Viggen missing feature

[Northstar98]

That, and folding wings of carrier aircraft, which are also pilot controlled, as they taxi with the wings folded, and then unfold on the cat.

 

Where did folding wings come from?

 

To reiterate my point. The argument against the folding v.stab. is that it doesn't involve the pilot, hence it brings nothing to the sim. Correct? My argument, following that exact train of reasoning (doesn't involve pilot = no benefit to DCS), functioning elevators and modelled hangars for aircraft carriers also bring nothing to the sim - they have nothing to do with the pilot at all and yet we're getting those features.

 

To repeat aircraft are always started, rearmed and refuelled from the flight deck. Pilots always enter and exit their aircraft from the flight deck. As far as pilots are concerned in the DCS perspective missions and sorties always begin on the flight deck and always end on the flight deck. Aircraft are always moved from the hangar onto the elevator and onto the flight deck by the 'ground crew' of an aircraft carrier: engineers, mechanics and aircraft handlers - never pilots. The hangars are there for maintenance - not storage. Only in special cases which is more of a rarity will you see aircraft being stored in a hangar and that is more the case on smaller vessels such as assault ships - LPHs, LHAs and LHDs - neither of which we're getting from ED (functioning elevators is an ED level thing that needs to be implemented, at the moment AFAIK they're unsupported by the engine, I could be wrong on that one though, but seeing as aircraft currently slide about all over the place on ships in DCS, presumably it's something ED have to add). Only RAZBAM AFAIK are bringing out a smaller LHA, where storing aircraft in the hangar for use might be more commonplace, which even then I doubt and the above stands. Whether or not RAZBAM's LHA will be fully functional and have all features implemented (such as working elevators and modelled hangars) is for another thread.

 

If an aircraft is going to be used, in practice it is brought up to the flight deck a good while prior (~45 minutes) to the beginning of the sortie. Using this reasoning, implementing hangars an functioning lifts also brings nothing to the sim, and yet we're getting them [Which I'm super pleased about as I think the 'doesn't involve pilot = brings nothing to DCS' is a poor argument and in whatever case I'd prefer in an ideal world to bring DCS as true to life as feasibly possible - so in that sense adding the functioning elevators and hangars are a big plus for me, I'd rather have them than not have them]. The Viggen's folding v.stab. is present on the real aircraft, whilst not involving the pilots (like hangars and functioning lifts) I'd rather have it than not have it for the sake of realism. Bbviously this is low priority, there are more pressing issue with the Viggen and as I've said I'll happily live without it for the time being, even you said it was a rarity, but it could be done.

 

Well, having a super detailed and animated fin fold on the player aircraft wouldn't bring anything to the sim. Watching ground crew opening the hatches, removing the bolt and start hand cranking the hydraulic pump and then mount a support strut... :)

 

The folding v.stab. doesn't have to be super detailed or super well animated, it can be to the same level of detail as any other folding wing.

 

Having static aircraft being parked with the fin folded is another matter. That's how Viggens could look at an airbase, although it wasn't a common sight. On major airbases, the hangars were big enough to keep the fin up. On war bases the ground crew fetched the aircraft at the cave hangar, pulled them out and towed them to a place where they would perform the turn-around duties, arm the aircraft and otherwise prepare it for the mission on order.

 

Static objects in pretty much all cases I've seen on DCS use the same model for AI and player controlled aircraft. The difference in simulating AI aircraft and player aircraft is that at least for the engine the AI aircraft will use DCS stock effects and sounds and use simple flight modelling. Reusing the same model you're already using is less demanding than any of them. (In DCS the Viggen's static and AI models are exactly the same as the player controlled models)

 

From a developer standpoint, I would imagine that making a lower detailed static 3D model is a lot less demanding than adding it to the full detail player aircraft.

 

So, yeah, I think Heatblur should att static aircraft with folded fins. But having them spend time making this for the player aircraft would be a waste of resources, really.

But considering their attention to detail, it wouldn't come as a surprise if they implemented it..! :)

 

Reusing the same model you're already using is less demanding than either of them and in DCS the Viggen's static and AI models are exactly the same as the player controlled models. Minus the cockpit obviously. For some reason I doubt that Heatblur will add a different static model to facilitate the folding v.stab. though I swear I heard that they are adding an AI JA-37

 

Heatblur is making carrier deck crew for their F-14 module. Will be really interesting to see how this will look and function! :)

 

I too am interested in Heatblur's Forrestal class carrier, I also hope that it has everything possible implemented to bring it as close to life as feasibly possible, including hangar and functioning lifts. It will be interesting to see how they get along with their animated ground crew and it will certainly be interesting to see them in DCS :)

Edited July 27, 2017 by Northstar98

[Goblin]

Where did folding wings come from?

