Rangi Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 The threads and cores used are not determined by the module creators, but are the domain of the core program - in other words ED. So the Viggen will use just the same resources as every other module. Recommended computer spec will be unchanged from that for DCS 2.0, but of course, the more powerful your processor/GPU/Memory combo, the better frame rates you will achieve. If you search for the DCS Benchmark thread on the forum, you'll get all the info you'll need to make an informed choice. Cobra seems to think differently, https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2924883&postcount=3064 I don't see any reason it's not technically possible for a module to use different cores than DCS proper. PC: 6600K @ 4.5 GHz, 12GB RAM, GTX 970, 32" 2K monitor.
Raven68 Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 Cobra seems to think differently, https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2924883&postcount=3064 I don't see any reason it's not technically possible for a module to use different cores than DCS proper. They are developing with later builds that we don't have visibilty to and with that is it possible that the base code is being altered to allow usage of multiple cores in 2.5? Has there been a release of information on system support for the upcomming 2.5 release? Intel i5-9600K @ 3.7GHz; Gigabyte Z370XP SLI Mobo; G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 64GB (4 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4080 16GB 256-Bit GDDR6; Thermaltake Water 3.0 Certified Liquid Cooling System Windows 11 Professional HP Reverb G2 /TrackIR 5 in case VR dies; Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog w/ Thrustmaster T-Flight Rudder Pedals
2-niner Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 Since it will be the first aircraft with Anti-ship missiles I was about to disagree with you because I distinctly remember using anti-ship missiles with the SU-33, but that was many many years ago and apparently they have taken them out of the game again (I just checked and realized this). Anyone know why and if there's any plans on bringing those back?
Pocket Sized Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 I was about to disagree with you because I distinctly remember using anti-ship missiles with the SU-33, but that was many many years ago and apparently they have taken them out of the game again (I just checked and realized this). Anyone know why and if there's any plans on bringing those back? Do you remember which ones they were? Were they rocket or jet powered? The Su-25T can carry a pretty nasty anti-radiation missile that is very useful against ships. (Kh-58U) On the topic of the Viggen, what sort of stability margins does it have? In other words, if you're at 150 kts and pull the stick fully back, will it depart or just nose up and stall? If you do depart is does it like to recover on its own? DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule. In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.
mattebubben Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 I was about to disagree with you because I distinctly remember using anti-ship missiles with the SU-33, but that was many many years ago and apparently they have taken them out of the game again (I just checked and realized this). Anyone know why and if there's any plans on bringing those back? The Su-33 once had (a LONG time ago) the Kh-41 Moskit missile (Air launched variant of the P-270 Moskit) But it was removed as the Su-33 was never able to launch the KH-41 (or any other Anti ship missile) as while it was considered to upgrade the Su-33 with that ability in the 90s (together with Air-Ground search modes for the radar etc) the upgrade never took place so it never got the ability.
2-niner Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 The Su-33 once had (a LONG time ago) the Kh-41 Moskit missile (Air launched variant of the P-270 Moskit) But it was removed as the Su-33 was never able to launch the KH-41 (or any other Anti ship missile) as while it was considered to upgrade the Su-33 with that ability in the 90s (together with Air-Ground search modes for the radar etc) the upgrade never took place so it never got the ability. Didn't know that the SU-33 didn't really have this capability, that's interesting considering it's naval role. And yeah it was a really long time ago :) it was probably in the lock-on days.
mattebubben Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 (edited) Yea it was in Lock on / FC2. But it was removed before FC3/DCS. As for the Su-33 there were plans to give it more capabilities then it ended up getting to make it more of a multirole aircraft (Capable of Air-Air,Air-Ground and Anti-Ship duties) but budget limitations put an end to those plans and made it end up with pretty much just the SU-27s systems. Edited October 13, 2016 by mattebubben
Buzzles Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 The threads and cores used are not determined by the module creators, but are the domain of the core program - in other words ED. So the Viggen will use just the same resources as every other module. I'm fairly certain that's factually incorrect. Modules in DCS are built within C++ .dlls. You can generally do what ever you want inside library functions. The core program, which is DCS World, happens to run on two threads (so it's definitely not a single-threaded app), so there's nothing stopping the libraries from spinning up threads as they see fit. They are however, still bound by the fact the DCS API is running as part of one thread afaik, so will probably have to do a fair bit of waiting. They are developing with later builds that we don't have visibilty to and with that is it possible that the base code is being altered to allow usage of multiple cores in 2.5? Has there been a release of information on system support for the upcomming 2.5 release? As above, base code has nothing to do with it. Fancy trying Star Citizen? Click here!
