lesnyborsuk Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 Hello, Since there is no fly-by-wire to save us from overstressing the aircraft from high G pulls, woudn't be nice if we had more G-feedback? Now, I need to watch airspeed and G indicator all the time during the dogfight. It is pretty dificult since they are in 2 separate places. In the real aircraft pilots are used to feel the Gs and release the stick if they are pulling too hard. I think it would be great if we had some option to see if we are pulling more Gs with some graphical/sound effects. Without this it is very hard for me to keep the corner speed in turns... What do you think? I remember when sex was safe and flying was dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmy Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 The airframe shaking at high alpha isn’t enough warning? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] http://www.476vfightergroup.com/content.php High Quality Aviation Photography For Personal Enjoyment And Editorial Use. www.crosswindimages.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lesnyborsuk Posted May 9, 2019 Author Share Posted May 9, 2019 (edited) The airframe shaking at high alpha isn’t enough warning? Yes, because when you are in this situation, you have already lost your airspeed and the bandit can easily take advantage on that. I would like to see some additional feedback for 3, 4, 5, ... Gs. The sound of the wind passing canopy increasing with airspeed would be also nice, as you also get this in real. Edited May 9, 2019 by lesnyborsuk I remember when sex was safe and flying was dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
draconus Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 (edited) Buffeting, shaking and G-effects are already simulated. VR and vibrating seats are also good addition to the feeling. As a virtual pilot you will learn to feel it with other senses than IRL. After hours of flight time you will know how much you can pull the stick. You don't look at the gauges because you have to keep your eyes on the bandit. Edited May 9, 2019 by draconus Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060 Rift S T16000M HOTAS FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E CA SC NTTR, PG, Syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jazz_44 Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 When you dogfight, forget the G indicator and the airspeed indicator. Your only true friend is the AOA indexer - don't exceed 15 units AOA unless you have to. You won't need any additional G cues. Take a quick look at the AOA indexer as you dogfight, and learn where the stick is when you reach 15 to ease back a bit. That's all it takes, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
draconus Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 If it shakes you're pulling too much, if it doesn't turn where you want it you're too slow, if you see G-effects you're too fast :) Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060 Rift S T16000M HOTAS FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E CA SC NTTR, PG, Syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
probad Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 (edited) nah just learn how to pull the stick in a controlled manner its your own limb, it's your own responsibility besides if you're relying on blacking out you're probably not conducting very good bfm choreography Edited May 9, 2019 by probad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nealius Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 The shaking isn't enough warning because the intensity of the shake is the same whether you're pulling 4G or 9G. There's no gradient to judge how hard you're pulling. At least not enough of a gradient that's noticeable while fighting. The brain's ability to pick out and analyze details doesn't work too well under stress. Real pilots seem to agree the physical sensation of G is much more noticeable. I've found the only way to be really proficient at the F-14 is by flying in VR where the wider FoV helps you keep an eye on the AoA gauge and accelerometer without loosing sight of the bandit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyTX Posted May 9, 2019 Share Posted May 9, 2019 You could try a Jetseat from Andre's shop the buffet from the seat varies with AOA. You can even have a g effect on but for me the AOA effect is far more realistic and useful. Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk I7 3930 4.2GHz ( Hyperthreading Off), GTX1080, 16 GB ddr3 Hotas Warthog Saiteck Combat Pedals HTC Vive, Oculus CV1. GTX 1080 Has its uses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 G-feedback is very bad implemented. It doesn't have stick force implemented and the Gs feedback for the pilot is really bad since the breath is the same from 2.5 Gs to 10+ You can go from 1 to 10+ Gs like nothing, like if the pilot were a terminator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyTX Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 I wonder what you mean by stick force implemented . In a real plane there is no g force through the stick just your arm weighs more holding it Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk I7 3930 4.2GHz ( Hyperthreading Off), GTX1080, 16 GB ddr3 Hotas Warthog Saiteck Combat Pedals HTC Vive, Oculus CV1. GTX 1080 Has its uses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 (edited) I wonder what you mean by stick force implemented . In a real plane there is no g force through the stick just your arm weighs more holding it Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk 11.3.3 Maneuvering Stick Force.Maneuvering stick force or stick force per g of the aircraft ispredictable throughout most of the flight envelope. That is, an increase in force commands a correspondingincrease in g (approximately 4 pounds per g). 7 Gs would be 14kg of extra force on the stick Even the F4 had pressure on the stick for Gs. Also the pilots feel the Gs but in the simulator you don't get this feedback. This plane needs a dinamic axis control for the pitch. Edited May 10, 2019 by Ignition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donut Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 This plane needs a dinamic axis control for the pitch. +1!!! Brilliant! This is really a perfect solution. A pitch axis curve that is dynamic...the curve changes and dampens the pitch input as g's increase. i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyTX Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 11.3.3 Maneuvering Stick Force.Maneuvering stick force or stick force per g of the aircraft ispredictable throughout most of the flight envelope. That is, an increase in force commands a correspondingincrease in g (approximately 4 pounds per g). 