Jump to content

Pilot Body Update from Aug, 18th


IronMike

Recommended Posts

vor 1 Minute schrieb Gypsy 1-1:

I don't know what's holding them up.

HB did just do a lot of work on the Viggen and pushed back the Tomcat stuff. So maybe something might happen in the next large patch.

And then there's this, from the Heatlbur roadmap:

"Pilot bodies and animations are coming to the Tomcat. We plan to expand our in cockpit animation systems to better serve side by side aircraft such as the A-6E."

Maybe they are waiting for something related to A-6 development?

In any case, there's also the flight model that will get some more tuning, missile API overhaul, (hopefully) Jester upgrades, two SP campaigns (maybe even a third one?), new afterburner effects, the F-14A early (and Iranian semi-version), RWR improvements, dynamic cockpit (FORGE), enable/disable Jester in MP, ground friction tuning, fixing the spawning issues in MP, visual damage model improvements, vapor effects, TARPS pod (non-functional)...and ECM fairings. 

They probably won't be able to do all of that at once, so priorities have to be set. IMO I'd rather have missiles to shoot that work exactly as they should (or at least come as close as legally possible), planes that don't blow up when spawning on a carrier, "smarter" A-A Jester, finalized flight model,  and new campaigns before I'd want the visual improvements...which for me includes the pilot body.

I've been playing flight sim games since 1983, mostly without a pilot body in the cockpit....I can wait a few more months. And when we finally get one, I bet it will be amazing, because even though HB might take their time (small team, largely part-time), boy do they deliver good products!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

Sucks to have two modules in EA, one of which is closing on 6 years, at the same time, doesn't it?

 

May I suggest that you go away to fly on other Sims that don't have Early Access, so that you can stop complaining here? 🙄

  • Like 4

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

Oh, there are plenty of sims and games without Early Access out there. 😉 

 

Thank god for the Ignore facility, as you seem determined to remain here.

  • Like 2

 

For work: iMac mid-2010 of 27" - Core i7 870 - 6 GB DDR3 1333 MHz - ATI HD5670 - SSD 256 GB - HDD 2 TB - macOS High Sierra

For Gaming: 34" Monitor - Ryzen 3600X - 32 GB DDR4 2400 - nVidia GTX1070ti - SSD 1.25 TB - HDD 10 TB - Win10 Pro - TM HOTAS Cougar - Oculus Rift CV1

Mobile: iPad Pro 12.9" of 256 GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

Sucks to have two modules in EA, one of which is closing on 6 years, at the same time, doesn't it? 😉 Big ambitions are great but not delivering within any reasonable tiemeframe isn't. 

Uh, yeah, only that we are in EA this long, because we like to deliver a fistful of extra content, in comparison to other modules. By industry standards we could have released the Tomcat F-14B single variant module as non EA from its very first release, same with the Viggen. Bugs occur and will always occur even after EA release, but going by that you are not considering how much more content you get with our modules for the same price as other modules. If that is what ppl do not like, we can easily change our approach, be less forward in the future, slam on a "released" label, and simply deliver the bare bones 1 module variant + 1 campaign, fully functional on release and be done with it. But that is not us, and never will be. The only thing we ask in return, is that you guys show a bit patience with us, because extra content equals extra time. And also extra honesty (as in admitting not all our promises have been fulfilled with a persisting EA label) equals extra scrutiny. Which is fine by us, if put in perspective, too.

Sure, we can easily put in a pilot body now. Or, we can take our time and make something new and better, with animations that fit the multicrew aspect of the module, etc etc... Everything needs to be put a little bit in perspective.

We know how much some of you want the pilot body, and not having done it by now, doesn't mean we do not respect these wishes. But we will not fall below our own standards because of haste. We always want to evolve the simming environment with what we do, and the pilot body is part of it. It will come. We did not forget. And we still hear you all. Thank you for your kind patience in the meantime.


Edited by IronMike
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 8

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/9/2022 at 3:51 AM, nzteddy said:

Hi Heatblur, you are a business, you are only successful by selling more licenses for your modules. While it is true that broken/missing systems are not great, they are typically missed by those who already have the module. I for one fly exclusively VR, and I cannot fly a plane without a pilot. I have tried the F-14 and I love it, but I won't buy it because it doesn't have a pilot. I wonder how many others out there are like me. I hope you are making the right priority decisions for your business.