 

Your first post ;)

 

However, I read somewhere that the Viggen's vertical stabiliser could be folded (similar to folding wings on carrier-borne aircraft allowing it to fit into smaller hangars.

 

That, and when you countered with wheel chocks, led me to believe that you thought the fin could be folded from the cockpit, or that this was something the pilot ordered the ground crew to do. Both chocks and wingfolds are. Viggen fin fold is not.

 

To reiterate my point. The argument against the folding v.stab. is that it doesn't involve the pilot, hence it brings nothing to the sim. Correct? My argument, following that exact train of reasoning (doesn't involve pilot = no benefit to DCS), functioning elevators and modelled hangars for aircraft carriers also bring nothing to the sim - they have nothing to do with the pilot at all and yet we're getting those features.

 

What do you want to do with the fin fold feature then? Do you want a key command that raises and lowers the fin? A comm command that instructs the ground crew to do it?

Both would be unrealistic. Maybe if they add player controlled ground crews in Combined Arms. Hey! That's an idea! ;)

 

You keep bringing elevators and hangars into the discussion. This is something you would see on a carrier. That's what they bring to the sim. I doubt the player will have control of the elevator.

So following this train of thought, it makes sense to see a parked Viggen with its fin folded. That's all I'm saying.

[Northstar98]

Your first post ;)

 

I suppose so but this is what I said:

 

...I read somewhere that the Viggen's vertical stabiliser could be folded (similar to folding wings on carrier-borne aircraft allowing it to fit into smaller hangars)...

 

In no way was I implying that both folding wings and the folding v.stab. are pilot commanded, I was making a comparison to the similarity between the folding v.stab and folding wings, which on the face of it, they are (folding something to save space). I'm not saying they are exactly the same thing, just a similar sort-of thing. Just like the DMT on RAZBAM's harrier are kind-of like the Litening TGP, they're not the same thing at all, just a quasi-similar sort of thing.

 

I didn't counter with wheel chocks because I thought the Viggen's fin could be folded in-cockpit - I did so because I thought about it 'willy-nilly' as something not involving the pilot, when they do - that's what you get when you don't think for a minute before pressing reply. It's not really an adequate counter at all. A failure on my part there.

 

What do you want to do with the fin fold feature then? Do you want a key command that raises and lowers the fin? A comm command that instructs the ground crew to do it?

Both would be unrealistic.

 

How would you go about operating the aircraft elevators? Key command? Unrealistic. Ground crew option? Unrealistic. The Viggen's v.stab. and the functioning elevators are exactly the same in this respect. How you would go about doing it on an aircraft carrier is to have a playable position commanding it, whatever this might be (I need to think who's the person in charge of this, bear with me). How you would do this for the Viggen is as per your suggestion (which actually I really like that idea of CA style ground crew!) Both would give players in DCS the potential to do everything possible - that is exactly what I want in DCS! :) Obviously where possible of course.

 

You keep bringing elevators and hangars into the discussion. This is something you would see on a carrier. That's what they bring to the sim.

Yes I do keep bringing them up. Because what they bring to the sim is the same as the Viggen's folding v.stab. using the argument that no pilot involvement = no benefit to DCS. The exact same basic argument I was faced when I proposed it.

 

Just because they are seen on aircraft carriers doesn't mean they bring anything to the sim. Viggen's folding v.stab is what you see for a parked Viggen. Hangars on board ship are where you see aircraft being fixed or maintained. There aren't many cases and even then they're rare where you'll see aircraft in hangars for any other reason. Elevators are where you see aircraft either going to be fixed (after pilot has left it) or where you'll see aircraft returning to operation (a good while before the pilot stands anywhere near it). I know this from my own experience aboard HMS Ocean as well as from family members, (my dad has served on HMS Ocean and my uncle was an aircraft handler on HMS Illustrious).

 

Fact is they bring more realism to the simulator, the Viggen really did have a folding v.stab. so it's more realistic for it to be at least implemented. How you go about controlling it isn't the problem I'm dealing with. Aircraft carriers have functioning lifts and hangars so it's more realistic for them to be implemented (which I'm very pleased about that they are/will be). Again how you go about controlling them isn't the problem, it's them being implemented and possible in the first place. We can worry about how to control them properly when they are in the sim :) In this sense they are both exactly the same. That's all I'm trying to say as a counter.

 

As for CA ground crew, I like that idea! :) Personally my ideal mission is DCS is right from the start of a conflict to the end of a conflict including logistical elements. That way not every player has to be a pilot, there could be some in charge of and controlling 'support' groups such as ground crew etc. :)

Edited July 27, 2017 by Northstar98

[drPhibes]

The truth is, the Viggen's folding v.stab. was one of the integral components allowing it to be deployed from improvised locations and bases that had hangars with low ceilings right?

 

Yes and no. You're right about the low hangar ceiling at certain bases (or at least the hangar door at Säve), but for improvised- or temporary bases like the road bases, the folding fin is not an essential (or even useful) feature. For rapid deployment from a road base you need the aircraft to be ready to fly. Which it isn't when several maintenance folks are needed for erecting the fin.

 

A folding fin on the DCS Viggen adds as much to the gameplay as an animated engine change or an animated conscript cleaning dead bugs off the canopy.

 

[Northstar98]

Yes and no. You're right about the low hangar ceiling at certain bases (or at least the hangar door at Säve), but for improvised- or temporary bases like the road bases, the folding fin is not an essential (or even useful) feature. For rapid deployment from a road base you need the aircraft to be ready to fly. Which it isn't when several maintenance folks are needed for erecting the fin.

 

Fair enough, minor editing in progress

 

A folding fin on the DCS Viggen adds as much to the gameplay as an animated engine change or an animated conscript cleaning dead bugs off the canopy.

 

Or an animated mechanic, engineer or aircraft handler moving aircraft to and from the hangar using an aircraft lift? Because, we're getting those minus the animated mechanic, engineer or aircraft handler (which in fact Heatblur are doing).

 

To reiterate and please god be the last time I do this, aircraft are always started from the flight deck, always rearmed from it, always refuelled from it. Pilots always enter their aircraft from the flight deck and they always exit their aircraft from the flight deck. For the purposes of expedited deployment time (which you also brought up) aircraft are stored on the flight deck not the hangar. Because if they're going to be used they're needed as close as ready-to-fly as possible, that's why they're stored on the flight deck and not below decks in a hangar. If an aircraft is to be used it will have to be moved from where it is in the hangar, onto the elevator and onto the flight deck, which is usually done ~45 minutes before the first flying serial (the ship is brought to flying stations 45 minutes before the first flying serial, during which time the ship is prepping to operate aircraft - which will involve bringing them up to the flight deck if required), crew board the aircraft ~15 minutes prior to launch - at least that's how it's done on HMS Ocean.

 

As far as we're concerned in DCS aircraft always start sorties and missions from the flight deck and they always end sorties and missions from it. What's the first thing you do in DCS when starting cold from parking? Get rearmed if not already and start it up - both of which always happen on a flight deck not a hangar. You don't wait 30 minutes before you can enter your aircraft. Using this argument (which only holds water if the only thing you ever care about is strictly pilot experience) hangars and functioning lifts also add nothing to DCS but yet...

 

If all we ever care about is strict pilot experience then hangars and aircraft elevators add the same thing to gameplay as the Viggen's folding v.stab. i.e not much.

 

Personally I'm super glad hangars and elevators are being added, for me it's more an incentive to buy the new carrier modules, I probably wouldn't be interested in buying them if they weren't as realistic as feasibly possible - which involves having the hangars and functioning elevators. Generally speaking, they improve realism, which I love - which is also the reason why I suggested this. Nothing more, nothing less. My argument is if the real thing had it then ideally it should be implemented at some point if/where feasible. That's all I'm saying, I'm not saying it's high priority, or that it should take high priority, just it's more realistic with the folding v.stab. to 'be there' in any sense, than not to be there. Just like it's more realistic to have functioning elevators and modelled hangars than not to have them. On top of that it means in DCS we have the potential to do everything, which is how it should be, because I try to think DCS as being a full flight simulator, rather than merely an improved Strike Fighters 2

Edited July 27, 2017 by Northstar98

[Goblin]

Fact is they bring more realism to the simulator, the Viggen really did have a folding v.stab. so it's more realistic for it to be at least implemented. How you go about controlling it isn't the problem I'm dealing with. Aircraft carriers have functioning lifts and hangars so it's more realistic for them to be implemented (which I'm very pleased about that they are/will be).

 

I think, that if you take a step back and re-read my posts, you will see that I'm agreeing with you.

Your references to chocks and wing folds led me to believe that you wanted a player controlled feature, which I explained it wasn't.

 

I understand that's not what you meant. I have been for a while ;)

 

And, as I have written numerous times now, I agree that you should be able to see Viggens with folded fins, just like you would see elevators on aircraft carriers, and be able too see into the hangar deck, should you be hovering about.

 

As for CA ground crew, I like that idea! :)

 

The more I think of it, so do I!

Could be that feature would be hard to sell, but what do I know about marketing ;)

[Northstar98]

I think, that if you take a step back and re-read my posts, you will see that I'm agreeing with you.

Your references to chocks and wing folds led me to believe that you wanted a player controlled feature, which I explained it wasn't.

 

I understand that's not what you meant. I have been for a while ;)

 

And, as I have written numerous times now, I agree that you should be able to see Viggens with folded fins, just like you would see elevators on aircraft carriers, and be able too see into the hangar deck, should you be hovering about.