7 Gs would be 14kg of extra force on the stick Even the F4 had pressure on the stick for Gs. Also the pilots feel the Gs but in the simulator you don't get this feedback. This plane needs a dinamic axis control for the pitch.Yea but in a real aircraft it doesn't work like that, because it doesn't need to, you can feel it and after a while you know how much you are pulling. The stick in the F3 did get heavier with speed to stop you snatching 10g and breaking the jet but it was never a g vs pressure relationship. To be fair tho if you want to buy a ffb stick carry on, personally I prefer the Jetseat that gives me realistic feedback that I am used to.and is way cheaper at the moment . Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk I7 3930 4.2GHz ( Hyperthreading Off), GTX1080, 16 GB ddr3 Hotas Warthog Saiteck Combat Pedals HTC Vive, Oculus CV1. GTX 1080 Has its uses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskey11 Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 The shaking isn't enough warning because the intensity of the shake is the same whether you're pulling 4G or 9G. There's no gradient to judge how hard you're pulling. At least not enough of a gradient that's noticeable while fighting. The brain's ability to pick out and analyze details doesn't work too well under stress. Real pilots seem to agree the physical sensation of G is much more noticeable. I've found the only way to be really proficient at the F-14 is by flying in VR where the wider FoV helps you keep an eye on the AoA gauge and accelerometer without loosing sight of the bandit. That's because aircraft buffet isn't a function of G but a function of Angle of Attack and when viewed against AoA, the buffet is actually VERY easy to tell whether you are in low, medium or high AoA... as others have said, a barely perceptible shake is around 15 AoA or the ideal one... beyond this you neither turn faster nor recover any quicker because you are losing the lift vector associated with the body of the aircraft as it stalls out... no lift in a corner = larger turn radius. All medium and high buffet does is decrease your airspeed. Useful in limited situations, mostly worthless if you need to keep your energy up to not fight a superior low energy dog fighter in ACM, like, the Hornet, which has a massive advantage in nose authority at low speed over you. My YT Channel (DCS World, War Thunder and World of Warships) Too Many Modules to List --Unapologetically In Love With the F-14-- Anytime Baby! -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dudikoff Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 (edited) +1!!! Brilliant! This is really a perfect solution. A pitch axis curve that is dynamic...the curve changes and dampens the pitch input as g's increase. I was thinking about the same solution the other day when I broke my airplane by pulling on it slightly at higher speed. Like having an option for some dynamic adjustment of the pitch axis (well, I guess roll as well to keep the inputs balanced) with speed so that at critically high speed, you'd need to pull the stick much more to achieve the same deflection as with a lighter pull at slower speed. We wouldn't be losing much or any pitch authority really since we're limited by G's anyway. Either that or there should be some tweaking of the G-effects regarding the airframe damage or perhaps pilot effects where there would be a blackout onset while the pilot input would be reduced to a point to delay the instant airframe destruction (unless e.g. the pilot doesn't quickly reduce the pitch input). I presume that in the real thing you would feel the pressure on the controls at high speed and thus couldn't destroy the airframe with a slight soft pull, so I find the current behavior somewhat unrealistic in practical terms. Not sure if there is some G-effect pilot implementation still missing from the module? Edited May 10, 2019 by Dudikoff i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nealius Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 That's because aircraft buffet isn't a function of G but a function of Angle of Attack and when viewed against AoA, the buffet is actually VERY easy to tell whether you are in low, medium or high AoA... as others have said, a barely perceptible shake is around 15 AoA or the ideal one... beyond this you neither turn faster nor recover any quicker because you are losing the lift vector associated with the body of the aircraft as it stalls out... no lift in a corner = larger turn radius. All medium and high buffet does is decrease your airspeed. Useful in limited situations, mostly worthless if you need to keep your energy up to not fight a superior low energy dog fighter in ACM, like, the Hornet, which has a massive advantage in nose authority at low speed over you. This hasn't been my experience. I get light buffet between 5 and 10 AoA, then the buffet increases to the exact same intensity between 15 and 30 AoA. Without looking at the gauge it's impossible to tell whether I'm at 15 or 20 or 25 or 30 AoA just from the buffet alone because it's exactly the same at those ranges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodak Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 +1!!! Brilliant! This is really a perfect solution. A pitch axis curve that is dynamic...the curve changes and dampens the pitch input as g's increase. Got it already in the Hornet, called flyby wire. Apply it to non flyby wire, and it's called training wheels. Than what happens next is everyone whines and gripes because of the rapid increase of newly dangerous formerly stick wanking wannabe ace's who've lost all ability to ever stall. I'd settle for a graphical acceleration readout within something like the flight control positioning indicators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 Yea but in a real aircraft it doesn't work like that, because it doesn't need to, you can feel it and after a while you know how much you are pulling. The stick in the F3 did get heavier with speed to stop you snatching 10g and breaking the jet but it was never a g vs pressure relationship. To be fair tho if you want to buy a ffb stick carry on, personally I prefer the Jetseat that gives me realistic feedback that I am used to.and is way cheaper at the moment . Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk Im not talking about ffb, just a dinamic Y axis for the pitch which would be a way for the pilot knowing how much Gs the plane has. At the time the the pilot feedback for Gs are not simulated and this is wrong. This plane simulates the issues of over stressing the airframe, so if you decide to do this you also need to "simulate" the features that real life pilots have to not die by pulling g. Is really stupid that the most difficult task in the DCS F-14 is not breaking it by over g. I dont break it but when I'm fighting an enemy I'm more concerned about not over g than anything else. It should be possible to break the plane of course but it should be way more difficult than atm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donut Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 Got it already in the Hornet, called flyby wire. Apply it to non flyby wire, and it's called training wheels. Than what happens next is everyone whines and gripes because of the rapid increase of newly dangerous formerly stick wanking wannabe ace's who've lost all ability to ever stall. I'd settle for a graphical acceleration readout within something like the flight control positioning indicators. What are you talking about? Training wheels? How is artificially implementing something that the real aircraft has considered cheating? The real aircraft gives feedback through forces in the stick. As it stands now, controlling the Tomcat with completely free range of motion and no increase in resistance when applying stick input at high G is unrealistic. My solution is realistic as it would replicate what would be felt in the real aircraft. Your idea of adding graphical readouts would be training wheels i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donut Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 Im not talking about ffb, just a dinamic Y axis for the pitch which would be a way for the pilot knowing how much Gs the plane has. At the time the the pilot feedback for Gs are not simulated and this is wrong. This plane simulates the issues of over stressing the airframe, so if you decide to do this you also need to "simulate" the features that real life pilots have to not die by pulling g. Is really stupid that the most difficult task in the DCS F-14 is not breaking it by over g. I dont break it but when I'm fighting an enemy I'm more concerned about not over g than anything else. It should be possible to break the plane of course but it should be way more difficult than atm. I could not have said it better myself. This is spot on and really good stuff. Hopefully Heatblur is listening and open to these suggestions. i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodak Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 What are you talking about? Training wheels? How is artificially implementing something that the real aircraft has considered cheating? The real aircraft gives feedback through forces in the stick. As it stands now, controlling the Tomcat with completely free range of motion and no increase in resistance when applying stick input at high G is unrealistic. My solution is realistic as it would replicate what would be felt in the real aircraft. Your idea of adding graphical readouts would be training wheels No, it isn't realistic. Unless your putting and changing actual pounds of force on your stick. Messing with curves on a joystick trying to replicate is in no way real. It is training wheels. Who mentioned anything about cheating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donut Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 No, it isn't realistic. Unless your putting and changing actual pounds of force on your stick. Messing with curves on a joystick trying to replicate is in no way real. It is training wheels. Who mentioned anything about cheating? You are right, cheating is the wrong word. I am just trying to say that it wouldn't be making anything easier, just trying to simulate something that cannot be replicated with a desktop joystick. You have to remember that this is a simulation. Nothing we do is "real" and everything is trying to replicate the feel of flying the Tomcat on a desktop computer with computer programming and coding. i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nodak Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 Its not going to something simple to implement, stick forces aren't just G dependent, they're also speed sensitive and responsive to units of AOA. End result will be fly by wire like training wheels if you cannot violate these conditions. Your going to need lots of data in the first place, than how are you going to set a dynamic limiter if it can't push back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donut Posted May 11, 2019 Share Posted May 11, 2019 Its not going to something simple to implement, stick forces aren't just G dependent, they're also speed sensitive and responsive to units of AOA. End result will be fly by wire like training wheels if you cannot violate these conditions. Your going to need lots of data in the first place, than how are you going to set a dynamic limiter if it can't push back? FBW prevents, limits or modifies certain control inputs. I am suggesting that stick input be dynamic dampened based on increased g force, speed, etc. It would still allow you to apply too much input and suffer the consequences, but it would require a much larger input than what is currently implemented. It probably wouldnt't be easy and I don't have the slightest idea how it could be properly implemented, but it really does sound like a great idea if it could be made to work. Flying the Tomcat right now is a game of millimeters in regards to control inputs. It is just too easy to go from controlled flight to uncontrolled with the slightest increase in stick input. In a real aircraft, the amount of stick pressure would prevent this. i5 7600K @4.8GHz | 1080 Ti | 32GB 3200MHz | SSD | DCS SETTINGS | "COCKPIT" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts