GGTharos Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 I've played it. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
warthogmadman987 Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 Hey GG, I think the primary reason that wind gusts are so high up on everybodies list is becuase that is something that they KNOW is wrong in FC. A lot of people have never fired a maverick or an aim-9, but most know the forces of the air from even just driving their cars around on a gusty day. Is that not the primary force that aircraft must compete with, and why it hasnt been extensively modelled is a mystery? See, quite frankly, I agree that everything should be modelled as closely as it can, but what will I notice the most? I doubt that I will be able to tell the effects of a weak or broken transponder, but I bet you that I and a massive porportion of the simmers here will notice the effects of the wind. I especially wish the wind gusting was made apparent because I have am about to solo for my private pilot's license, and let me tell you that here in Nebraska, there is rarely a fight where my 172 isnt getting tossed around in the soup. I enjoy the detail that BS is bringing along, and I wish that hopefully in the future will will also see something that competes with MSFS in radios, and traffic. We also need to see things such as a better pilot interface, like fatigue and stuff. It is these things that will make sims heads over heels better. Don't get me wrong though when I say that BS should have this stuff, I am sure that I will accept it willingly in whatever form it comes out, becuase we have never seem anything that will have compared to it.
The_GOZR Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 You must love F4 Tharos actually ;) Here a little quick example about your ultra light planes.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clear_air_turbulence Anyway i'm finish trying to talk about that.. I understand you and we have different priorities that about it.
GGTharos Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 Wow, you guys are still NOT getting it, are you? You are NOT flying ultralights! You are flying heavy, multi-metric ton aircraft that are -barely- affected by these things in combat! Lights are on but no one's home? :D And no, I don't really like F4. Black Shark is a good candidate for being affected by wind, but again - if it isn't strong enough to put you out of your misery, then really, what's the point? This is why it's a low priority item. Believe it or not, you'll notice that transponder going off-line when you lose your dlink signal and get blue-on-blued at worst ... It's more important to accurately simulate the battlefield environment - troops, SAMs, etc right now than it is to model the weather. Especially since the Ka-50 is NOT an 'all weather' combattant. But if you prefer having wind gusts over ground troops shelling you with their little rifles ... well. CONDOR is the flight sim for YOU! :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
warthogmadman987 Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 Wow, you guys are still NOT getting it, are you? You are NOT flying ultralights! You are flying heavy, multi-metric ton aircraft that are -barely- affected by these things in combat! Lights are on but no one's home? :D And no, I don't really like F4. Black Shark is a good candidate for being affected by wind, but again - if it isn't strong enough to put you out of your misery, then really, what's the point? This is why it's a low priority item. Believe it or not, you'll notice that transponder going off-line when you lose your dlink signal and get blue-on-blued at worst ... It's more important to accurately simulate the battlefield environment - troops, SAMs, etc right now than it is to model the weather. Especially since the Ka-50 is NOT an 'all weather' combattant. But if you prefer having wind gusts over ground troops shelling you with their little rifles ... well. CONDOR is the flight sim for YOU! :D Ok, I just want to make it apparent that I have nothing in relation to ultralights, nor CONDOR, and couldnt really care partially becuase I do not even know what it is, but GG, you are not recognizing my point. Take note, that the huge multi ton aircraft are "massively" affected by wind, but the pilots in them have so much training they make it look like there was no wind at all! Of course you remember Newton's law of every action has an equal and opposite reaction? With all that air pressing on the side of a KC-10 in a crosswind landing, the PIC must input the same, if not more rudder and bank to enter a slip compared to any other aircraft, including gliders for that matter! It is even worse in the BS, beleive me, it cannot get any worse in a helicopter. Beleive me GG when I say that my lights are on, and somebody is home, so that doesnt make condor the sim for me!:D And maybe the transponder was a bad example, how about instead modeling of the the gyroscopic heading indicator deviation compared to the magnetic compass when you could just follow the flight plan on the HUD set through the ABRIS! Again, I am not saying that this technical stuff isnt needed, but if there was some type of gusting wind set, ANY flight sim would be so much more realistic than it had been.
