Question about fidelity / realism

[ekg]

There's a lot of posts saying that FC3 is not a high fidelity module for DCS. Can somebody explain to me what is meant by that? Is there a wiki / page that explains which modules are realistic and which ones are not? I also know that FC3 has a simplified cockpit, is that true for other modules?

[Silver_Dragon]

Check here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=122801

[ekg]

Ah ok, so I'm guessing it's because all FC3 modules are SSM for the system part of the simulation. Are there any plans to upgrade those?

[Silver_Dragon]

has some "rumor" about a Belsimtek "harcore" F-15C but not confirmed, but surely will be a new module, outside of FC3. By the moment, no FC-3 system updates outside a future new 6DoF Mig-29 cockpit and external 3D model. Meanwhile, waiting news.

[JNASova]

FC 3 is far from realism. Everythig is simplified.

If you want a high percentage of realism, then play DCS MiG-21bis.In my opinion, this is the best DCS module,if we talk about airplanes, not helicopters.And there's a lot missing, but it is quite a good start for further development.

[ekg]

does anyone know if there are any plans for a realistic su-27 or mig-29 model (any variant)?

 

@JNA what do you mean far from realism? My understanding is that the flight physics should be good, are you saying those are also not up to par?

[NineLine]

FC 3 is far from realism. Everythig is simplified.

If you want a high percentage of realism, then play DCS MiG-21bis.In my opinion, this is the best DCS module,if we talk about airplanes, not helicopters.And there's a lot missing, but it is quite a good start for further development.

 

You are mistaken, not everything is simplified, the FMs of the A-10A, Su-25, Su-25T, F-15C and Su-27 are not SFM. In fact the F-15C and Su-27 are using some of the most advanced FMs seen (PFM).

[secret1962]

By the moment, no FC-3 system updates outside a future new 6DoF Mig-29 cockpit and external 3D model. Meanwhile, waiting news.

 

And Su-33 PFM.

 

EDIT: also mig29 pfm planned

Edited July 16, 2015 by secret1962

[rcjonessnp175]

And got deleted? It was really that bad telling the truth? Or should I say voicing ones opinion. I think we need to buy ya a beer sith you've been working overtime lately lol

Edited July 16, 2015 by rcjonessnp175

[Silver_Dragon]

And Su-33 PFM.

 

EDIT: also mig29 pfm planned

 

That correct, I missing them.

[NineLine]

And got deleted? It was really that bad telling the truth? Or should I say voicing ones opinion. I think we need to buy ya a beer sith you've been working overtime lately lol

 

I didnt delete you comment, I would have, but someone beat me too it, the Call of Duty comment was just... well weak. So as I have been called out, and I am feeling rather saucy today.... Here... we... go...

 

First the missiles us an Advanced Flight model. They are tuned to the best known information ED has, ED is and has taken input from a number of sources, but it cant be taken lightly, you cant just use popular opinion to tune a simulation. As well, the SME's they entertain can only devulge so much. Missiles are tricky...

 

Second, you have an AFM for the missiles, but that doesnt do anything for the real meat and potatoes of the missiles, the guidance and such. I think this is even more heavily guarded than anything else. So its not like you can go to your local missile dealer and say, hey, we want to sim your missiles, tell us how they work. SO again, they do the best they can. They have to code their own guidance and such... now this in the missile industry sets missiles apart... yet we expect ED to just make it magically happen. ;)

 

And third, we have that other sim syndrome, what is this, well it works like this in this game, that missile must be able to do this. So make ours like that. Again, ED wants to make the most realistic missiles (and everything else) possible. Its slower, its not as easy to prove or get info, but its the way they work, in order to produce the best sim they can. There is the easy path, and the right path... I am not such a fan boy to say that ED's path is always perfect BUT their goals are the same as everyones here, the only difference is they have to make it work, we just get to sit back and tell them what we armchair missile hurlers expect.

 

I fully expect GG or someone more up on the missiles and such to explain this better, but I got called out so there you go.

 

My take on FC3, its the most bang for your buck in any flight sim out there... whether you buy all or 1 at a time... they are giving away incredible updates for them all the time. The PFM in the Eagle and Flanker are incredible, and while not complete yet, are easily worth more than we are paying for. I have seen and been in the new MiG cockpit, it looks beautiful... and I am not a Russian aircraft fan... No you cant click on stuff, yes there are rumors about the F-15, but even with out that, you would not find a better value anywhere, look at some of the top end Eagle drivers in the community... they have some incredible vids, and really show how much fun and skill is required for these 'simple' aircraft...