 

Well at least that's settled then :thumbup: Like I've said I'd rather have it there for the sake of realism than not have it.

 

The more I think of it, so do I!

Could be that feature would be hard to sell, but what do I know about marketing ;)

 

If it was reasonably priced I'd go for it, I think they're sorta trying it out with the new carriers (I'll try and find the relevant posts etc) I'm not sure, but personally I'd go for it. My ideal DCS and this is almost lunacy, is where I can do everything related to combat in anyway, be that flying supplies in, constructing FOBs (I thought of having a CA type thing that gives you the ability to 'unpack' slingloaded cargos etc then have like combat engineering vehicles to move stuff around so that you actually have the potential to construct stuff not just have them there already), to actually flying combat missions etc I'm not saying every campaign should be like that - doing absolutely everything is no way for everybody, but that is what I dream to have the potential to do. Then again I'm a bit too dreamy I guess.

Edited July 27, 2017 by Northstar98

[Goblin]

My ideal DCS and this is almost lunacy, is where I can do everything related to combat in anyway, be that flying supplies in, constructing FOBs

 

A cross between DCS, ARMA3 and GTA5! ;)

[Northstar98]

A cross between DCS, ARMA3 and GTA5! ;)

 

Marry that with outerra features and yeah, damn near perfect! It just makes me sad when we step back to reality and it seems those are dreams too far... I cry everytime. Still better to dream than despair eh? :thumbup:

Edited July 27, 2017 by Northstar98

[JanTelefon]

No it was not something unique to the JA 37.

 

Especially if you look at the Photo on page one of the Viggen with the folded Fin you can see that its not a JA 37.

 

Its a SH/AJSH 37 (Which is based on the AJ with only minor differances when it comes to radar and the ability to carry Camera pods as well as some cockpit changes etc but overall airframe should be more or less identical to my knowledge)

 

Thank you. I stand corrected. :)

[Cobra847]

We'll get to it eventually. There are higher priorities currently (some secret big ones) and some known ones- like bugs and the RAT, etc.

[Northstar98]

We'll get to it eventually. There are higher priorities currently (some secret big ones) and some known ones- like bugs and the RAT, etc.

 

Excellent! Thank you so much Cobra! :thumbup:

 

Big thumbs up to you guys! I really appreciate it.

 

Obviously there are things more important that are in need of addressing I understand that perfectly. But thank you so much for taking this into consideration, I'm really grateful :D

[jeffdude]

..(some secret big ones)..

 

Hmm what have we here Mr Cobra/N.D.?!

 

I'm always excited to see what is on the horizon at Heatblur!

[amalahama]

We'll get to it eventually. There are higher priorities currently (some secret big ones) and some known ones- like bugs and the RAT, etc.

 

I hope one of the "secret big ones" is a finished manual.

 

Regards!

[Agremont]

We'll get to it eventually. There are higher priorities currently (some secret big ones) and some known ones- like bugs and the RAT, etc.

 

Relating to the Viggen or what?

[Winterz]

Theater for the Viggen!

[azm]

Keyboard commands for left/right wheel brakes are missing.

Not sure where to write so asking here - does original plane have a switch that turns nose wheel steering on/off?

Thanks!

[renhanxue]

The only way to turn nose wheel steering off is by losing hydraulic pressure in system 2. Would not recommend.

[azm]

Training missions for Rb 75 and gun pods.

[YoYo]

+1 for folding fin, as we its possible now to have animated parts like this in DCS. On the Kolo map, where there will be low some of hangars, this is quite necessary.

[TOViper]

On 8/2/2017 at 4:55 PM, amalahama said:

I hope one of the "secret big ones" is a finished manual.
Regards!

No, this is not one of the "secret big ones", for sure!

Look into your DCS / MODS / AIRCRAFT / AJS37 / DOC folder, there is a "finished manual" called "DCS_AJS37_Flight_Manual_EN_RC2.1.pdf", which might be if your interest then ...

[YoYo]

Btw. This is interesting video with AJS37, not only about the folded fin but also it looks like it had some kind of optical / laser pod on the right interior pylon. Any idea what it was?

Edited May 27, 2024 by YoYo

[MYSE1234]

11 minutes ago, YoYo said:

Btw. This is interesting video with AJS37, not only about the folded fin but also it looks like it had some kind of optical / laser pod on the right interior pylon. Any idea what it was?

 

It's the "Avståndskamera", carried by SH and SF Viggens and their modern '90s versions AJSH & AJSH. Basically a camera pod use for taking photos at large distances.
The fact that the Viggen is carrying the pod, and the fact that it's not a SF, says that the Viggen in the video is a SH or a AJSH version. Not sure what differences the AJ and SH had externally (if any), internally there are a few that are quite obvious.
But anyway, it's a camera pod.