Deadpoetic6 Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 What variant will we have? I'm trying to find a cockpit picture of the viggen but there is like 4-5 different kinds, I wanna know what model will be ours :) Is it the one with the MFDs or the more basic one?
MYSE1234 Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 What variant will we have? I'm trying to find a cockpit picture of the viggen but there is like 4-5 different kinds, I wanna know what model will be ours :) Is it the one with the MFDs or the more basic one? We will get the AJS 37. Which is a AJ 37, but with some new weapons, a slighly diffrent radar, and a few other things. The cockpit is the same as on the AJ 37, but with a maverick sight, called EP-13. The blueish circle to the right of the hud. Viggen is love. Viggen is life. 7800X3D | RTX 4070 Ti S | 64GB 6000MHz RAM |
mattebubben Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 And if you have any question about the aircraft thats what we are here for. (a ton of info has already been posted in this thread but since there are currently 311 pages to sift through i think its ok to just ask ^^) I would be happy to try to educate you on the aircraft and its capabilities (and there are plenty of others as well).
robban75 Posted October 13, 2016 Posted October 13, 2016 On the topic of the Viggen, what sort of stability margins does it have? In other words, if you're at 150 kts and pull the stick fully back, will it depart or just nose up and stall? If you do depart is does it like to recover on its own? I'd say quite stable. :) According to a Viggen pilot(from the book System 37 Viggen, Flyghistorisk Revy) when the stick was pulled hard back at 350 km/h it resulted in a rapid nose up attitude, stick full forward and the aircraft flew straight and level again, no drama. He estimated the AoA to be in the vicinity of 45-50 degrees. Load factor around 4 G. Stalling characteristics should be good. The canard is mounted at a higher angle of incidence than the main wing. Meaning the canard will stall before the main wing. So, (I'm no expert here) when the Viggen stalls it is first and foremost the canard that stalls, the main wing still has lift. If the aircraft departs it may enter a super stall. But, from what I've gathered it should be much easier to get out of in comparison to the Draken. :)
JanTelefon Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 And apparently the superstall of the Draken was very smooth and pleasant, and not very hard to get out of. :)
renhanxue Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) SFI AJS 37 part 2, chapter II, page 38 (page 41 in the PDF): Quote 24.4 Uncontrolled attitudes 24.4.1 Superstall and spin If the angle of attack exceeds the permitted limits, some yaw disturbances appear around alpha 25-28°, and at alpha 28-30° there are weak pitch-up tendencies. If the stick is moved forward at pitch-up, the aircraft returns to normal alpha, possibly after overshooting up to alpha ~50°. Note that the angle of attack instrument only shows the area -4° to +26°. If the stick movement forward at the pitch-up is too small or is made too late, so that the angle of attack does not immediately decrease, the aircraft enters superstall or spin. Superstall is characterized by: indicated alpha 26° (actually around 60°) low rotation speed (< 40°/s) stable or oscillating nose attitude Two types of spin may be encountered: Oscillating spin (most common) indicated alpha 26° (actually around 60°) moderate to high rotation speed (> 40°/s) moderate to powerful oscillations in pitch and/or roll Flat spin indicated alpha 26° (actually around 70°) high rotation speed (up to 120°/s) small or no pitch or roll oscillations The sink rate in a superstall or spin is around 100 m/s. If the pitch-up occurs without aileron input, the maneuver usually results in superstall. If the pitch-up occurs with any aileron input active, the aircraft yaws in the opposite direction and the likelihood of a spin increases. [...] The oscillating spin may after ≥15 s diverge such that the aircraft rolls inverted, from which position it usually recovers by itself with control surfaces neutral (but see also the section on "inverted plunging spiral" below). In superstall or spin the pitch authority is good, which eases recovery. Aileron input results in adverse yaw, that is to say rolling right gives a yaw to the left and vice versa. Rudder authority is negligible. Recovery from superstall and oscillating spin is accomplished by moving the stick to a position somewhat forward of the neutral pitch position, with ailerons and rudder neutral. To recover from a flat spin, the yawing rotation must be stopped first, which is accomplished with neutral pitch and full roll input in the direction of the rotation ("stick into the spin"). When the rotation has just about ceased, recovery is accomplished with neutral ailerons and the stick somewhat forward of neutral, just like when recovering from superstall and oscillating spin. If the center of gravity is particularly far aft (aircraft with heavy loads on V7 (wing pylons) and no load on S7 (fuselage pylons)) the pitch-up tendency is more pronounced than with normal CoG positions. To return to a normal angle of attack a stronger pitch down input is required; the stick must be moved close to its fully forward position. These characteristics are not affected to any significant degree by fuselage mounted loads. The characteristics with both fuselage and underwing loads are not known but are assumed to be the same as with only fuselage loads. Stalled inverted attitudes have not been possible to achieve in flight tests. Moving the stick fully forward gives alpha about -30°, there are no pitch-up (pitch-down?) tendencies and when the stick is moved back to neutral the aircraft returns to a normal angle of attack. 