 

Sorry for the rant... but I needed to get that off my chest ;)

[Stuge]

Heh yeah it's true that paradoxically, FC3 offers for me the most complex and satisfying air combat experience available, no contest. Clickable cockpit isn't very relevant when it comes to tactics. Also, I like the missiles the way they are. When missiles aren't ultra-effective-one-shot-kill-devices, it leaves more tactical options for the pilot, which is great :)

 

I've flown combat sims for 20 years and this is the best. Eagle+Flanker PFMs are dreams come true. Thank you ED <3

[JNASova]

You are mistaken, not everything is simplified, the FMs of the A-10A, Su-25, Su-25T, F-15C and Su-27 are not SFM. In fact the F-15C and Su-27 are using some of the most advanced FMs seen (PFM).

 

We're talking about simulations of modern era fighter jets.It consists of a lot of things. Radars,missile guidance, ECMs, flight model, many restrictions on the use of aircraft depending on the load and atmospheric conditions ...

You did some parts of flight model,some graphic details, and trying to impress the audience. You did not do interactive cockpits, even partially.Other simulations that have more than ten years ago and more.All actions, taking off, turning on radar,search and target lock, weapon usage and landing are made with a pair of keys. Allmost no limitation,no room for error.The difference between good and bad pilots is that a good pilot knows limitationsof his airplane and made no mistake. In FC 3 pilot knowledge can not be shown. Just a few programming tricks and eventual exploit.

All things considered, DCS MiG-21 BiS is currently the best module,in my opinion.

[NineLine]

We're talking about simulations of modern era fighter jets.It consists of a lot of things. Radars,missile guidance, ECMs, flight model, many restrictions on the use of aircraft depending on the load and atmospheric conditions ...

You did some parts of flight model,some graphic details, and trying to impress the audience. You did not do interactive cockpits, even partially.Other simulations that have more than ten years ago and more.All actions, taking off, turning on radar,search and target lock, weapon usage and landing are made with a pair of keys. Allmost no limitation,no room for error.The difference between good and bad pilots is that a good pilot knows limitationsof his airplane and made no mistake. In FC 3 pilot knowledge can not be shown. Just a few programming tricks and eventual exploit.

All things considered, DCS MiG-21 BiS is currently the best module,in my opinion.

 

You said everything is simplified. its simply not true.

[JNASova]

You said everything is simplified. its simply not true.

 

It is.

[Toybasher]

Some things in FC3 are a bit simplified. It's hard to explain but the planes don't have as much "features" on them as the full-sim ones. They are still pretty detailed, though. For example starting the 25T only requires a few keyboard shortcuts (Electrics on, engine 1 on, engine 2 on.) opposed to the complicated start up process of the a10c or mig-21.

 

The FC3 craft also lack a clickable cockpit. This is a bit of a pain for me as I'm using a Logitech extreme 3d pro and having to print out a million keyboard shortcuts is annoying for me.

 

I really hope ED considers upgrading the FC3 craft to "fullsim".

[NineLine]

 

I really hope ED considers upgrading the FC3 craft to "fullsim".

 

I hope so too, but right now the FC3 aircraft are good entry level aircraft for new flight simmers or new to DCS. Gateway modules if you will... but with kick butt flight modules either already available or coming soon.

[kontiuka]

I hope so too, but right now the FC3 aircraft are good entry level aircraft for new flight simmers or new to DCS.

I think people forget that there is an actual market for this level of sim.

[Exorcet]

We're talking about simulations of modern era fighter jets.It consists of a lot of things. Radars,missile guidance, ECMs, flight model, many restrictions on the use of aircraft depending on the load and atmospheric conditions ...

You did some parts of flight model,some graphic details, and trying to impress the audience. You did not do interactive cockpits, even partially.Other simulations that have more than ten years ago and more.All actions, taking off, turning on radar,search and target lock, weapon usage and landing are made with a pair of keys. Allmost no limitation,no room for error.The difference between good and bad pilots is that a good pilot knows limitationsof his airplane and made no mistake. In FC 3 pilot knowledge can not be shown. Just a few programming tricks and eventual exploit.

All things considered, DCS MiG-21 BiS is currently the best module,in my opinion.

 

Skill is the same in FC as it is in full DCS modules. There is a clear and very large gap between new pilots and experienced pilots, and even experienced pilots and very experienced pilots. Really MiG-21 isn't that different from say the FC F-15. The MiG requires more button presses, but that's about it really.

 

Flying the FC aircraft requires to you to know flight performance, or you'll be caught pushing outside your envelope in turns (can be a disastrous consequence in the Su-27, and is quite bad in the F-15) or prevented from reaching the edge of the envelope at all (like trying to take the F-15 to high Mach with 3 tanks or ignoring the high transonic drag before M 1.3). You need to know your weapons, ET's are great assets for the Su-27, but are harder to make use of than ER's. Sensors too, some pilots don't know about the RWR blind spots and that can make them quite easy to pounce on.

[GGTharos]

Radars,missile guidance, ECMs,

 

In that case the MiG-21 isn't all that realistic. I really don't care HOW MANY switches you have to throw, thus having switchology realism - but if the RESULT is not realistic, then you really don't have much of an argument.

 

.Other simulations that have more than ten years ago and more.All actions, taking off, turning on radar,search and target lock, weapon usage and landing are made with a pair of keys.

 

Sorry but no. You still have to use correct flight techniques in the FC3 aircraft. The REAL aircraft they represent just happen to have flight-safety and carefree-handling enhancements that a MiG-21 does not.

Again, I don't care how many buttons you have to push to turn something on or off.

 

The difference between good and bad pilots is that a good pilot knows limitationsof his airplane and made no mistake.

 

No, that's just the very beginning of what it means to be a good pilot.

 

In FC 3 pilot knowledge can not be shown. Just a few programming tricks and eventual exploit.

 

Of course it can be, the knowledge just rests in flight techniques ... I don't care how many buttons your have to push ... pushing buttons doesn't teach you how to fly the aircraft, it doesn't teach you how to fight the aircraft, or how to fight in a team. It doesn't teach you weapons envelopes or formation flying techniques.

 

Your comparison of knowing how to operate a cockpit to 'knowledge' of air combat altogether is just way off the mark.

 

If you believe that the MiG-21 is the best module, good on you. But your reasons in terms of calling upon realism are kinda ... eh.

[Frostie]

We're talking about simulations of modern era fighter jets.It consists of a lot of things. Radars,missile guidance, ECMs, flight model, many restrictions on the use of aircraft depending on the load and atmospheric conditions ...

You did some parts of flight model,some graphic details, and trying to impress the audience. You did not do interactive cockpits, even partially.Other simulations that have more than ten years ago and more.All actions, taking off, turning on radar,search and target lock, weapon usage and landing are made with a pair of keys. Allmost no limitation,no room for error.The difference between good and bad pilots is that a good pilot knows limitationsof his airplane and made no mistake. In FC 3 pilot knowledge can not be shown. Just a few programming tricks and eventual exploit.

All things considered, DCS MiG-21 BiS is currently the best module,in my opinion.

 

Sorry mate but other than MiG21 being the best the rest of what you say is a load of tosh.

Since I've accustomed myself to flying the MiG21 the tactics and level of application are just the same as I do with FC3. There is very little difference in what you have to do in combat other than the expected more hands on approach of older system modelling. You talk as though the operation of FC aircraft radar etc. is an unrealistic procedure, i'd love to know how you think they're operated in rl, pulleys, pedals and slide rules maybe.

 

If you want to call simplified because of how ED models radar effects, weapons, ECM etc. then those also apply to the MiG21.

[Worther_1]

I personally enjoy all the Flaming Cliffs aircraft, I got them in Steam sale for about £10, and then ED updated both SU-27 and F-15C what a bargain! They fly well, A2A engagements are fun and challenging.

 

I'm no expert, but the F-16 pilot who consulted on Falcon 4.0 states in the manual 'if Missiles hit every-time they'd be called Hitiles'!

[Stuge]

The Mig21 is in my view a simpler, more limited experience than FC3. Why? Because the Fishbed lacks the capabilities and thus the tactical flexibility of more modern fighters. Radar, RWR, weapons and maneuverability are all very limited, thus making even a mig21 vs mig21 fight more of a cripple fight with woodsticks :) (a little exaggerated to make the point)

[secret1962]

The Mig21 is in my view a simpler, more limited experience than FC3. Why? Because the Fishbed lacks the capabilities and thus the tactical flexibility of more modern fighters. Radar, RWR, weapons and maneuverability are all very limited, thus making even a mig21 vs mig21 fight more of a cripple fight with woodsticks :) (a little exaggerated to make the point)

 

Sorry but that makes it harder not simpler. And the systems are modeled. So yea, it definitely wouldn't be a "simpler, more limited experience than FC3", but rather call it an old airplane that you just don't want to operate with :D

 

Anyway as for FC3, the main problem is the airplanes lack the ASM component. The fact that the systems are simplified may relieve some workload on the pilots indeed, but the flight is the flight (atleast for PFM airplanes... SFM is very weird).

That the missiles are not really realistic is known, especially in the guidance part :lol:

[Hellfire257]

It is.

 

What makes you say that?