About Flight Model

[Rikus]

In lomac we have SFM "Standard Flight Model"

 

In FC we have SFM and new AFM "Advanced Flight Model"

 

In BS we will have a new one for future aircraft like MIG29 and SU27? or it will be the AFM of SU25?

 

If BS have a new flight model, how it calls?

 

Greetings

[EvilBivol-1]

You can read a detailed description of the Ka-50 flight model here:

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=950&scr=default&lang=en

 

"AFM" doesn't refer to a specific aircraft, but the fundamental design of the flight model. AFM means the model is dynamic and calculates the momentums and forces exerted onto individual airframe components in real time, leading to physically accurate trajectories and eliminating the need for artificial "scripting" of specific parts of the flight envelope.

 

The Ka-50 flight model will use AFM technology, although the original Su-25 AFM has been largely recoded to account for the rotor forces of the helicopter and expanded to model the various mechanical systems to a greater depth. AFM technology will be used to model all future DCS flyable aircraft.

 

In addition, AI helicopters in DCS also use the AFM, although somewhat simplifed to calculate less variables.

[amalahama]

You can read a detailed description of the Ka-50 flight model here:

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=950&scr=default&lang=en

 

"AFM" doesn't refer to a specific aircraft, but the fundamental design of the flight model. AFM means the model is dynamic and calculates the momentums and forces exerted onto individual airframe components in real time, leading to physically accurate trajectories and eliminating the need for artificial "scripting" of specific parts of the flight envelope.

 

The Ka-50 flight model will use AFM technology, although the original Su-25 model has been largely recoded to account for the rotor forces of the helicopter and expanded to model the various mechanical systems to a greater depth. AFM technology will be used to model all future DCS flyable aircraft.

 

In addition, AI helicopters in DCS also use the AFM, although somewhat simplifed to calculate less variables.

 

Then, If we fly other helicopter rather than the Ka-50, we will fly it with an AFM?? So I could fly an Apache realistically inside a Ka-50 cockpit??

 

Regards!!!

[GGTharos]

Flying an AH-64 with a Ka-50 is definitely not realistic. ;)

[Aeroscout]

"AFM" doesn't refer to a specific aircraft, but the fundamental design of the flight model. AFM means the model is dynamic and calculates the momentums and forces exerted onto individual airframe components in real time...

I assume resulting in increased CPU cycles and thus reduced performance... especially on a system like mine. :(

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong... (I hope I'm wrong... :music_whistling:)

[GGTharos]

New stuff always means more CPU getting eaten by something ...

[EvilBivol-1]

Then, If we fly other helicopter rather than the Ka-50, we will fly it with an AFM?? So I could fly an Apache realistically inside a Ka-50 cockpit??

Assuming you will be able to select AI helicopters as flyable, then yes, but I don't know if such an option will be possible.

I assume resulting in increased CPU cycles and thus reduced performance... especially on a system like mine. :(

The AFM has a very low footprint on the CPU. I don't know if you have played FC, but most people reported only a slight frame hit when flying the AFM Su-25 as compared to the SFM jets. The Ka-50 AFM in DCS may be a little more demanding, but still not significantly so.

[Rikus]

I assume resulting in increased CPU cycles and thus reduced performance... especially on a system like mine. :(

 

Please correct me if I'm wrong... (I hope I'm wrong... :music_whistling:)

 

 

I don´t care if need more cpu if the flight model is more realistic.

 

I think everybody say yes to, as more realistic better, need what it need...

 

Greetings

[VMFA-Blaze]

I'm not that concerned about haveing to install a new CPU if it's needed...

But I've read that BS shouldn't really require that much more processing power.. We'll just have to wait and see how the FPS are affected after the release.. Anyway constant upgrades is part of the flight sim hobby.. If you can't affored that then maybe you should think about getting a different hobby. :dunno:

 

 

Blaze

[Rikus]

Exactly.

 

Different hobbys, or you can keep flying Flaming Cliffs.

 

Greetings.

[JimMack]

Exactly.

 

Different hobbys, or you can keep flying Flaming Cliffs.

 

Greetings.

 

I do not know if this is of any help, but I am testing on a laptop with the following spec, and am getting 20 fps:-

Intel 3.4Ghz, 1GB, Geoforce 6800 256Mb.

 

Of course there are still many goodies to be added to the code/graphics so I will have to see what happens when we go code final.

[britgliderpilot]

I do not know if this is of any help, but I am testing on a laptop with the following spec, and am getting 20 fps:-

Intel 3.4Mhz, 1GB, Geoforce 6800 256Mb.

 

Of course there are still many goodies to be added to the code/graphics so I will have to see what happens when we go code final.

 

You might want to make that 3.4GHz.

 

If Black Shark could run on 3.4MHz, I'd really be impressed . . .

 

My personal record was the Lomac demo on a P-II 350. That took patience!

[JimMack]

You might want to make that 3.4GHz.

 

If Black Shark could run on 3.4MHz, I'd really be impressed . . .

 

My personal record was the Lomac demo on a P-II 350. That took patience!

 

Oops - quite correct! 3.4GHz!

[VMFA-Blaze]

You might want to make that 3.4GHz.

 

If Black Shark could run on 3.4MHz, I'd really be impressed . . .

 

My personal record was the Lomac demo on a P-II 350. That took patience!

 

Hey Brit do you ever sleep man??? :hehe:

 

Everytime I look your posting something, And I know that your about 12 Hrs. ahead of us here in NYC.. :lol:

 

~S~

 

Blaze

[Weta43]

Grenwich's only 5 hours ahead of NY - Where are you two at ?

Always thought there were only me & Sub17 regularly posted 12 hours ahead of GMT ..

[VMFA-Blaze]

My mistake... I think that London is actually 8 Hrs. ahead of NYC...

 

 

~S~

 

Blaze

[thereminqblank]

No only 5. Greenwich is pretty much in London :P, hence we are on Greenwich Mean Time

[Rikus]

The AFM that MIG29 or SU27 will have in a future, will be the same AFM that SU25T has in FC, or in BS the AFM is an improved of the AFM of SU25T from FC.

 

Greetings

[EvilBivol-1]

We don't know if there will be a MiG-29 or Su-27 AFM, but we can certainly hope. Compared to FC's Su-25/T, any DCS AFM aircraft will probably be more complex, mainly because DCS models greater depth and width of mechanical systems interaction. The Ka-50 model is what the standard will be and any future flyable aircraft would be similarly or more detailed.

[Infidel Castro]

Just a simple question about the flight model I hope someone can answer for me:

 

Having never been in a KA-50 in my life, if I set the realism to 100% and by some stroke of luck or miracle I manage to take off and land: will I be able to sit in a real KA-50 and do the same thing?

 

I'm aware that you'll be experience G-forces and whatnot to disorient you but still :)

[GGTharos]

^^^^

 

The answer is NO, for any and /all/ simulators. Period.

You might know how to operate the aircraft, but trying to fly it without training with an actual instructor first will probably just get you killed.

[BBQ]

I was fortunate enough to fly a simulator at a well-known airline--my brother in law is a pilot there. This was before 9/11, and I was able to watch him take a "test" in the simulator--and at the end, I got some stick time--albeit only 5 minutes. I was able to take off, and then come around for a landing, which I did successfully. My only experience flying comes from flight sims (falcon 4, Jane's F/A 18). I did bounce the landing though lol. My brother in law told me it cost like 10K a day to run the simulator!

 

Also--I asked him how much real airtime the pilots get before they have passengers on board--and the answer astonished me. Zero. None. They go right from the simulator to the real deal with passengers on board!

[Azrayen]

Also--I asked him how much real airtime the pilots get before they have passengers on board--and the answer astonished me. Zero. None. They go right from the simulator to the real deal with passengers on board!

Hu hu... Really sure of that ? :music_whistling:

I think he meant 0 on the big plane perhaps, but not 0 flight hour. :joystick:

 

And still, I'm doubtful. I don't think things goes that way in the airlines I better know (which is an european one).

 

Cheers,

Az'

 

BTW : I flew a little Robin DR-400 once, from take-off to landing (included).

Well, I was afraid - mostly for the landing - (even if, of course, an instructor was at my side) but managed to do it. No other experience than flight sims. And I do not consider I'm a superman for doing that (I'm just proud of it, for having proved something to myself).

But, and that's a big difference, I really don't think that

- I could have done that without the instructor (even if I was piloting, he advised me at the right time and with the right words during the flight)

- I could have done that in a rotorcraft, by nature muche more unstable & hard to fly than a sunday-pilot-approved plane ;)

[BBQ]

Yes--they have plenty of real flight hours of course--just not in that aircraft! And I also agree with you--that a helicopter would be a different story!

[BBQ]

BTW Az--good job on the Robin DR-400! I would have been scared shi*less