flight modelling question...

[fitness88]

If I understand correctly, as flight modelling goes from SFM to AFM to PFM there should be a greater feeling of realism when flying.

 

I find as you go from SFM [Mig-29] to PFM [F-15, SU-27] it gets more difficult to control the aircraft as it seems the aircraft is always close to stalling...unless you're near full throttle at close to top speeds. Also there seems to be a lot of head movement inside the cockpit making my view of outside the cockpit very loose.

 

I found this interesting reading:

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

 

Thank you.

[razo+r]

If I understand correctly, as flight modelling goes from SFM to AFM to PFM there should be a greater feeling of realism when flying.

 

I find as you go from SFM [Mig-29] to PFM [F-15, SU-27] it gets more difficult to control the aircraft as it seems the aircraft is always close to stalling...unless you're near full throttle at close to top speeds. Also there seems to be a lot of head movement inside the cockpit making my view of outside the cockpit very loose.

 

I found this interesting reading:

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

 

Thank you.

 

You can turn off or stabilize the head movement in the cockpit

[Bourrinopathe]

You can turn off or stabilize the head movement in the cockpit

 

It's in Options -> Misc. -> Head Movement by G-Forces in Cockpit

 

If you take some time with the PFMs, you'll see it's much much more interesting and realistic, and most of all: a delight to fly.

As the Su-27 is unstable by design, you may want to use the trim to stabilize the aircraft first, then play around that (set the trim for a good maneuverability speed (around 500 km/h would be a good start)). No need to go full throttle !

 

There are several threads about similar considerations. :thumbup:

[DarkFire]

It's in Options -> Misc. -> Head Movement by G-Forces in Cockpit

 

If you take some time with the PFMs, you'll see it's much much more interesting and realistic, and most of all: a delight to fly.

As the Su-27 is unstable by design, you may want to use the trim to stabilize the aircraft first, then play around that (set the trim for a good maneuverability speed (around 500 km/h would be a good start)). No need to go full throttle !

 

There are several threads about similar considerations. :thumbup:

 

This.

 

Aircraft that have the PFM, and the Su-27 in particular, require a very significant time input in order to feel comfortable at the controls. When I first started flying the Su-27 with the PFM having previously only flown it back in FC2 it felt totally uncontrollable. Be patient and put the time in and eventually everything will fall in to place and you'll wonder what all the complaining is about :)

 

As far as flying the PFM aircraft is concerned, don't expect to be able to throw them round the sky immediately. Slow is smooth, smooth is fast. Take things slowly and carefully and you'll fairly quickly get the hang of things.

 

If you've never flown either I'd have to recommend the F-15 to try first as it's much more forgiving to fly and takes much, much less time to become comfortable with it. Personally I find the Su-27 to be more rewarding but that's just my personal opinion. Both have their strengths & weaknesses.

[fitness88]

Thank you all for your input. It was helpful to understand PFM flying needs some time and practice. I thought it was going to be an immediate feeling of added control and smoothness of flight. I'll give it some time.

[DarkFire]

Thank you all for your input. It was helpful to understand PFM flying needs some time and practice. I thought it was going to be an immediate feeling of added control and smoothness of flight. I'll give it some time.

 

Definitely give it some time. If you think in terms of PFM aircraft being much closer to reality, and that most type conversion course in most air forces involve some 50 - 75 hours flying time, you'll get an idea of the time input required to become comfortable with everything a given aircraft can do.

 

A couple of other recommendations: once you've set up your controls for a given aircraft, particularly the F-15 and Su-27, most people would recommend using curves for the pitch and roll axes. The exact curvature for a given axis will depend on your setup and personal preferences but most people seem to find the sweet spot somewhere in the range of 15 - 25 for both pitch and roll. Using control curves will let you carry out fine adjustments in both axes whilst still enabling you to drastic rolls and pitch changes when you need to.

 

Something else I'd strongly recommend would be to make sure you have "Synchronise cockpit controls with HOTAS controls at mission start" checked under misc. options. This is particularly important for the interactive training missions. What it does is makes sure that the in-game aircraft controls are set to what your HOTAS is actually doing rather than being set at the HOTAS controls of the person who recorded the training mission. If that makes sense. It avoids big differences between what the aircraft is actually doing and what your HOTAS is set to and makes for much smoother mission starts. Not so important for ground starts but very, very useful for starting in the air which most of the training missions do.

 

Anyway good luck and happy flying :)

[fitness88]

Definitely give it some time. If you think in terms of PFM aircraft being much closer to reality, and that most type conversion course in most air forces involve some 50 - 75 hours flying time, you'll get an idea of the time input required to become comfortable with everything a given aircraft can do.

 

A couple of other recommendations: once you've set up your controls for a given aircraft, particularly the F-15 and Su-27, most people would recommend using curves for the pitch and roll axes. The exact curvature for a given axis will depend on your setup and personal preferences but most people seem to find the sweet spot somewhere in the range of 15 - 25 for both pitch and roll. Using control curves will let you carry out fine adjustments in both axes whilst still enabling you to drastic rolls and pitch changes when you need to.

