Mirage 2000 Discussion (On Topic Only)

[il_corleone]

Nice video! I love the feature of the "painted" runway on Hud!, really wanting to test her out!

 

And above the Painted runway some meters above ground, I think in the worst situation, you could already see the runway with your mk1 eyeball or with the lights on the landing gear

[Dee-Jay]

I accept the correction and acknowledge that I was wrong and will close the matter on this issue.

 

... some ppl are also here "to help you" :smilewink:

 

The aircraft will have the landing speeds the real one has. And those are based on landing weight. The heavier you are the faster it is, up to a limit.

 

Indeed, on moderns jets like M2000, F-16, F-15, Rafale ... etc ... we do not fly a speed during the approach, but an AoA.

What is important is to get the right AoA during approach and landing.

 

Airspeed depends on weight, not the case of the AoA.

 

Example:

It was easier to fly the airspeed because indication is more stable than the AoA indicator, so the aim was to take AoA 10°, note the corresponding airspeed, then fly this airspeed. But most important is to have the right AoA ... no more, no less.

 

:thumbup:

 

So as you said, and what is important to remember : The airspeed during approach and landing depends on aircraft's weight. What is mandatory is not the speed, but the AoA.

 

This video is a good illustration of this point:

 

${1}

 

:smartass:

Edited December 10, 2015 by Dee-Jay

[Dee-Jay]

Hi Only for DCS!

 

On another note, Im really excited about the low visibility landing abilities of the Mirage2000C. I don't know why,but its making me giddy with excitement. That system is awesome.

 

Sorry if I am misunderstood you, but if you are talking about the synthetic runway in HUD, this is not a "low visibility landing" feature and changes nothings to the pilot's minimums. In other words, with, without, it change nothing.

 

Note also that on M2000, HUD is not primary flight display, ILS and other instruments procedures has to be performed heads down.

 

Kind regards.

Edited December 10, 2015 by Dee-Jay

[TomCatMucDe]

Ok Razbam,

 

I am about to plan my weekend, so there is the ultimate questions. Will we see the bird before the weekend or saturday?

 

A word from you and i cancel everything! My whatsapp message to the girl is ready to be sent!

[il_corleone]

Ok Razbam,

 

I am about to plan my weekend, so there is the ultimate questions. Will we see the bird before the weekend or saturday?

 

A word from you and i cancel everything! My whatsapp message to the girl is ready to be sent!

 

:megalol::megalol::megalol:

 

This is 2, ready to going in!

[jojo]

Note also that on M2000, HUD is not primary flight display, ILS and other instruments procedures has to be performed heads down.

 

Kind regards.

 

I dare to disagree here Dee-Jay. It's true for F-16, but for me Mirage 2000 HUD is primary instrument...could you check ?

Edited December 10, 2015 by jojo

[OnlyforDCS]

Yes even with 0 wind the smokes stacks show wind even though there is not, unsure if this is a 2.0 thing, every video of every mission we've shown should have no wind in it, except for the one video I made to demonstrate a landing that does have wind in the mission.

 

In summary, and mentioned many times before, don't trust the smoke stacks...

 

Ok thanks for the clarification. To be honest, I have no idea if that is a problem in DCS 2.0 as I have yet to see a single smoke stack in Nevada :)

[mjmorrow]

In the video, I noticed that near the end of the approach to the runway, when the closed box rested right in front of the runway, the pilot stopped chasing the closed box with the FPM. The sim pilot then placed the FPM toward the center of the runway. Should we continue to chase the closed box near the end of our approach or are we better off just following the closed box till near the end of the approach and then just placing the FPM somewhere on the runway? :thumbup: MJ

Edited December 10, 2015 by mjmorrow

[jojo]

The same as any ILS procedure on any aircraft...

 

Follow ILS until visual on runway.

[mjmorrow]

The same as any ILS procedure on any aircraft...

 

Follow ILS until visual on runway.

 

Thank you, JoJo! :thumbup: MJ

[Dee-Jay]

I dare to disagree here Dee-Jay. It's true for F-16, but for me Mirage 2000 HUD is primary instrument...could you check ?

 

I just did before posting my last by asking a former M2KD pilot who is deployed with me. I already knew it but asked him to confirm.

 

And for sure, synthetic runway on HUD is not a "low visibility landing" system. Just a nice/useful overlay.

[TomCatMucDe]

I just did before posting my last by asking a former M2KD pilot who is deployed with me. I already knew it but asked him to confirm.

 

And for sure, synthetic runway on HUD is not a "low visibility landing" system. Just a nice/useful overlay.

 

why isn't it for low visibility landing? because of its accuracy?

[jojo]

Yep, in real it isn't accurate enough in close range.

 

To my knowledge the only aircrafts that land on 0/0 do it on auto pilot until the end.

 

On air liners the plane use auto land (ILS Cat III), the plane flare, touch and brake by itself.

Fighters on US carriers...don't flare and catch the wire !

 

Think it's 80' technology here, and better than many aircrafts of its time.

 

I read an article of Indian pilot that performed a 0/0 landing. But it seems to be out of procedure...risky business !

 

@ Dee-Jay: OK

Edited December 10, 2015 by jojo

[Dee-Jay]

why isn't it for low visibility landing? because of its accuracy?

 

I do not exactly know.

 

To be certified, HUD must comply with a lot of characteristics. (probably "fail safe" (loss of info/sources must not confuse the pilot and must be clearly identified), readability, reliability, no risks of spatial disorientation, presences of marker, ILS LOC & GLIDE deviations, head up vs head down compatibility, display refresh rate, symbology standardization ... etc ...)

 

Synthetic runway is also an issue. I do not know how the synthetic runway is generated (?) If it is with the ILS LOC/GLIDE radio beam (external source), maybe it can be trusted (?).

If it is an inertial feature (like the FPM) display thanks to aircraft' inertial/GPS positioning + aircraft altitude/elevation source, it is certainly not enough reliable because it depends on a digital terrain elevation info and/or QHN setting which can be potentially erroneous.

 

On my a/c it is clearly not possible to land safely using only the synthetic runway as reference since positioning precision is about 10 to 20m (geo coordinates system used is xxx°xx,xx'), depends on given QNH and QNH set in the system, and also depend on runway's threshold coordinates, elevation, axis, mag variation and runway's length programmed by the crew (or present in navdata) . We must have the runway in visual.

 

M2000's HUD is certainly considered as: "Supplemental use" , not as "Primary instrument" ... at least, not for instrument approaches, nor for hazardous situation recovery (spatial disorientation issues).

Edited December 10, 2015 by Dee-Jay

[Voodooflies]

Hello Zeus,

 

I had some chat with CptSmiley on the 104th, I asked him about the M2000C lightning systems but he couldn't find an answer so I bet you'd know. Does the M2000C got its own lightning system, such as the C101EB ? The biggest issue I've noticed so far that affects all FC3 planes, even the A10C, UH1H, MI8 etc... are their lightning effects, which are absolutely not realistic at all, I wrote a post about that (check it out guys: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=154373&highlight=nav+lights), wheareas on the C101EB, all lights are well made.

[RabidRider]

You say it is fine as it is, but then that it needs to be fixed...

 

I am in a way saying the same. This isn't a deal breaker to me, and is perfectly manageable. I just wanted to give my two cents in, as it would be incredibly distracting for me (especially in harsh weather or an night) to have the synthetic runway behave in such a way when you haven't yet kissed the ground

 

+1

[Zeus67]

Hello Zeus,

 

I had some chat with CptSmiley on the 104th, I asked him about the M2000C lightning systems but he couldn't find an answer so I bet you'd know. Does the M2000C got its own lightning system, such as the C101EB ? The biggest issue I've noticed so far that affects all FC3 planes, even the A10C, UH1H, MI8 etc... are their lightning effects, which are absolutely not realistic at all, I wrote a post about that (check it out guys: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=154373&highlight=nav+lights), wheareas on the C101EB, all lights are well made.

 

AFAIK, we use our own effects for lighting. But I would have to check with the modeler/texturizer.

[Corsair]

I accept the correction and acknowledge that I was wrong and will close the matter on this issue.

 

Hello Zeus,

 

I am glad to hear that it will be corrected.

