No more above 12G turns

[JunMcKill]

The real Su-27 does have G and AOA limiters but apparently they're only actually programmed to take weight of stores, fuel etc in to account on the most recent versions, e.g. Su-30MKI, Su-35 etc.

 

Russian "generation 4" aircraft have historically been designed this way: they often don't have artificial limits on what the pilot can make the aircraft do, but then expect the pilot to know how to, and be able to, operate within safe limits. The theory is that not having care-free handling enables more experienced pilots to get more performance out of their aircraft than would be the case if they had care-free handling characteristics. The flip side of the coin is that the aircraft are more dangerous for less experienced pilots since it's possible (and relatively easy) to take it way outside the structural safety limits.

 

Thanks is a good and logical answer! :thumbup: Anyway lets see if GGTharos find another explanation from the model designers. Thanks to both!

 

Actually I think in some cases the hydraulics won't even produce enough pressure to let you pull more g's (specifically as very high IAS). I'm not certain if it's really modeled that way, I'd have to ask cofcorpse

 

It's possible (Actually likely) that the Su-27 doesn't have this hydraulic pressure issue modeled, but if I'm wrong I'm sure YoYo will correct me

[Chrinik]

They could make non HOTAS switches fail to operate under 4-5g+. Otherwise, the virtual pilots have too little g resistance in the fc3 fast movers IMHO.

 

How about we also mess with track IR so that you can´t move your head under high-G loads?

 

I mean, if you want to deactivate switches in high-G because of arm movement, why not head movement as well...can´t really see me looking up-left at a bandit and then pulling 9 G up into him without my neck straining.

 

 

.............................................

 

While I understand that ED is most proficient with the Flanker, I kinda feel iffy about all of those updates hitting the flanker first as some kind of testbed...It´s hard enough getting newbies into the airplane without having to constantly remind them that they are actually limiting their "kill ratio" and have "more work to do" as compared to the Eagle...so they just all keep flying Eagles because easy kills = more fun.

 

Newbies don´t know how rewarding the Flanker can be, argueing on that point is meaningless.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Chrinik

[Shahdoh]

I do not think it would be right to limit the control input, but what might work is if you black out sooner if you are not in a proper High G resisting position. Head straight and forward for best G resistance. Could tie this to the view position, so no matter what is used to change the view, it would be affected.

 

Thoughts?

[probad]

While I understand that ED is most proficient with the Flanker, I kinda feel iffy about all of those updates hitting the flanker first as some kind of testbed...It´s hard enough getting newbies into the airplane without having to constantly remind them that they are actually limiting their "kill ratio" and have "more work to do" as compared to the Eagle...so they just all keep flying Eagles because easy kills = more fun.

 

and that's not the audience that has made dcs what it is, and it shouldnt be the audience dcs caters to. that is the audience that ea, activision, gaijin etc caters to, and it will be the end of dcs if ed decides to play on their field by catering to their target audience.

[SinusoidDelta]

I can only imagine whats going down on the russian side of the forum right now.

 

And I wouldn't say kills are easy in either jet. Multiplayer bum-rush has created that perception.

[Ironhand]

I can only imagine whats going down on the russian side of the forum right now...

 

There have literally been about 5 or 6 posts about it. The jist of the conversation is:

 

Hey! The wings can fall off now.

 

Of course they can. Finally we have something more realistic.

 

Unfortunately it's one sided. It makes the remaining aircraft look even better (stronger).

 

Yes, well, it's a simulator.

[Aginor]

I imagine the Russians will be excited. Now they have the more realistic plane! :)

[*Rage*]

and that's not the audience that has made dcs what it is, and it shouldnt be the audience dcs caters to. that is the audience that ea, activision, gaijin etc caters to, and it will be the end of dcs if ed decides to play on their field by catering to their target audience.

 

Wrong.

 

FC(3) is EDs most successful 'franchise'. All other DCS modules are small change in comparison.

Edited April 12, 2016 by ///Rage

[xaoslaad]

Wrong.

 

FC(3) is EDs most successful 'franchise'. All other DCS modules are small change in comparison.