I appreciate your honesty, thank you for the feedback.

But let me be honest in return: the reason we care about such feedback is precisely not because we are missing you as customer of our business (we are not that type of business), but because we want you to enjoy the sim in the way you prefer to enjoy it.

Honestly, I guess we do not make the "right priority decisions" as a "hard-capitalist business" (I added this twist on purpose, bare with me pls). With our skills, we could say go and create modules for civilian flight sims (much bigger market), or do a racing sim (huge market), or even do a space sim/ FPS kinda thingy (biggest market). But these are not our primary goals. Our goals are to do and survive with what we love and to give you guys, what you guys love. That is primarily combat flight sims. Which is a niche market within a niche market. I am saying this to show that this kind of argument of "priority decisions for our business" does not apply as flat as you put it, if you allow me saying it ever so carefully. Ofc we need revenue, but what we want much more than that is to create something that inspires, that pushes bounderies, that evolves (combat) flight simming. And the same applies for the pilot body. We want it to turn out great, before we feel comfortable asking you for your money (if the reason you spend it is the pilot body), especially if and because the pilot body is a pet peeve of yours. Of course it pains us that you are holding out on the module because of one specific feature, but at the same time we respect your decision - it is your perogative afterall. But in the end we hope you will be pleased with the outcome, and thus I would carefully correct myself and say: yes, we do make the right priority decisions for our business in particular. I hope that makes sense, and thank you again for your feedback. 🙂 


Edited by IronMike
  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello guys !!

 

Personally, I am not even waiting for the sales to buy the F14 but the implementation of the pilot body !!

the same as you I am in VR and without the body of the pilot it kills me the immersion 😞

 

VR has taken off on DCS (we can see the same thing in Simracing)

 

I am closely monitoring the news of the F14 for the days when the update will be made and if in not too long I will buy the module , i Hope soon 🤞🤞🤞🤞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Sure, we can easily put in a pilot body now. Or, we can take our time and make something new and better, with animations that fit the multicrew aspect of the module, etc etc... Everything needs to be put a little bit in perspective.

🤩🤩🤩🤩

you make me dream !!!

but not too long lol

Thanks ironmike to be present on the forum and to take into account our wishes! 😚


Edited by kaneda06
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, kaneda06 said:

Thanks ironmike to be present on the forum and to take into account our wishes! 😚

 

It is my pleasure, as always. 🙂

  • Thanks 1

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THIS!!! 

 

"Sure, we can easily put in a pilot body now. Or, we can take our time and make something new and better, with animations that fit the multicrew aspect of the module, etc etc... Everything needs to be put a little bit in perspective."

 

Thanks for the Work you are doing for raising the bar to high standards and bringing top notch quality to DCS - Take your time - we will wait even if its hard to wait ^^

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heatblur originally scanned my body as a model for the virtual pilot. The model was all ready to go, and then they realized that rendering my tall, fit, handsome, immaculate countenance would ruin "immersion" for all of the short, flabby, pear bodied players out there who might be triggered or distracted by such an unobtainable fighter pilot likeness.

AFAIK, the plan is to wait six months so you can all to sign up for a workout program at your local gym, lift weights, run, get fit, buy a new wardrobe, get a squared away military haircut, shave (keep the mustache), take a shower (regularly this time), and then release the pilot body so you don't feel "inadequate".

Of course you won't have time to play the sim because you'll be too busy juggling with all of the new babes that are hanging all over you...

 

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 1

Viewpoints are my own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Victory205 said:

...then they realized that rendering my tall, fit, handsome, immaculate countenance...

Where would this world be without digital editing, I wonder. 😂

 

All this talk of immersion makes me wonder where you kids were when flight sim "cockpits" were rendered as low-res 2D overlays you couldn't interact with.