Please accept my apologies, I was a little aggressive - the 2000 is an aircraft I love and I wish the best for this module ! :)

[Luzifer]

Synthetic runway is also an issue. I do not know how the synthetic runway is generated (?) If it is with the ILS LOC/GLIDE radio beam (external source), maybe it can be trusted (?).

If it is an inertial feature (like the FPM) display thanks to aircraft' inertial/GPS positioning + aircraft altitude/elevation source, it is certainly not enough reliable because it depends on a digital terrain elevation info and/or QHN setting which can be potentially erroneous.

 

You can't generate a synthetic runway display based on ILS. That only tells you how much you're left/right of the localizer beam and above/below glideslope. For display you would need distance, direction, elevation and orientation, none of which is supplied by ILS. So the INS together with a runway database is the only possible source providing that information.

[Zeus67]

Regarding the synthetic runway and navigation in general let me explain something:

 

This is a simulation, not the real world. Simulations cheat on navigation. The simulated world knows the position of everything that is relevant to that world: vehicles, terrain features, specific buildings and of course runways.

 

When coding a INS, you don't code for accuracy, since the world is accurate to the millimeter, you code errors.

 

In the specific case of the synthetic runway for the M-2000C, the INS checks the flight plan and see if the current waypoint is an airport and then it asks the sim world for the runway coordinates and use those coordinates to render the synthetic runway in the HUD.

 

That means for the model of the M-2000C, the synthetic runway is very accurate in world position.

[OnlyforDCS]

AFAIK, we use our own effects for lighting. But I would have to check with the modeler/texturizer.

 

Hi Zeus. Can you also check whether the NAV lights cast dynamic lights? I.E. do they light up other parts of the aircraft at night. (Like the landing lights light up the runway).

 

The reason I ask is because most NAV lights Ive seen in DCS are cosmetic only, they produce very dim effects that can hardly be seen 15 meters away, let alone for kilometers as they should be at night.

[Dee-Jay]

You can't generate a synthetic runway display based on ILS. That only tells you how much you're left/right of the localizer beam and above/below glideslope. For display you would need distance, direction, elevation and orientation, none of which is supplied by ILS. So the INS together with a runway database is the only possible source providing that information.

 

Thank you for input.

 

So, as said, impossible to use it as precision approach symbology.

 

Hey Zeus, why is the artificial runway in the air above the actual runway, and not closer to the ground? Just a temporary bug in your current build, or maybe a feature from the actual aircraft?

 

Not a bug and can be the case IRL depending on QNH setting and data fed in the system for the runway 3D coordinates. Please refer to posts above.

 

...

 

about the synthetic runway, would it be possible to have it disappear at a certain radar altitude (which I might think would be the correct behavior due to minimums, but I truly don't know)? Is the real behavior of this system fully understood and modeled, or is input like this open for discussion?

 

Af far as I can see, current implementation is correct. The synthetic runway remains in the HUD until WOW is compressed (touchdown).

What I can't say, is if the runway overlay fit to the real runway dimensions, or if it is a generic size (probably based on a standard NATO runway of 2400*45m).

I would rather bet on the later. (?)

 

 

Will try to get the answer.

[jojo]

It's generic size in real.

[Hook47]

Hi Zeus. Can you also check whether the NAV lights cast dynamic lights? I.E. do they light up other parts of the aircraft at night. (Like the landing lights light up the runway).

 

The reason I ask is because most NAV lights Ive seen in DCS are cosmetic only, they produce very dim effects that can hardly be seen 15 meters away, let alone for kilometers as they should be at night.

 

I think the external lighting effects are still WIP In 1.5 and 2.0, as they are pretty dim. Hopefully ED will work on that.

 

I would be curious to know if the lighting is automatically dynamic in the new engine or if its developer dependent, if the former hopefully the M2000 will have dynamic lighting anyway.

[Voodooflies]

I think the external lighting effects are still WIP In 1.5 and 2.0, as they are pretty dim. Hopefully ED will work on that.

 

I would be curious to know if the lighting is automatically dynamic in the new engine or if its developer dependent, if the former hopefully the M2000 will have dynamic lighting anyway.

 

Consider making your voice on that post Ramsey, perhaps things will change one day: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2595625#post2595625