That franchise lives in a wider world now (see what I did there?).

 

And that world strives to be as realistic as reasonable. Look at Mavericks in the A-10C. No more off bore shots sailing with precision to the target.

 

The Su-27 isn't the only craft getting improved in ways that inhibit unrealistic habits. If you can't handle it right now fly in 33 until you get used to it. I was surprised when I took the wings off the 27, but I will adapt.

 

Everyone's pointed out an eagle survived (for certain values of survived) 30 G's, but I wonder how well they'll operate when they rip missiles off the plane, destroy sensors and sytems, and wobble everywhere because the wings have a new curve to them and they jammed control surfaces (something I recall they were very surprised didn't happen in the 30G case)... give it time and it will get sorted out.

[Svend_Dellepude]

There have literally been about 5 or 6 posts about it. The jist of the conversation is:

 

Hey! The wings can fall off now.

 

Of course they can. Finally we have something more realistic.

 

 

Hehe! Relaxed..

[Kuky]

Wrong.

 

FC(3) is EDs most successful 'franchise'. All other DCS modules are small change in comparison.

 

Wait till DCS Hornet hits the shelves, that won't be the case any more :smilewink:

[Chrinik]

and that's not the audience that has made dcs what it is, and it shouldnt be the audience dcs caters to. that is the audience that ea, activision, gaijin etc caters to, and it will be the end of dcs if ed decides to play on their field by catering to their target audience.

 

To make myself clear...I am also not that audience and I welcome these new realism features...as long as it´s universally applied accourding to all plane specifications. And I´m looking forward to all planes having wing-flex and G-loads and stores ripping off and dislodging and jamming because of high G...and Alpha-Vortexes....XD

 

But as it stands, the Flanker is the only one and is the testbed for it.

 

What I was getting at is that a steady steam of new blood needs to be introduced not only to DCS, but also to the different airframes, and right now, only the die-hard MEN could be convinced to learn the Flanker as it literally needs "work" to fly effectively.

 

The rest will forever stick with the Eagle because it´s "easier". I heard that arguement so many times.

During Blue Flag, the amount of people joining blue side and immediately asking why there is no amraams, and then subsequently disconnecting was amazing from what I´ve experienced.

 

Yes, personally we don´t need them...but if everyone thought that way the number of simmers would drop over the years until only some die-hard seniors fly anything.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Chrinik

[mvsgas]

Everyone has different experiences, but for me, going back to Flaming cliff one (circa 2004/2005 maybe), most people gravitated towards the F-15 ( for different reasons). IIRC, before you could put F-15 on both sides, there would be server with 10 F-15 vs 1 or 2 Su-27. So, in my experience, people go for the F-15 regardless.

[possumkiller]

I am definitely new to jets in DCS. I had BS1 for years and Il-2 and such. I just got DCSW recently and FC3 last Friday. I haven't even touched the F-15 yet because I love the Su-27 so much. I occasionally hop into the Su-33 for ground pounding with its extra pylons but I mainly stay in the Su-27. Easily my favourite. It may change when the new FM comes to the 33 but we will see.

[M460]

To make myself clear...I am also not that audience and I welcome these new realism features...as long as it´s universally applied accourding to all plane specifications. And I´m looking forward to all planes having wing-flex and G-loads and stores ripping off and dislodging and jamming because of high G...and Alpha-Vortexes....XD

 

But as it stands, the Flanker is the only one and is the testbed for it.

 

What I was getting at is that a steady steam of new blood needs to be introduced not only to DCS, but also to the different airframes, and right now, only the die-hard MEN could be convinced to learn the Flanker as it literally needs "work" to fly effectively.

 

The rest will forever stick with the Eagle because it´s "easier". I heard that arguement so many times.

During Blue Flag, the amount of people joining blue side and immediately asking why there is no amraams, and then subsequently disconnecting was amazing from what I´ve experienced.

 

Yes, personally we don´t need them...but if everyone thought that way the number of simmers would drop over the years until only some die-hard seniors fly anything.