 

Yes I've always had my axis curved.

Something else I'd strongly recommend would be to make sure you have "Synchronise cockpit controls with HOTAS controls at mission start" checked under misc. options. This is particularly important for the interactive training missions. What it does is makes sure that the in-game aircraft controls are set to what your HOTAS is actually doing rather than being set at the HOTAS controls of the person who recorded the training mission. If that makes sense. It avoids big differences between what the aircraft is actually doing and what your HOTAS is set to and makes for much smoother mission starts. Not so important for ground starts but very, very useful for starting in the air which most of the training missions do.

 

I've also always had this enabled, thanks for this explanation,.

Anyway good luck and happy flying :)

 

Thank you.

Edited November 15, 2015 by fitness88

[fitness88]

BTW...have any of you installed the beta 1.5, if so would you recommend it?

[DarkFire]

Definitely recommended! 2 x the frame rate of 1.2.16, the new EDGE graphics engine, it's probably the biggest single advancement there's ever been in DCS. It does have issues with multiplayer though so it would be worth installing it in parallel with the stable version.

[fitness88]

Definitely recommended! 2 x the frame rate of 1.2.16, the new EDGE graphics engine, it's probably the biggest single advancement there's ever been in DCS. It does have issues with multiplayer though so it would be worth installing it in parallel with the stable version.

 

Would parallel installation allow you to use 1.5 offline by yourself but then go back to 1.2 for multiplayer?

[Exorcet]

Would parallel installation allow you to use 1.5 offline by yourself but then go back to 1.2 for multiplayer?

Yes, I have 5 copies of DCS installed. They are all independent.

[fitness88]

Yes, I have 5 copies of DCS installed. They are all independent.

 

I take it the option for parallel install is indicated during the install process?

[DarkFire]

Would parallel installation allow you to use 1.5 offline by yourself but then go back to 1.2 for multiplayer?

 

Should do. The DCS 'beta channel' installs independently of the stable version. The two don't share things like registry entries etc so they should happily co-exist. Personally I've stopped using the old 1.2.16 stable version in favour of 1.5 beta. I'd definitely give it a try, it's SO much more advanced in all sorts of ways than the old version.

[Top Jockey]

Should do. The DCS 'beta channel' installs independently of the stable version. The two don't share things like registry entries etc so they should happily co-exist. Personally I've stopped using the old 1.2.16 stable version in favour of 1.5 beta. I'd definitely give it a try, it's SO much more advanced in all sorts of ways than the old version.

 

Hello DarkFire,

 

In what ways is 1.5 more advanced than 1.2.16 (the one I'm using now) ?

(I'm recently playing FC3 and MiG-21Bis for the first time.)

 

Are there significant improvements on aircraft behavior ? Like Air-to-Air weapons; avionics ?

[fitness88]

Thanks DarkFire and Exorcet, I'll give it a try.

I believe the download has to be done manually from the web page.

[fitness88]

I installed the update but I'm told I'm missing MSVCR120.dll and it's telling me to re-install which I did with no positive result.

 

 

edit

I found this fix for anyone having the same problem:

 

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=40784

Edited November 16, 2015 by fitness88

[winchesterdelta1]

Install this to fix the MSVCR120.dll misisng error : http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downl....aspx?id=40784

[DarkFire]

Hello DarkFire,

 

In what ways is 1.5 more advanced than 1.2.16 (the one I'm using now) ?

(I'm recently playing FC3 and MiG-21Bis for the first time.)

 

Are there significant improvements on aircraft behavior ? Like Air-to-Air weapons; avionics ?

 

For now, you get the new graphics engine, a 3D encyclopaedia, some new 3D models for various things, a new MiG-29 cockpit and some other goodies. Most importantly the 1.5 --> 2.0 development path is the future. I can't imagine that 1.2.16 will ever see any major updates and, good as it was for all the years we had it, is now a sort of evolutionary dead end.

 

For me upgrading to 1.5 beta was worth it for the new graphics engine alone: at least double the frame rate even with all the new graphical bells & whistles.

[Bourrinopathe]

More details about 1.5/2.0/NTTR map here (FAQ & Discussion thread).

 

Afaik: no specific aircraft behavior, air-air weapons, etc. development as it's an ongoing effort to improve DCSW.

[Top Jockey]

Ok thank you for the info.

[Stuge]

Hello DarkFire,

 

In what ways is 1.5 more advanced than 1.2.16 (the one I'm using now) ?

(I'm recently playing FC3 and MiG-21Bis for the first time.)

 

Are there significant improvements on aircraft behavior ? Like Air-to-Air weapons; avionics ?

 

Significant improvement in F-15 handling, it feels much more like a real plane now instead of a toy plane, even if it makes it slightly less capable.

 

Oh and try the R-73 with helmet sight, I guarantee you will orgasm... and aim-9m performance also much improved!