  • Like 2

DCSF-14AOK3A.jpg

DCSF14AOK3B.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Swordsman422 said:

Where would this world be without digital editing, I wonder. 😂

 

All this talk of immersion makes me wonder where you kids were when flight sim "cockpits" were rendered as low-res 2D overlays you couldn't interact with.

Few remember what Chuck Yeager's Flight Simulator was like on a 286 with nothing but arrow keys, and what felt like a sizzling 2-3 frames per second. And by contrast what it felt like to boot up USNF '97 and see and hear the glory that was Jane's in their heyday.

Regarding the pilot body thing I was cursed with the creeperstache genes, hence why I need the new bodies to have a stache so I can live out my fantasy of having a crumb catcher as I ride my glorious metal steed for some sunset volleyball. Or whatever the hell the Navy does when it's in the Philippines....

  • Like 1

Heatblur Rivet Counting Squad™

 

VF-11 and VF-31 1988 [WIP]

VF-201 & VF-202 [WIP]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Victory205 said:

... would ruin "immersion" for all of the short, flabby, pear bodied players out there who might be triggered or distracted by such an unobtainable fighter pilot likeness.
 

 

You might be laughing, but that statement is not much off for me.

 

I usually fly with pilot body off in VR since a) there is always a body part in the way of an switch or something and b) I never ever, besides a short period of time during my teenage days, had a such a small and lean body. So that's definitely looks very odd to look down and see this thing that was never me.

Oh, I admit, all that hard stuff I had once in my prime, got jello-fied and subsequently was sliding a reasonable amount down, to the center of gravity of the planet we are living on,which make for a unsolvable computing error in part of my analog brain as soon as I look down on that sorry 3D representation of an body, while the same time, my local 14 day war reserve storage, prevents me from ripping off the wings of the Tomcat, because of stick travel restrictions.

Guess I opt out on the aforementioned program for flight safety reasons. A wingless Tomcat seems to much of an hassle. Hope though, the seat got an extra charge modeled, to get me out of the airframe in case of need. 

 

@Heatblur. I hope you observe the, for an old person hard to understand, modern times and make the new body fully customizable. I want to edit my body composition, including the size or even the removal of my men hood, so I can be the unicorn I always wanted to be. 

Yes, I know this statement is not political correct, but I'm old and grumpy 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

All this talk of immersion makes me wonder where you kids were when flight sim "cockpits" were rendered as low-res 2D overlays you couldn't interact with.

Kid I was on wings , aces over europe , aces over Pacific, Chuck Yeager , striker commander , f117 , f15 strike eagle , usnf 95 and others

 

But now  2022,  im on DCS with hotas and Motion dynamique platforme with VR and i want most immersion possible 😉

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add some other thoughts to the pilot body topic, I would say, that the jets we got simulated without a human inside the cockpit is pretty unrealistic. The same counts for airfields and even the cities and bases within DCS World.

Once the deckcrew was introduced for the Supercarrier, it added so much to the Supercarrier. So much realism, functionality and vividness to the module. This is something still missing in most parts of the simulation.

There are people saying: "we don´t need or want that!", without offending or pointing the finger, I believe those ones are stuck in kind of 90´s flight-sim bubble, in which it was technically not  as possible to implement, like it is nowadays. Today it is possible to add with astonishing accuracy the vividness and realism by the presence of humans in a military flight-sim and I´m trustfull that Heatblur will push the boundaries a little more by their creation of a pilot body with detail and animation.

ED stated, that with the EA release of the Apache, the pilot body ( VR and non-VR ) will become a standard in the development of modules. It´s surely the decision of each developer, what to develop first, like first weapons deployment, then navigation, then EFM or in different order, but hopefully the pilot body won´t fall off of such development order for future releases and be included into EA-releases - it does add more than meets the eye.

  • Like 2

F-14b Tomcat   /   AV-8B Harrier   /   F-16C Viper  /   KA-50 Black Shark   /   Mi-24 Hind   /   MiG-21bis   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, kaneda06 said:

Kid I was on wings , aces over europe , aces over Pacific, Chuck Yeager , striker commander , f117 , f15 strike eagle , usnf 95 and others

Nice. All classics. My first combat flight sim was 1985's Jet, where the planes were wireframe vector graphics. I was really too young to understand it then, but that's how I got bit by the bug, and it's carried me this far.

My point was that technology and technical ability has kinda spoiled all of us. And yeah, it's great that awesome developers like ED and HB are so very willing to push the envelope, but it has some unfortunate side effects. We get impatient (I said "we," so this goes for me, too. Hell, I want the pilot body added even though I'll probably turn it off) and start loading up threads with complaints about how one particular feature or other, which wasn't really possible a decade ago or more, hasn't been added yet when we were still enjoying the flightsims of yesteryear without it (and some of us still play those anyway), and we all think that the one feature that serves our particular enjoyment is the most important missing piece. Whatever it is, it's not going to changed the fact that all that really separates DCS from Spacewar is time and we aren't doing this thing for real. 

Patience is important. Victory205 might tell you to go get better at what you can do in the sim, and if that's not good enough, go outside and be in the sun for a few minutes.


Edited by Swordsman422
  • Like 2

DCSF-14AOK3A.jpg

DCSF14AOK3B.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 5 Stunden schrieb Rosebud47:

There are people saying: "we don´t need or want that!",

Unless I have missed it, no one in this thread said such a thing.  The gist, mine included, of those who you would "accuse" of being "stuck in the 90's bubble" was that an animated pilot body would be nice to have, and most welcome, but it should not be a top priority ATM, when there's still more functional stuff to fix/ polish/ finish. All in good time.

People (generally speaking, not you personally, Rosebud) really need to realize that development, especially when it's a small team that has high standards in their work, takes time. Pestering them every week about your pet features will not speed up the process - quite the contrary: by forcing them to respond, they have to take time off from working on their respective modules. Do you guys sit at home and think "if I don't ask Heatblur about XY right now, they'll forget about it! Quick, to the Batcave forum!"? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please believe me saying, that I didn´t want to offend someone on a personal level. Meanhwile the topic of a pilot body araised very often, not only in the F-14 Tomcat threads, and there are always people against it, so I made some thoughts how come, as you could bind a key to disable the pilot body, if it makes the view uncomfortable. There are also keybinds to disable the stick or even the seat in the Mi-24 if it makes the view uncomfortable. 

Developing a pilot body for the early access release doesn´t steal time for developing the module, as in my opinion, it should be of the same priority in the development as other features. 
My point in it is not about time or pressure, but to have a pilot body, especially for VR,  standardized in early access. That´s all.

I do accept your opinion that it should not be a top priority in the development, but the argumentation doesn´t convince to change mine. Also you would smile, how much I am of your opinion regarding the postings in the forum of people ( others than in this particular thread ), which demand everything right now by arguing they are paying customers.  

 

 

  • Like 1

F-14b Tomcat   /   AV-8B Harrier   /   F-16C Viper  /   KA-50 Black Shark   /   Mi-24 Hind   /   MiG-21bis   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kidding aside (you all should still get into shape for simple health reasons, start today), a pilot body wearing an SV2 vest (added four or five inches in some places, especially when carry a handgun and ammo) and gear gets in the way of a lot of switches. The F14 cockpit was roomy for a fighter (I'm 6'3", and could move my elbows outboard about two inches and touch the canopy rails), but you were still constantly having to move an arm, elbow, hand, leg etc to see switches and or CB's, so I'm not sure how that would translate to TrackIR or VR players. Good chance, like the control stick, that a lot of folks will turn it off after the novelty wears off.

The bloke who said he wouldn't buy the module due to a lack of a pilot body? Even for a child, it's beyond silly, look at what you are missing.

While I've not tried VR, there is something a little unrealistic about the cockpit view in all desktop flight sims. I'm not sure if it is due to eye position or the lack of stereoscopic vision (VR users, please chime in). Seeing the HSD around the F14 stick wan't a big deal, but it is in the sim. The canopy bow and windshield frame is nothing in real life, but since it is always in focus from a single eye reference, it is in the sim. Take note the next time you drive you car, the window pillars don't intrude like they do on a screen. Focus on this dot ⚫  on your screen. Back up a few feet, then hold your thumb up at arms length directly over the dot. Can you still see the dot? The same thing that happens to your thumb, happens to the windscreen structure. 

My view is that while you say you want immersion, you really don't, not all the way, because you don't know what that entails. You can't really move your head under max G, you can move your eyes to see maybe 20-30º, but you aren't going to change sides with the alacrity of a one G head tracking device. You aren't going to make delicate switch changes, and most of you (since you admit to being flabby pools of blubber), are going to gray out at 5G's sustained, get tunnel vision at 6, and become tired after about 180 degrees of turn and take the aircraft vertical to get rid of some of the G (we had a big talking little guy in our squadron that couldn't handle 6 G's for more than a few seconds, he'd always go vertical at the pass, easy kill).

The O2 mask isn't going to pull down even with the tip of your nose, pulling your helmet down with it, so you can't see as far in the vertical plane. All of the flight sims that I've sampled make it seem like the pilot isn't wearing a helmet at all (which would be nice in real life, if there was a way to keep an O2 mask in place or increase the pressurization). Give me a Bose A20 and Google (or better yet, Apple) Glasses for HMCS any day.

If you manage to depart, and spin, your face isn't going to be against the top of the stick, with your head next to the ACM panel, and you can get full control throw, which isn't realistic at all. You can easily recover from a flat spin using proper controls in the sim, where you couldn't in the aircraft. Don't believe the BS artists on that accord.

Oh, and get rid of that comfy gaming chair you spent $600 on. Sit on a plywood board...with nails that begin to stick up after an hour and a half. That's immersion. 😉

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Viewpoints are my own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Victory205 said:

Kidding aside (you all should still get into shape for simple health reasons, start today), a pilot body wearing an SV2 vest (added four or five inches in some places, especially when carry a handgun and ammo) and gear gets in the way of a lot of switches. The F14 cockpit was roomy for a fighter (I'm 6'3", and could move my elbows outboard about two inches and touch the canopy rails), but you were still constantly having to move an arm, elbow, hand, leg etc to see switches and or CB's, so I'm not sure how that would translate to TrackIR or VR players. Good chance, like the control stick, that a lot of folks will turn it off after the novelty wears off.

The bloke who said he wouldn't buy the module due to a lack of a pilot body? Even for a child, it's beyond silly, look at what you are missing.

While I've not tried VR, there is something a little unrealistic about the cockpit view in all desktop flight sims. I'm not sure if it is due to eye position or the lack of stereoscopic vision (VR users, please chime in). Seeing the HSD around the F14 stick wan't a big deal, but it is in the sim. The canopy bow and windshield frame is nothing in real life, but since it is always in focus from a single eye reference, it is in the sim. Take note the next time you drive you car, the window pillars don't intrude like they do on a screen. Focus on this dot ⚫  on your screen. Back up a few feet, then hold your thumb up at arms length directly over the dot. Can you still see the dot? The same thing that happens to your thumb, happens to the windscreen structure. 

My view is that while you say you want immersion, you really don't, not all the way, because you don't know what that entails. You can't really move your head under max G, you can move your eyes to see maybe 20-30º, but you aren't going to change sides with the alacrity of a one G head tracking device. You aren't going to make delicate switch changes, and most of you (since you admit to being flabby pools of blubber), are going to gray out at 5G's sustained, get tunnel vision at 6, and become tired after about 180 degrees of turn and take the aircraft vertical to get rid of some of the G (we had a big talking little guy in our squadron that couldn't handle 6 G's for more than a few seconds, he'd always go vertical at the pass, easy kill).

The O2 mask isn't going to pull down even with the tip of your nose, pulling your helmet down with it, so you can't see as far in the vertical plane. All of the flight sims that I've sampled make it seem like the pilot isn't wearing a helmet at all (which would be nice in real life, if there was a way to keep an O2 mask in place or increase the pressurization). Give me a Bose A20 and Google (or better yet, Apple) Glasses for HMCS any day.

If you manage to depart, and spin, your face isn't going to be against the top of the stick, with your head next to the ACM panel, and you can get full control throw, which isn't realistic at all. You can easily recover from a flat spin using proper controls in the sim, where you couldn't in the aircraft. Don't believe the BS artists on that accord.