 

 

I agree, and welcome every feature that head towards reality,

 

So I jumped onto the SU-27 and really liked the enhanced "you can break me" feature pushed on this update, You really have to be weary bout you top speeds for maneuvering. Too bad you don't get that feel on the F-15, feells more like a "Tyco" than an "Eagle"... I had no fun, seriously.

[JunMcKill]

Wait till DCS Hornet hits the shelves, that won't be the case any more :smilewink:

 

You're right, and wait for the F-14 in the shelves too! WOW!, both will be best sellers from day one!

 

Regards!

[SinusoidDelta]

To make myself clear...I am also not that audience and I welcome these new realism features...as long as it´s universally applied accourding to all plane specifications. And I´m looking forward to all planes having wing-flex and G-loads and stores ripping off and dislodging and jamming because of high G...and Alpha-Vortexes....XD

 

But as it stands, the Flanker is the only one and is the testbed for it.

 

What I was getting at is that a steady steam of new blood needs to be introduced not only to DCS, but also to the different airframes, and right now, only the die-hard MEN could be convinced to learn the Flanker as it literally needs "work" to fly effectively.

 

The rest will forever stick with the Eagle because it´s "easier". I heard that arguement so many times.

During Blue Flag, the amount of people joining blue side and immediately asking why there is no amraams, and then subsequently disconnecting was amazing from what I´ve experienced.

 

Yes, personally we don´t need them...but if everyone thought that way the number of simmers would drop over the years until only some die-hard seniors fly anything.

 

Because the effective range of an AIM-7M is 3 miles and the so called APG-63 radar is atrocious, restricted weapons is suicide for the eagle.

[*Rage*]

Suicide only because you've got so used to depending on the 120. Take it away and most F15 pilots flounder.

[Xenovia]

This is especially true, for me, as i fly the Mirage. OHHHH BOY DO THOSE EAGLES DROP LIKE FLIES, going up against a delta wing fighter, like the Mirage. Before they patched the turning on the Mirage i would out turn so many people, it was hilarious.

[GGTharos]

FTFY.

 

Razbam has been doing a great job on the FM.

 

This is especially true, for me, as i fly the Mirage. OHHHH BOY DO THOSE EAGLES DROP LIKE FLIES, going up against a fantasy fighter, like the Mirage. Before they patched the turning on the Mirage i would out turn so many people, it was hilarious.

[Frostie]

I'm letting Sukhoi down drastically, defensive breaks' turn into defensive broken.

It is going to take some practice getting these panic moments in order, the lack of physical G makes it really tough to gauge how much you're pulling. The S button and brake button are not even needed for this capitulation.

 

Also i've heard that what is missing in DCS is that in the real flanker there is a system that limits stick movement and warns pilot of approaching limits by vibrating the stick at 8Hz.

[DarkFire]

...Also i've heard that what is missing in DCS is that in the real flanker there is a system that limits stick movement and warns pilot of approaching limits by vibrating the stick at 8Hz.

 

Definitely. Not sure how ED could model the stick shaking for non-FFB sticks (sound possibly?) but even more useful would be the stick limiter. If the real Su-27 has one it'd be really nice for our DCS Su-27 to also have one.

[Sweep]

I'm letting Sukhoi down drastically, defensive breaks' turn into defensive broken.

It is going to take some practice getting these panic moments in order, the lack of physical G makes it really tough to gauge how much you're pulling. The S button and brake button are not even needed for this capitulation.

 

Also i've heard that what is missing in DCS is that in the real flanker there is a system that limits stick movement and warns pilot of approaching limits by vibrating the stick at 8Hz.

 

I've read similar things about the Eagle as it comes to stick vibration, though I believe its more for BFM cues and not overload...That's what the OWS whining is for!

[probad]

helps to readjust the curves to make it heavier for most of the travel

[HiJack]

Also i've heard that what is missing in DCS is that in the real flanker there is a system that limits stick movement and warns pilot of approaching limits by vibrating the stick at 8Hz.

You can limit the pitch axes and add curves to limit the stick in controller options. Maybe not a perfect workaround but should work.