Real World F/A-18 Pilot Will Test DCS F/18 If Donations for Hurricane Victims Met

[Tiramisu]

Mover, most of us understand it, if you do not get too much into details, because of some classified stuff. :smartass:

Personally I would like to know how much more challenging it is to fly a real Hornet compared to DCS (putting aside the G-effects and the real life stress). Or whether flying the DCS-Hornet might cause negative learning, i.e. if there are situations when people might learn totally false stuff in the simulation. Again, I respect it, if you do not want to go too much into details of secret informations.

[Mover]

Mover, most of us understand, if you do not get too much into details, because of some classified stuff.

Personally I would like to know how much more challenging it is to fly a Hornet compared to DCS (putting aside the G-effects and the real life stress). Or whether flying the DCS-Hornet might cause negative learning, i.e. if there are situations when people might learn totally false stuff in the simulation. Again, I respect it, if you do not want to go too much into details of secret informations.

 

I will try to do a better job of comparing what I experienced to the real jet in part two.

[Lex Talionis]

Mover,

Where/when did you go through primary/advanced ?

[Tiramisu]

I will try to do a better job of comparing what I experienced to the real jet in part two.

 

Thanks! I am looking forward to it. ^^

[Mover]

Mover,

Where/when did you go through primary/advanced ?

 

Enid, America. 2007.

 

AF trained. Flew Vipers for four years before flying the Hornet for 6. Now back in the AF.

[Lex Talionis]

read through this thread and I feel I have to say something ....

 

 

 

... taking a pilot heavily trained in a very specific airframe, then expecting them to perform likewise in a near representation of the real thing, is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an accurate representation of ones ability in either context. It only means you have succeeded in confusing the pilot; capitalizing on there habit patterns by making them no longer viable as they would expect via micro differences .

 

 

The very reason I have not made any other vids is that I can not yet fly this game nearly as good as I can the real thing. This only means I am not good at this game and nothing more. It also means that this game is different enough to the real thing that what I have been doing for decades, have thousands of hours in, all my real world habits, are not similar enough to translate on a 1:1 ratio. That should tell you something about the validity of the sim and NOT the poor bastard failing to implement real world techniques to play it.

 

 

 

I have been doing my best to make what I have as familiar as possible, to include constructing my own controllers, screen set ups that best match various fields of view needed, etc. This entire endeavor from anyone else perspective has been an ass pain of sorts, I guess it just hasn't dawned on me yet. I tell you this so you understand the level of contorting need to effectively "break" real world habits so one can play this game.

 

 

 

We all have pretty thick skins, believe me. There is nothing, and I mean nothing, anyone here can throw at us that myself or Mover has not already experienced, In triplicate .... just please keep things in perspective.

 

 

I engage in the vast majority of discussions on discord for a multitude of reasons. If anyone has any questions you are always welcome to ask and can find me on here. https://discord.gg/eVtu42R

Edited November 23, 2018 by Lex Talionis

[hansangb]

read through this thread and I feel I have to say something ....

 

 

 

... taking a pilot heavily trained in a very specific airframe, then expecting them to perform likewise in a near representation of the real thing, is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an accurate representation of ones ability in either context. It only means you have succeeded in confusing the pilot; capitalizing on there habit patterns by making them no longer viable as they would expect via micro differences .

 

 

The very reason I have not made any other vids is that I can not yet fly this game nearly as good as I can the real thing. This only means I am not good at this game and nothing more. It also means that this game is different enough to the real thing that what I have been doing for decades, have thousands of hours in, all my real world habits, are not similar enough to translate on a 1:1 ratio. That should tell you something about the validity of the sim and NOT the poor bastard failing to implement real world techniques to play it.

 

 

 

I have been doing my best to make what I have as familiar as possible, to include constructing my own controllers, screen set ups that best match various fields of view needed, etc. This entire endeavor from anyone else perspective has been an ass pain of sorts, I guess it just hasn't dawned on me yet. I tell you this so you understand the level of contorting need to effectively "break" real world habits so one can play this game.

 

 

 

We all have pretty thick skins, believe me. There is nothing, and I mean nothing, anyone here can throw at us that myself or Mover has not already experienced, In triplicate .... just please keep things in perspective.

 

 

I engage in the vast majority of discussions on discord for a multitude of reasons. If anyone has any questions you are always welcome to ask and can find me on here. https://discord.gg/eVtu42R

 

Awesome post. I think the primary reason for the "bristling" by some is that Mover CLEARLY treated it as a game. And, news flash, it is a game. I know we like to call it "study level sim" and I enjoy the hell out of it. But in the end, we have to understand that it's an approximation of a plane. Hell, even something simple as Infantry tactics can't be applied that well in ARMA.

