DCS had a built-in option to go "topgun" (e.g. "laser-tag", hit count, tones, etc, etc). :)

Edited February 10, 2015 by rrohde

[rrohde]

For that reason I would love to see possibility to reset the mission with trigger.

 

Other things what I miss is to spawn a template, group, mission again and again and again with a trigger, radio call etc.

 

 

Excellent idea!

[Tumbleweed]

cough cough.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=134086

[rrohde]

cough cough.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=134086

 

 

There we go. Points well made, Tumbleweed. There seems to be a real opportunity for ED to implement these things with NTTR.

 

For me, one of my major "complaints" of DCS is the lack of centralized and guided training; everything seems to be in pieces and somewhat unstructured, so the notion of "wargames" or "topgun" doesn't seem far fetched.

[Frostie]

Indeed, but unless you start in the air, doing as you suggested would waste a lot of time, not mentioning testing nothing else but the damage model and effectiveness of the missiles' warheads.

 

We usually combine both approaches, but being immortal with a thorough debriefing could be better sometimes. Anyway, I don't dismiss your opinion.

 

The approach to BVR training using unlimited ammo and immortality followed by extensive debrief is as close to replicating the real world as your going to get, no doubt, it would be interesting to incorporate that method into our trainings purely for the realism factor.

But you stated that this was very useful for BVR training and while it is I'm sure the airforces of the world would rather incorporate air starts and actual kills to their training to intensify the situation and save a lot of time, half of the debrief happens live where as artificial kills have to be discovered in a later debrief as well as the lack of cause and effect during the engagements. These engagements would always degenerate into either a mass 4v4 furball or a stand off with no in between.

 

As a nostalgic training method yes a huge thumbs up, but being more useful for BVR training I don't see it.

[GGTharos]

AFAIK right now (Depending on the air force), kills are called right away. Technically you take the shot when in parameters, and it is usually decided to be valid. This gets things done quicker, fewer arguments, and it cements in mind the fact that initial advantageous position is king. Also IIRC the data pods will return missile 'kill' results very quickly, so you know when you've been shot down.

 

That's not to say that defensive training is not done, plus, a great part of those debriefs are secret and we'll just not know what really happens there - we can imagine they discuss the limitations of the exercise ... and of course, they have simulators as well.

 

As for things degenerating into furballs ... that's a game-ism and has to do with discipline. I recall a 2v4 (in game) where the 2 ended up fending off 8-12, just because respawn rules had not been very clear. (Yes, the two got shot down eventually and they never respawned).

Edited February 10, 2015 by GGTharos

[Frostie]

That's why I put furball or standoff, discipline doesn't allow the fight much scope.

 

Plus our sim is our world.

[GGTharos]

I'm confused and curious:

 

Stand-off can be dealt with by having time-limit goals.

Furballs can be dealt with by discipline, though sometimes kills can slip through the cracks.

 

(Of course, I agree with the sim being the world. Quickstarts work well too)

 

Why is the scope limited? I'm just trying to find out what you're thinking about, because you must be thinking of specific things but I'm not seeing them.

[Frostie]

With mortality there is no question as to how the engagement pans out, with immortality the rules add ambiguity and require either a keen eye to eliminate participants or continue without loss, the later would limit the scope of the engagement not allowing for it to develop keeping each at arms length or pushing in and all getting caught up in a furball, but maybe I'm imagining it as too much work to make such a method simulate a real engagement without actually trying it first hand. It seems to me too much emphasis is spent on coordinating the proceeding taking up valuable time and effort which would be best spent on the actual BVR part.

[GGTharos]

Coordination definitely takes up time until you get the hang of it, and it's being done correctly.

 

You're right that it isn't easy, and ultimately it's up to the participants to determine it's value to them. :)

[Frostie]

Yes, immortality and ramp starts also bring a great level of realism to trainings and I'm definately keen to try it out, but I can't see it substituting our BVR grind.

[GGTharos]

Each one has its place.

 

Full sortie practices pretty much everything - your start-up procedure, radio calls, the TO itself, entry into the MOA, fuel management and monitoring, and then your ability to quickly get into the setup, execute it, and then do it again, and observe and apply the training rules as well as possible - this part tends to train observation IMHO ... and it kinda helps you train to avoid droning around, I'd say.

Then there's your egress, landing etc.

 

With quick-starts you get right into the meat of things.

 

So, pros and cons. :)

 

As for immortal, I'm looking into making explosions a bit louder or apply some other helpful hit indicator (possibly the best approach, but also potentially more dependent on ED).

Another option is to export events like tacview would but in real time (for accuracy) and then analyze the events and perhaps send a 'kill' message to the chat, or even trigger a sound.

Since this is squadron training, I don't think anyone would be fussed about exports.

[Bimbac]

I should add that our focus is on all aspects of modern aerial combat, including all standard procedures: ATC, GCI, take-offs, landings, air refueling, etc. We even use standard NATO comm procedures (speaking English).

 

Since the time we can spare for training is limited (most of us have families, you know?), when training a specific tactics or setup we usually start the mission in the air, because it can be restarted quickly without any unnecessary delays. If basic procedures training is on schedule, we always fly a full-profile missions, including bad weather conditions and radar-trail approaches.

 

Every aspect of modern aerial combat requires different ways to train. I'm not telling that our way is the only one, or the best one, or the most correct one. I'm just telling that it works. Maybe you can find a different approach that will bring you the same result. Our motto for the training is the same as for the real deal: KISS (Keep it simple, stupid). ;)

[Frostie]

Every aspect of modern aerial combat requires different ways to train. I'm not telling that our way is the only one, or the best one, or the most correct one. I'm just telling that it works. Maybe you can find a different approach that will bring you the same result. Our motto for the training is the same as for the real deal: KISS (Keep it simple, stupid). ;)

In all fairness as far as BVR in DCS is concerned we've found the simplest way that we train provides the best results accomplished in DCS to date.

[FlyingHighAU]

Just wondering if there's a Topgun type of mod that allows dogfighting online while avoiding the frustration of getting shut down.

 

The idea is to do mock-combat that focuses on tactics and engagement, rather than falling out of the sky - just like Topgun training would.

 

For that to work, a mod has to exist that replaces the bullets and missiles with sensors that would tell the shooter and the "victim" whether the simulated shot was a hit or miss. Needless to say, all cockpit indications for the shooter would have to work (e.g. "got tone"), and all the warnings for the "victim" as well.

 

So, is there anything out there like this for DCS?

 

 

You can also create a mission (or use the random mission generator) and then set all of the planes to use either no ammo / missiles or training ammo where applicable.

[rrohde]

You can also create a mission (or use the random mission generator) and then set all of the planes to use either no ammo / missiles or training ammo where applicable.

 

Thanks for the info! :)

[Bimbac]

In all fairness as far as BVR in DCS is concerned we've found the simplest way that we train provides the best results accomplished in DCS to date.

 

I'd like to get this explained a little bit more.

 

In our opinion, teamwork is the key, so that's where our main focus lies. Training a very specific tactics makes no sense in DCS, because every patch usually changes some critical aspects, either sensors or missiles. That's why we focus on the BVR in a more general way, explaining principles and decision making. That way you can just do some minor adjustments, instead of developing everything a new.

[Pikey]

I'm sure the advantage of simulation is being able to air start at the merge, play it out as normal and de-host respawn for another at the end.

 

We did this with dedicated hardware and observers in a recent ladder 2v2 match but it's a minor inconvenience compared to the need for simulated hits and kills.

If you all step back a sec, a double simulation - a simulation of a simulation is only really for enjoying a simulated experience of a simulation of which there is less point than a simulation of the real thing when discussing BVR/WVR.

 

Anything else is just a different type of simulation and just as valid as any solution if you want to wade through it, but ultimately pointless, unless you are interested how they do simulation in the real thing.

 

The logic continues to degrade at every simulated layer, just ask yourself, do you want to learn BVR in a simulation or do you want to learn how to simulate BVR in a simulation?

[Bimbac]

Sorry, but I can't see the point in your statement, though I don't deny your logic.

 

To the question you have asked, the answer would be: neither. We use DCS simulation to explain how the BVR works, so you could use same basic skills no matter what simulation you use or what aircraft you fly. Laws of physics and the law of conservation of energy applies to everyone and should be implemented in any decent modern aircraft simulation environment.

 

So, the conclusion would be that we use DCS World to teach modern aerial combat tactics.

[Pikey]

Oh there is another couple of values to the non-double simulation route. When the simulated missile actually launches, the defending pilot gets to defend, and indeed is forced to.

 

Additionally, no need to debrief on wether it was a kill or not, no arguments and no "knock it off, valid shot in parameters" calls when the blood is flowing.

 

Got to say, it seems the OP needs a few friends in multiplayer with access to hardware. At any given time in the evening there's at least 3 others who can provide this dedicated and just sit the fight out and call BRAA's for players on LotATC. At this point the original question becomes moot.

[Pikey]

Sorry, but I can't see the point in your statement, though I don't deny your logic.

 

To the question you have asked, the answer would be: neither. We use DCS simulation to explain how the BVR works, so you could use same basic skills no matter what simulation you use or what aircraft you fly. Laws of physics and the law of conservation of energy applies to everyone and should be implemented in any decent modern aircraft simulation environment.

 

So, the conclusion would be that we use DCS World to teach modern aerial combat tactics.

 

The question I posed was to the OP, not you. I do apologise for your confusion.

"do you want to learn BVR in a simulation or do you want to learn how to simulate BVR in a simulation? "

[Frostie]

I'd like to get this explained a little bit more.

 

In our opinion, teamwork is the key, so that's where our main focus lies. Training a very specific tactics makes no sense in DCS, because every patch usually changes some critical aspects, either sensors or missiles. That's why we focus on the BVR in a more general way, explaining principles and decision making. That way you can just do some minor adjustments, instead of developing everything a new.

Teamwork is not learning how to defeat missiles so patch version is moot, it is all about SA, mutual support, shape and co-ordination. Learning how to recognise tactics employed by the enemy and adapting tactics to combat or take advantage of and also knowing when the advantage is gained and when it is lost how to adapt to this and how to stay alive in a fight. All this is done with the risk of being shot down to intensify the situation which increases the ability to handle such pressure.

 

BVR tactics, co-ordination, comms and BRAA calls etc. are all easy to learn, its completing these tasks in an intense situation effectively which is the making of it all and that is where the real training is at.

[Roadrunner]

if not using immortal setting, i would make moving triggerzones on the client aircrafts, and let a lua script check if a released weapon is within it, if so, remove the weapon by script and display a "client xyz hit!" message.

 

i know it is possible with lua script, although i cannot create it.

 

regards,

RR

[Pikey]

The script sounds doable Roadrunner, but again, having the missile pass through the enemy plane or explode without damage is no different to the point of the training and achievable with a checkbox.

 

I just thought of a good use for it though :) Multiplayer servers can have massive no fire zones. This could be put to good use on servers to stop griefing, it's similar to another games approach, home base firing is ineffectual.

Edited February 12, 2015 by Pikey
Second paragraph added