24.4.2 Plunging spiral In certain adverse dynamical scenarios the aircraft can enter an uncontrolled attitude of the autorotating type, here called plunging spiral. The plunging spiral, which can be either right side up or inverted, is considered to be the potentially most dangerous form of uncontrolled flight that has been discovered during the spin tests of aircraft 37. 24.4.2.1 Inverted plunging spiral The most common form of the plunging spiral is the inverted one. The following attitudes/maneuvers repeatably result in an inverted plunging spiral: Somersault into inverted position from oscillating spin (for example while attempting to recover from a spin with the stick fully forward) Stalling the tailfin through so-called "knife flying" (TN: knife edge?) The inverted plunging spiral is characterized by the following: Negative load factor (-1 to -3) Low nose Rapid rotation around the roll axis (≥ 200°/s) High sink rate (≥ 150 m/s) Moving the stick back and/or aileron input to either side tends to increase the roll rotation speed. The rotation can be stopped by moving the stick fully forward with no aileron input. When the rotation has ceased, the stick is moved back to neutral pitch, and the aircraft returns to controlled flight. 24.4.2.2 Non-inverted plunging spiral The aircraft only entered a non-inverted plunging spiral on a handful of occasions during the spin tests. It has not been possible to define any repeatable attitude or maneuver that results in a non-inverted plunging spiral. During the spin tests the non-inverted plunging spiral only occurred on the following two occasions (not repeatable): When recovering from an inverted superstall When recovering from an oscillating non-inverted spin The non-inverted plunging spiral is characterized by the following: Positive load factor (+1 to +3) Low nose Rapid rotation around the roll axis (≥ 200°/s) High sink rate (≥ 150 m/s) In a non-inverted plunging spiral, aileron inputs have no effect. Instead, the roll rotation must be stopped by pulling gently back on the stick until the rotation ceases. When the rotation has ceased, the stick is moved forward to the neutral pitch position and the aircraft returns to controlled flight. The aerodynamics compendium also mentions that pitch stability is "basically undisturbed" all the way up to alpha 25° or so. Other than that: Swedish speakers, how would you translate "flygläge"? I chose "flight mode" here but it's clunky. Flight regime isn't quite right either, or is it? Flight position? Edited August 23, 2023 by renhanxue
addde Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 Other than that: Swedish speakers, how would you translate "flygläge"? I chose "flight mode" here but it's clunky. Flight regime isn't quite right either, or is it? Flight position? Put it in a full sentence please.
renhanxue Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 Put it in a full sentence please. Kapitelrubriken "Okontrollerade flyglägen" "Överstegrade inverterade flyglägen har inte kunnat erhållas vid prov." "Endast vid ett fåtal tillfällen under spinnutprovningen hamnade fpl i en rättvänd störtspiral. Något repeterbart flygläge/manöver som resulterar i en rättvänd störtspiral har ej kunnat definieras."
addde Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) Kapitelrubriken "Okontrollerade flyglägen" "Överstegrade inverterade flyglägen har inte kunnat erhållas vid prov." "Endast vid ett fåtal tillfällen under spinnutprovningen hamnade fpl i en rättvänd störtspiral. Något repeterbart flygläge/manöver som resulterar i en rättvänd störtspiral har ej kunnat definieras." I would simply say "attitude", as in uncontrolled attitudes. Or maybe "Aircraft state/states". Edited October 14, 2016 by addde
microvax Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 Yee would agree flight attitude. Fluglage in german. ))) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] *unexpected flight behaviour* Oh shiii*** ! What ? Why ? What is happening ?
renhanxue Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 It's certainly better than what I had. Changed. Thanks!
addde Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 It's certainly better than what I had. Changed. Thanks! Glad to be of service to the great AFM translator ;)
renhanxue Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 Haha, glad you appreciate it. :) Please tell me if you see anything else that looks dumb in the English text. The language in these manuals is rather hard to just read in the first place, and making it make sense in aeronautical English is pretty challenging. Figuring what exactly "tätning" (literally "sealing", as in making something airtight) referred to wasn't trivial, but Google eventually turned up a report from Statens Haverikommission where it was actually explained. It means "rapid pitch-up". Explain how that makes sense, anyone? Then again, is that what "departure" refers to in English as well? That makes more sense but it's still kinda odd.
Recommended Posts