GGTharos Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 And I'm saying it's importance is minor compared to modeling the rest of the battlefield :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 I did. Quite simple ... what's a rare, fairly random event got to do with modeling atmosphere and more importantly, jet combat? I've not found any jet pilot testimonies blaming much of anything on clear air turbulence. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
warthogmadman987 Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 And I'm saying it's importance is minor compared to modeling the rest of the battlefield :) Ahh, and that is where we disagree. Granted there is absolutly nothing wrong with that but I think we are kinda looking at this from different stand points. I do believe though, that if one is modelled as well as it will be in BS (Battlefield), then it can make up for the other. (Gusting winds) We will be so busy with one, we cannot focus on the other!:P
GGTharos Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 It's all part of the piloting experience, certainly. The problem is that when you have to write a simulator you must spend time doing it ... so things get prioritized. Weather just ain't a priority ... at least not for the current TFC engine, from what I can tell. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
warthogmadman987 Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 I did. Quite simple ... what's a rare, fairly random event got to do with modeling atmosphere and more importantly, jet combat? I've not found any jet pilot testimonies blaming much of anything on clear air turbulence. Isnt our atmosphere random? Atleast from what we know about it scientifically, as in not much. Heck, we cannot even predict the weather right:music_whistling: By the way, I have always wondered what your name meant (GGTharos), does it stand for your real name or something? Just curious. 1
GGTharos Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 Then what's the point of modeling it? ;) 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
warthogmadman987 Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 Then what's the point of modeling it? ;) To in some form or another model our earth, which BS plays a significant role in:thumbup: BTW, we should be IM'ing, we have been posting back and forth like every minute!:megalol:
The_GOZR Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 Tharos get a bit of cash and ask someone to take you on a plane ride somewhere close to your home airport.. just for you to get more knowledge or experience... well at very minimum.. there is no point to make if you have actually no experience on that matter.
GGTharos Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 To answer your question, GGTharos isn't anywhere near my real name. It's sort of a mish mash of a greek word and my callsign. As for the atmosphere ... as for the IMing part, perhaps you're right, since her's a little OT now :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos Posted February 7, 2008 Posted February 7, 2008 I've been in plenty of aircraft. In flight. Including a fairly severe turbulence incident ... ONCE. Tharos get a bit of cash and ask someone to take you on a plane ride somewhere close to your home airport.. just for you to get more knowledge or experience... well at very minimum.. there is no point to make if you have actually no experience on that matter. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Rhen Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 In an ideal world where (insert your favorite sim here) developers have lots of cash and time on their hands, they should model the entire planet in excruciating detail. However, we don't live in an ideal world, where funds flow like water, or everyone's specific desire will see fruition in DCS. Here's neat thought... How 'bout we make sure the thing in the name of the sim is simulated? Lock On: Modern Air Combat = an air combat sim that should concentrate on specific details that make it an air combat sim. Digital Combat Simulator: Black Shark = again a combat environment, concentrating specifically on the KA-50 helicopter - so let's get those things right first, then concentrate on other things that help immersion. Microsoft Flight Simulator = Supposedly simulates the specifics of flight in a variety of aircraft. Hey, here's an idea... let's make sure there's gusty winds and clear air turbulence in this sim, because the feeling of flight is the important thing, then we make sure they've modeled hydraulic system overheats and jet blasts later. The SIMS: Whatever... :megalol: Yes, I'd like to see meteorological phenomena in a combat sim eventually, but I would have thought that the more important things are getting the feeling of flying a helicopter in a combat environment is more important, once that's done, then we can put wind perturbations into the mix. As a guy that does most of his fighting above the dirt and grime of a battlefield, I can safely say that gusty winds or turbulence has very little effect in how I fly an Eagle in combat. Now, it makes a difference if I'm doing an ASLAR or formation approach, but not much of an effect on combat ops - at least for fast movers.
CAT_101st Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Then what's the point of modeling it? ;) I feal your pain. I would much rather have trees that I can colied with. No since in having wind if the only thing to hit is the ground. My dad was in the USAF for 20 years. He took me on a ride in a F-111. (no I wasn't supose to be given one. But it was a windy day and I don't rember any turbulans that would be felt in a 172. Compairing a small privet plain to a Mil jet ro helo is just well DUM. To get the thing you guys are after would usaly ground helos /jets till ti cleard up to be safe. As GG stated it isn't something that can't truly be transfered thru a 2D screan even if it is 6dof. YOU WON'T FEEL IT (that is emersion,Feeling the wind). Ok Im dun with this subject. Other things are more important than winds aloft. Home built PC Win 10 Pro 64bit, MB ASUS Z170 WS, 6700K, EVGA 1080Ti Hybrid, 32GB DDR4 3200, Thermaltake 120x360 RAD, Custom built A-10C sim pit, TM WARTHOG HOTAS, Cougar MFD's, 3D printed UFC and Saitek rudders. HTC VIVE VR. https://digitalcombatmercenaries.enjin.com/
leafer Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 How is it that we can feel the AFM, that ED painstakingly modeled, but we can't/won't feel a gust of wind that might blow your arse to the netherworld? I was in a 737 when it flew over, I think, an air pocket that suddenly, without warning dropped the plane god knows how many feet. I can tell you most of our butts left our seats for a brief second, and almost everybody screamed their collective behind off. And a 737 is hella heavier than a Flanker, so I'm not sure what you mean when you said weather condition barely effect a fighter in combat. Oh, sure, if ED came out with a poll asking what do we want first, ground radar or real world weather condition, 99% here would say ground radar. But that doesn't mean many of us won't enjoy getting tossed around like a bunch of multi-ethnic salad. 1 ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P
warthogmadman987 Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 How is it that we can feel the AFM, that ED painstakingly modeled, but we can't/won't feel a gust of wind that might blow your arse to the netherworld? I was in a 737 when it flew over, I think, an air pocket that suddenly, without warning dropped the plane god knows how many feet. I can tell you most of our butts left our seats for a brief second, and almost everybody screamed their collective behind off. And a 737 is hella heavier than a Flanker, so I'm not sure what you mean when you said weather condition barely effect a fighter in combat. Oh, sure, if ED came out with a poll asking what do we want first, ground radar or real world weather condition, 99% here would say ground radar. But that doesn't mean many of us won't enjoy getting tossed around like a bunch of multi-ethnic salad. Here Here. My point exactly.
CAT_101st Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 thanks for making my point. you felt it. it was not displayed to you on a screan. how would you know that you are falling other than looking at your gauges? At 20,000 feet you have no refrance points to tell you you are falling. Their gose a waisted script and moders time that culd have ben better spent. Home built PC Win 10 Pro 64bit, MB ASUS Z170 WS, 6700K, EVGA 1080Ti Hybrid, 32GB DDR4 3200, Thermaltake 120x360 RAD, Custom built A-10C sim pit, TM WARTHOG HOTAS, Cougar MFD's, 3D printed UFC and Saitek rudders. HTC VIVE VR. https://digitalcombatmercenaries.enjin.com/
leafer Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 How do you 'feel' the AFM when all you got is your screen? Yes, if I hit an air pocket while my attention is at the mess my two-year-old just made on the floor then I won't know. But most people here fly with their eyes glued to the monitor, so you will feel it. Your butt won't leave your seat but your brain will do its magic and translate the sensation and you will correct for it. I just reread your post. What do you mean you won't see it on the screen? The vibration in the cockpit. Your virtual head would bounce. The horizon will shift. There are many ways for ED to realistically simulate the visual cue and the physical punishment your virtual body reacts to a sudden jolt. 1 ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P
Weta43 Posted February 8, 2008 Author Posted February 8, 2008 In response to GG I'm sorry, what does this add to jet combat again? Or heli combat for that matter, save for the nuissance of having to correct for gusts, or the great opportunity of flying in air you shouldn't. Moderate gusts of wind are what’s being discussed here – you don’t need to create then knock down straw men to carry out the discussion. What does it add ? Dealing with an effect that is relevant at the altitudes & distances from cover that attack helicopters can reasonably expect to operate under (that’s 2 of the first 3 releases for DCS) – and which are featured in every LO-BS & DCS-BS promo video so far. The primary goal of modern jet combat is to simulate the jet combat - it is to simualte how the sensors, weapons, guns, engines, etc work. Weather conditions have a relatively minimal effect on all this, and at most will force you to change your departure/landing and formation procedures (ie. not flying fingertip because you're being thrown around). I'd call that pretty darned minor. I’d say that having an effect your departure/landing and formation procedures in and of themselves would warrant it, but also - the statement simply isn’t true when the craft you’re flying is an attack helicopter, which I will add again because your repeated reference to fighting jets makes me think perhaps you’ve forgotten, will be 2 of the first 3 aircraft released in DCS Who here would like to take a half hour to fly their Ka-50 into a great attack position just to get gusted into a cliff? Oh, I'm sure some of you are raising hands. Rest assured, this level of realism will have a novelty that will wear off after the second time you run into it. Especially when you've got your wife/kids/whoever screaming at you to get off the #(*$&(#$& computer and go sleep/eat/whatever. I could re-write the sentence ( in fact most of this and your following posts) replacing gusting wind with AFM. This is a logical extension of that work, and the AFM work is let down by the lack of at least rudimentary gusts in the DCS world. The PRIMARY goal of a combat sim is to model combat, NOT meteorology. About the only useful atmospheric effect here will be wake turbulence/jetwash which can put your aircraft out of control or stall your engines. Once again, this is 1/ not true of a simulation of an attack helicopter (see your own post regarding "who wants to fly their Ka-50 into a great attack position just to get gusted into a cliff?"), and 2/ an argument against wasting CPU cycles on AFM. Perhaps F4 has got their approach to flight modelling after all ? Modeling meteo effects is thus way WAY down on the priority scale. It isn't unwelcome, there's simply more important things to model. Like functioning windscreen wipers with 4 speeds ? Which add very little to gameplay, other than the knowledge that what should be there IS there. As gusting wind should be... And frankly, what would REALLY help my immersion is not meteo effects, but a 360 deg hemisphere projector that would allow me to see all around me without staring a a little monitor. NOT wind effects. & if it were a choice between the two, I’d vote with you. But there is no connection between the two, so I fail to see why the choice is offered… So, you're flying in this turbulence, and your screen's jittering. After 15 min your eyes are starting to hurt because, you know, your brain corrects for this stuff in the real world, but it can't correct for what's happening on the screen. Is this realistic? Is it immersive? NO! Only if the effect is poorly implemented. What about when you're landing, you're really bad at it (everyone makes a crappy aproach here and there) and wind shear slams you into the runway. Or heck, takes you out on take-off. Or maybe you're landing, you've trimmed for crosswind, but on your way down there's a bunch of huge honking hangars on the side of the runway and suddenly there's no crosswind. So you have to adjust your trim again and ... WHO CARES? Then turn the gusts off - or easy flight on. But under some circumstances, gusts will add to the whole scenario – much as having night, or fog, or clouds do – though most people seem to create mission with them off (daytime), and some people like the FLIGHT part of the flight sim too (how many people have done that tour of the Caucuses – any combat in that (I haven’t :-) Seriously, it's neat, but for some of this, how long will it be before you get annoyed at it and turn it off? It's just like random equipment/missile/whatever failures. Except that random failures occur in 1% of flights, where wind gust are present for (depending on where you live) 45% - 75% of flights (to a greater or lesser degree) In the real world you need to train for and know all these emergency procedures. In the simulated world, it's a nice addition, but it really has little to do with what we want to do: Combat. The purpose of a combat sim is to model combat. Not emergencies and attrition due to meteorology. Again – equally an argument for scripted flight models and not modelling fire extinguishers That is why 'turbulences' and all that other silliness is WAY down the priority list. Oh. Did I mention that already? You did – with all the conviction of a true A2A fast jet lover who has an interest only in those features that add to their particular shere of interest in the sim. Weather just ain't a priority ... at least not for the current TFC engine, from what I can tell & we’re suggesting that priority should be raised – unless ED has genuine technical difficulties with it (like that AI can’t land or take off) in which case they should say so & be done with it No since in having wind if the only thing to hit is the ground. (from someone else) or the ridge or building that you happen to be taking cover behind. (from GG again) This is why it is absolutely imperative that you are not detected when flying a helicopter. By which I assume you mean – make use of all the cover you can – terrain, buildings – all those things that with a gusting wind, you might bump into if you’re not careful Cheers.
VMFA117_Poko Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 Both sides of this debate have right - that's for sure. But I won't change my mind. Im still up for wind gusting. Is it really so hard to make? It's not so hard like simulating radar imho, is it?
britgliderpilot Posted February 8, 2008 Posted February 8, 2008 This one seems to be degenerating a bit . . . Give GG a break - it isn't a tester's job to make development decisions. ED have decided that Combat is more important here than every little detail of Flight. You're unlikely to get that decision reversed at this stage. Just to put this into perspective, Black Shark is already far and away the most realistic helicopter simulator ever, in terms of both the aircraft and it's physics. It is not a weather simulator, and to expand it to such would take considerable time and effort. On the effects of turbulence - if a gust of wind is going to put a ten-ton, 4000hp chopper into a hill, then either you're doing something wrong or you're flying in some seriously freaky weather. Vortex ring is a much, much bigger risk. I do know a little bit about strong wind and hills . . . . and yes, it's an issue. But you need some serious weather before it starts being a major problem. Yes, it'd be great to have Condor's weather effects in DCS. But that won't happen in the near future. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
Recommended Posts