 

VR does kick it up a notch, but the resolution isn't as nice as the 2D yet. I'm sure it'll get there. But I will go on the record and say that DCS is years ahead of SIMNET in how it looks. But SIMNET had the physical replica of everything, again, hard to do in a consumer oriented market. Back to VR, having played DCS in VR, I could never ever go back. So much so that I would just not play DCS if VR is not an option.

 

For some of us, flying the DCS FA18 or A10C on a computer is as close as we'll get. I'm very thankful that I can have so much fun with DCS in VR.

 

Quite honestly, some of the forum members need to stop treating DCS as the real life equivalent and enjoy it.

 

As to your videos, I could watch napkin drawings of formation/tactics for HOURS! :D:thumbup:

Edited November 23, 2018 by hansangb

[StandingCow]

Awesome post. I think the primary reason for the "bristling" by some is that Mover CLEARLY treated it as a game. And, news flash, it is a game. I know we like to call it "study level sim" and I enjoy the hell out of it. But in the end, we have to understand that it's an approximation of a plane. Hell, even something simple as Infantry tactics can't be applied that well in ARMA.

 

VR does kick it up a notch, but the resolution isn't as nice as the 2D yet. I'm sure it'll get there. But I will go on the record and say that DCS is years ahead of SIMNET in how it looks. But SIMNET had the physical replica of everything, again, hard to do in a consumer oriented market. Back to VR, having played DCS in VR, I could never ever go back. So much so that I would just not play DCS if VR is not an option.

 

For some of us, flying the DCS FA18 or A10C on a computer is as close as we'll get. I'm very thankful that I can have so much fun with DCS in VR.

 

Quite honestly, some of the forum members need to stop treating DCS as the real life equivalent and enjoy it.

 

As to your videos, I could watch napkin drawings of formation/tactics for HOURS! :D:thumbup:

 

 

Agreed... I have to say this thread has been rather cringey once the "tryhards" came in and started taking things too serious and complaining that Mover wasn't taking this super serious.

 

 

 

Thanks Mover and Bananimal for making this happen. Looking forward to part 2.

[Tinkickef]

Agreed... I have to say this thread has been rather cringey once the "tryhards" came in and started taking things too serious and complaining that Mover wasn't taking this super serious.

 

 

 

Thanks Mover and Bananimal for making this happen. Looking forward to part 2.

 

To continue on a theme..

 

Indeed. Very sad. It seems a lot of people want to hear that flying the Hornet in DCS is just like the real thing and they could jump into a cockpit and blow the enemy hordes out the sky with their superior skill.

Life is not like that. We all fantasize about it, but most realise that's all it is and don't need the fantasy propping up.

 

Hell, I can't do a regulation case one recovery to save my life. If any real life pilot did it how I do it, the CAG would rip the wings off his uniform and toss them over the side. Then again I don't need to because it is just a PC game. I do what works for me....

 

Then they take a hapless fighter pilot who poked his head above the parapet and present him with a screen and a sidestick setup. A stick that isn't a Hornet stick, it is not between his knees and any corresponding buttons aren't. The paddle does not disengage autopilot / nws, the pinky button does not engage nws hi gain when held down, or disengage lock. Instead they do something different.

 

This is fine for the owner of the setup, he designed it and has got used to it. It works well for him. Now put that same owner in a real military sim cockpit and tell him to operate the jet. Confusion reigns supreme.

 

The reason for this disparity is most likely not that the owner is lazy and didn't do his research, it is likely that he owns several different aircraft modules and has standardised his control setup across the board as far as possible.

Nothing wrong with that. It's efficient and something I can never understand is why the military doesn't do the same.

 

From the steely eyed missile man's point of view however.

 

It's like being invited to appraise and climbing in a home built replica car the same make and model as your own original and finding the pedals are on the right, the steering wheel is on the left, switching on the wipers to find the boot (trunk) just opened and when topping up the washer fluid, finding you just filled your crankcase with water and alcohol. In the meantime you are unable to move your head because of a weird head restraint and you are looking out of a letterbox instead of a full windscreen and Windows.

 

Then when you laugh and climb out shaking your head, the owner takes offence and expresses his disappointment because you didn't take it seriously or say it is absolutely like the original.

 

The best introduction for Mover would have been with guys that build replica cockpits, he would have been able to give some accurate feedback as to behaviour ect. As it is now, he cannot because he is concentrating on things that should come naturally. This is frustrating, and this will colour his perception.

 

I hope, as do the vastly silent majority reading this thread that Mover and Lex have broad shoulders and don't abandon us. They are an invaluable source of advice and I personally would like to hear some tall stories...

Edited November 23, 2018 by Tinkickef

[VirusAM]

Some thoughts having watched many of mover's vids in the past in relation to this one.

 

1. MC Trev had it right before the vid was posted. It's about managing our expectations.

 

2. This community is devoted to DCS, Mover is not. This means a vast difference in perception.

 

3. Mover was on an unfamiliar control setup, this is a major immersion breaker for him.

 

4. He was looking at a screen. Maybe it would have been better if his original foot in the water was a track ride in VR where he could take control of the throttles and stick up in the air before anything else. His perception may have altered a little. You would be surprised just how much a simple thing like a seat shaker ramps up the realism in VR.

 

5. Mover is not a gamer. This is just a game to him, much as the likes of beat saber or tomb raider is to us.

 

 

Nothing in his experience added any level of immersion or reality to what he was doing. Not knocking bananimals setup, it is a good one, but not the best way of introducing a RL Hornet pilot to DCS if you expect him to be impressed and take it a little more seriously.

Even his view was in 2D without depth or scale and without one to one head tracking. Basically, he was visually still sat in front of a screen in someone's living room, not on an airbase. I recall the first time I sat in the Hog cockpit , on the ramp in VR, I could not believe how high off the ground I was or how large the ramp was.

Everything he touched and saw was completely wrong. How could he possibly be expected to take it seriously?

 

Lex, bless his cotton socks, loves DCS, but some have an affinity with gaming and easily become immersed and others cannot without more substantial visual stimuli.

 

Even I don't take flat screen DCS or other sims seriously any more and am unable to get immersed, even though my first sim was flight unlimited in win 95 days. In this respect, for me; VR is a dream realised and also a curse.

 

I thank Mover and Bananimal for taking the time to do the video. His reaction may have been disappointing to some, but cannot have been unexpected.

 

Once again I am not knocking anyone's setup or how they do things, I'm just trying to walk a step in Mover's shoes.

 

 

 

i quote you on almost every thing

[UthervL]

Lex, thanks for the videos I'm finding them very easy to follow and it has gotten me quite far on how to operate fairly quickly. I plan on using DCS during the winter when I'm not flying.

 

 

 

Mover, thanks for sharing your personal story on YouTube. I too was discouraged out of the flight program but I didn't stick with it and I knew nothing about airguard "hiring" pilots.

 

 

I was in Meridian in 93 what a dump. I hope they have improved it. Man, there was nothing to do there.

 

 

Thanks to all the pilots posting videos. They're entertaining and very helpful.

 

 

Only a few years ago we couldn't expect such great interaction and usefulness for a PC title.

[Bananimal]

Hey Lex, Thanks for the insight. Enjoyed your vids as well and still refer to them from time-to-time.

 

Back when I was painting the VFA-204 birds for the sim and watching your vids, I thought that I'd reach out to you and ask you if you have any pics of your bird. I'd like to paint it for you, as well as a few others from your squadron, as a token of thanks for you contributions to the DCS community and our country. I never got around to asking, so now I am.

Edited November 23, 2018 by Bananimal

[crab]

My next door neighbor flew the A6 and we became good friends over the years. He moved back to his home state when he retired but we still see each other on occasion. At any rate back when he was still flying he rolled by for a beverage and I was flying such as it is for me and he wanted to give it a go while we sipped our beverages. He responded much the same as you see in the video here: For him it was a bit of fun but he did not equate it with flying. He was at least positive enough to give in to my insistence that it wasn't a game, it was a simulation. His words were something like, "Yeah, I can see they're trying to do it right so I could allow as to how it's maybe a little more than just a game as you've been saying." lol

 

At any rate I think it's fair to say that this is entertainment, not the real world. I think it would also be fair to say it's not really a game per se either in that our pleasure derives from trying to experience as best we can an accurate depiction of something we will never do. To me it's not just semantics even if it is a somewhat nuanced view.

[Skwinty]

I enjoy the rotary wing more so than fixed wing. I have a very good friend of 25 years, who flew choppers for SAAF. He has never flown any of my Sims for more than 5 minutes and I understand why.

 

He will however stand behind me and pretend I was one of his pupes which entailed verbal abuse and a smack around the ear. Needless to say I learnt quickly.. :joystick: :thumbup:

[Anklebiter]

When I think of flight simulator, I think of the official training sims pilots use.

 

 

When I think of game, I think of Crimson Sky, or what have you.

 

 

DCS occupies a strange middle area where it can be approached both ways, and doesn't represent the poster child of either extreme. It does lean much more towards sim when it comes to the cockpit.

 

 

A professional sim, of course duplicates all the physical controls as well. Without that, DCS slides more towards game. As a professional pilot, I'm sure that becomes more exaggerated, as has been expressed above.

 

 

Still, most of us who use this software approach it as a sim and love to hear the opinion of subject matter experts regarding accuracy. Thanks Lex and Mover for sharing what you can.

[hansangb]

When I think of flight simulator, I think of the official training sims pilots use.

 

 

When I think of game, I think of Crimson Sky, or what have you.

 

 

DCS occupies a strange middle area where it can be approached both ways, and doesn't represent the poster child of either extreme. It does lean much more towards sim when it comes to the cockpit.

 

 

A professional sim, of course duplicates all the physical controls as well. Without that, DCS slides more towards game. As a professional pilot, I'm sure that becomes more exaggerated, as has been expressed above.

 

 

Still, most of us who use this software approach it as a sim and love to hear the opinion of subject matter experts regarding accuracy. Thanks Lex and Mover for sharing what you can.

 

 

Yup, pretty much how I feel about it. But I will add that I've been in B52 and UH1 simulators. And while there is no 6DoF movement, VR and DCS looks and feels more like the real deal than the "real" simulators. At least to the casual player. Clearly, real simulators have the physical copy of the cockpit to drill procedures that you can't do with DCS.

[StandingCow]

StandingCow, your statement comes across as a bit cringey as well. There is more than one way to interpret why people said these things.

 

 

I never suggested there wasn't more than one way to interpret anything. I just find the way some people interpreted this as cringey. Don't see how my statement was cringey, but hey... you can interpret it that way if you wish. :)

[Anklebiter]

Yup, pretty much how I feel about it. But I will add that I've been in B52 and UH1 simulators. And while there is no 6DoF movement, VR and DCS looks and feels more like the real deal than the "real" simulators. DCS.

 

 

I've heard that before. They always say military tech is ahead of civilian though. I'm wondering if the current crop of training tools is super high rez VR nirvana!

 

 

Lex, Mover, any input there? :)

[Bananimal]

Here's a link to a local news channel that ran a story on this event.

 

https://wgno.com/2018/11/23/simulated-flight-raises-real-money-for-hurricane-relief/

 

Thanks to all that donated to this great cause. Even though it wasn't perfect for some, it helped those that needed the help.

[msalama]

DCS is not the real thing, but I wonder how much of the difference is due to the tremendous difference between our puny short-throw controllers and what the real thing has. Because however you tweak yours, our virtual jet and the real one will ALWAYS respond differently! And that makes me wonder how well would the characteristics match if someone had a proper RL FFB Hornet control set with calibrated true-to-life control / response forces hooked up... ;)

 

TL;DR: Our controllers are a joke that just can't mimic the real thing.

[oldcrusty]

DCS is not the real thing, but I wonder how much of the difference is due to the tremendous difference between our puny short-throw controllers and what the real thing has. Because however you tweak yours, our virtual jet and the real one will ALWAYS respond differently! And that makes me wonder how well would the characteristics match if someone had a proper RL FFB Hornet control set with calibrated true-to-life control / response forces hooked up... ;)

 

TL;DR: Our controllers are a joke that just can't mimic the real thing.

 

You can fly the Hornet perfectly well with a good side stick controller without any extra torsion springs, heck F16nish strain gauge stick would do well too.

Just wait till the devs tweak the FCS in PA mode... (I think that's one of their upcoming tasks :))

 

Aha!... That's what some simmers wanted Mover to test:doh: and... couple of other things.

[msalama]

Yeah, and I can fly our Mi-8 pretty well with my P.O.S. el cheapo HOTAS and pedals. But the feel and response is still miles off because for one, the physical controller throws between the two differ so much (and let's not even mention things like build quality, materials used, bearings used, tolerances, lubrication etcetera). See what I'm getting at?

[oldcrusty]

Yeah, and I can fly our Mi-8 pretty well with my P.O.S. el cheapo HOTAS and pedals. But the feel and response is still miles off because for one, the physical controller throws between the two differ so much (and let's not even mention things like build quality, materials used, bearings used, tolerances, lubrication etcetera). See what I'm getting at?

Got ya:thumbup:

[msalama]

:thumbup:

[Lex Talionis]

If i may give some perspective ...

 

 

A "SIM" models the actual hardware as closely as it does a flight model.

 

 

Whats more, It is not enough that just the hardware be accurately represented (and this is the single most important point), it is that the way the pilot interacts with that hardware be as identical as interacting with the real piece of machinery your trying to represent. "Close enough" does not work. This is what makes a "Simulator"; it simulates in every respect what you intend to ultimately operate in the way you intend to operate it, while removing the consequences for error.

 

 

Personally I call this the "operator-machine interface" and it is something that is literally taught on fam-0 before students even strap in. This is why you can have FAA approved sims without any visuals at all. It is as important that a simulator model correctly the way the pilot interacts with the airframe, then just about anything else.

Edited November 24, 2018 by Lex Talionis