Oh, and get rid of that comfy gaming chair you spent $600 on. Sit on a plywood board...with nails that begin to stick up after an hour and a half. That's immersion. 😉

 

 

@Victory205Being the nerd that I am, I have a decent amount of the aforementioned stuff hanging around the house now, and you're not kidding about the bulk the SV-2, MA-2 harness, and an LPU add. It's pretty close to what our plate carriers with mag pouches and such were like but at least you didn't have SAPI plates preventing you from properly bending over. I was also disappointed my wife's clothes didn't immediately blow off her body, but as you pointed out it was probably the lack of a moustache.

Oh, and after wearing an HGU-68 for a good hour or two I see why the fitment is important. I wore an HGU-47 that came from VT-27 (still has the LT it was fitted for in 1989 sharpied on the fitted insert) and boy, talk about pressure points. It was uncomfortable to wear for more than 15 minutes, and it's noticeably heavier than the HGU-68 or HGU-55. 

Heatblur Rivet Counting Squad™

 

VF-11 and VF-31 1988 [WIP]

VF-201 & VF-202 [WIP]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VR pretty much takes care of any obstructions the canopy frame and control stick pose in pancake mode. It's really a "new" gaming experience. Even though I run a bare minimum system, I'd rather endure the underwhelming visuals and bad performance over going back to 2D. I don't even notice that there's no pilot body, as I my focus is divided between looking at the instruments and outside, but if HB can come up with a great implementation that really acts like an (necessarily less muscular and handsome, of course 😉 )  avatar that can mimic all my core movements (leaning, hands/arms move with mine or the mouse pointer), I certainly would welcome it. 

vor 31 Minuten schrieb Victory205:

You can easily recover from a flat spin using proper controls in the sim

Well, I can't. 🙂 Been trying that "full cross control" thing Jungle mentioned in the F-14 Tomcast, well, didn't really go as planned. Instant flat spin, heading out to sea. Oh well. Back to doing racetrack patterns around Nellis. 😄 

On the plus side, I do go to the gym regularly. 🙂 


Edited by Jayhawk1971
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a myth that only thrust asymmetry due to engine stalls cause flat spins. VF201 lost an aircraft and RIO to a flat spin, as just one example, with both engines running just fine. I am not familiar with how the DFCS was flown or it's idiosyncrasies, but I doubt if I'd have made asymmetric thrust inputs at high alpha a matter of routine. It isn't necessary give the massive pitch rate available. Plenty of notes about what causes departures in NATOPS.

The current flight model recovers from spins using the NATOPS procedure. You'll find that going through the steps in order, works about the time you program in aft stick. The nose will begin to pitch, and when it pitches nose down 20-30 degrees, the airspeed will break (increase rapidly), and you can neutralize controls and recover from the dive at 17 units. It takes awhile and a bit of altitude, and in the real world, the pilot would never be able to hold full control inputs at -6.5 eyeball out G.

An easy way to set up a flat spin is to simply slow to a reasonable speed, say less than 200 knots, and input and hold full cross controls with full aft stick. Starting in a nose up deceleration helps expedite spin entry.

Don't throw up in the cockpit.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Viewpoints are my own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Victory205 said:

Oh, and get rid of that comfy gaming chair you spent $600 on. Sit on a plywood board...with nails that begin to stick up after an hour and a half. That's immersion. 😉

My most expensive mistake was trying to turn a MB Mk. 5 into a comfortable gaming seat. To parody Tom Connelly, there wasn't enough padding in all of Christendom. And it didn't help that I wasn't bringing any of my own to assist.

Being a nerd in similar fashion to Lance, I have also strapped on all 40-odd extra pounds of the gear and it already wasn't fun without the additional Gs. And this was 18 years ago when I was running 3 miles a day. Now, 35 pounds and one catastrophic knee injury later, I wonder if I'd rather eat my own uncooked foot than shimmy into all of that stuff, shoehorn myself into a tacjet cockpit, an subject myself to anything worse than an amusement park thrill ride. 

DCSF-14AOK3A.jpg

DCSF14AOK3B.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...