Trying other planes apart from Flanker

[B_Tank88]

The Flanker is the first jet that I tried in DCS and after years of flying it, even though my A2A skill sucks, I can comfortably say I am very comfortable flying it and I understand how to operate it very well.

 

I didn't try anything else until recently, where I tried the M2000C and then gave the Tomcat a go during it's trial. I just didn't gel properly with any of them. I really, really miss the radar/HUD integration and the position of the HDD radar display that we have in the Flanker. I can fully create a picture in my head without looking down and this adds to much more easte to creating a picture, for me.

 

The position of the M2000C's radar display requires me to look down and I just really struggled to get used to this. There are also simple things, like using degree values intead of a bearing arrow to determine target vector in the M2000C that just seems to cost more mental concentration to create a picture. These things add up to make a big disadvantage for me, and I just feel right at home again when I fly the Flanker.

 

The Tomcat with its extremely basic HUD is a real turn off for me. Simple things like not having airspeed and bearings in the HUD, again I really struggle with.

 

Does everyone else feel this way or is it just me? Am I too reliant on these Flanker ergonomics or am I missing something in the M2000C and Tomcat?

Edited January 20, 2021 by B_Tank88

[BlackPixxel]

I agree.

 

While the Su-27 provides less information than other aircraft, the way that the information is presented is very intuitive.

 

For example the radar elevation in the RWS mode. You get a visual representation of the radar angle on a +/- 60° scale. In the F-15 there is no such thing, it just gives you a number of the altitude range covered, but nothing visual.

Edited January 20, 2021 by BlackPixxel

[Ironhand]

Same with me. Been flying ED’s Su-27 since the late-90’s. While I enjoy flying other airframes, I find using them as a weapons platform more difficult. That includes the F-15C.

[draconus]

Nothing unusal - they are all different aircraft with different design philosophy behind. Don't forget the Tomcat is 2-crew so it depends on your RIO (and in case of Jester how skilled in using him you are). All that said I like some of the mentioned solutions for Russian birds but also appreciate the Tomcat's uncluttered HUD.

[GGTharos]

On 1/20/2021 at 6:54 AM, B_Tank88 said:

Does everyone else feel this way or is it just me? Am I too reliant on these Flanker ergonomics or am I missing something in the M2000C and Tomcat?

 

You're probably missing contact flying, like most flight simmers.  It's not that you've become reliant on how the flanker does things exactly - that's part of it - you've become very reliant on the HuD.

[Cmptohocah]

I've been flying Soviet jets since day one. I decided one time to try out F-15C. Man, I scored a kill but it was with AIM-9 on the deck. TWS, AIM-120, all this proved useless in my hands, I just could not shake off the tactics from the Fulcrum/Flanker. The thing that confuses me the most are radar range and the attitude indicator. I find RWR much more useful on the NATO airframes, 'cause it doesn't really tell you much about the threat's range, so I tend to be much less complacent compared to say SPO-15. My second flight in the Eagle, I got shot down by an Su-25T

Edited January 21, 2021 by Cmptohocah

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

Give the F/A-18 a spin, has what you like from the Flanker and maybe more.

[DarkFire]

Probably comes down to familiarity. After so many hours in any given aircraft you instinctively know how it's going to behave in any given situation, how to get the best from the avionics etc. That point definitely comes in the Flanker when you don't bother with the landing HUD mode because you can visualise an approach (given VFR conditions of course) or when you estimate ranges in your head based on SPo-15 signal strength & likely emitter types.

 

Going from that level of understanding and... comfort of use, to an unfamiliar airframe is to be moved outside of your comfort zone.

 

I tried taking the F-15C for a spin a few times. Just couldn't get used to it. Objectively it's an amazingly capable machine but I just can't really get it to work for me, probably because it's so unfamiliar.

 

I'm beginning to think that the only thing that's going to prize me out of my Flanker cockpit will be the Typhoon when it eventually arrives. Maybe.

[N22YF]

On 1/20/2021 at 3:54 AM, B_Tank88 said:

I didn't try anything else until recently, where I tried the M2000C and then gave the Tomcat a go during it's trial. I just didn't gel properly with any of them.

 

I would suggest trying the F-15C, which has some pretty stark advantages over the Su-27:

• TWS mode, which displays the heading and altitude of all detected aircraft (in addition to their positions)
• AMRAAMs, which are fire and forget and can be launched at multiple targets simultaneously
• The radar display (which is high up in the instrument panel like the Su-27's, and not low like the Mirage's) will indicate the altitude range your radar is sweeping at a given range, which makes it much easier to tell what altitudes you will and won't be able to detect aircraft at with your current antenna elevation
• If you're close enough, your radar will identify what type of aircraft you've locked onto, so you can tell, for example, which bogey is a harmless Su-25 and which is a deadly Su-27
• When you fire a missile, you get timers until it goes active and until it hits (or doesn't), so you don't have to guess how long you need to keep supporting your missile with a radar lock
• The RWR shows you the radar types being detected, so you can tell what's friendly and what isn't, and also exactly what sorts of radars are where (which can take some guesswork with the SPO-15 in cluttered environments, when you have many secondary threads of different types)
• A velocity vector on the HUD

Not that the Su-27 doesn't have its own stark advantages over the F-15C (some notable examples being datalink, the navigation map display, a full autopilot, and the helmet-mounted sight), but I still think a case can be made for the F-15C as an enjoyable A2A alternative to the Su-27.

[Fri13]

On 1/20/2021 at 1:54 PM, B_Tank88 said:

The Flanker is the first jet that I tried in DCS and after years of flying it, even though my A2A skill sucks, I can comfortably say I am very comfortable flying it and I understand how to operate it very well.

 

I didn't try anything else until recently, where I tried the M2000C and then gave the Tomcat a go during it's trial. I just didn't gel properly with any of them. I really, really miss the radar/HUD integration and the position of the HDD radar display that we have in the Flanker. I can fully create a picture in my head without looking down and this adds to much more easte to creating a picture, for me.

 

It is one of those design differences that make it interesting those different aircraft. Like thinking the F-16 how many hype its great visibility and focus to sensors, it is in the dogfight when that visibility comes advantage and otherwise you are spending time head down looking tiny displays just above your knees and trying to make out what there really is.

While even in Su-27S you get overall picture constantly on the HDD just next to HUD with all information over datalink with flight and SAM systems on ground and GCI etc. And the radar screen in HUD makes it easy to get the big picture where your sensor is looking.

 

There are always some of those odd things that I still do not understand, like why the SPO-15 is buried so deep inside the cockpit, where west places it as much as possible next to the HUD? Then it is odd that when it comes to HUD information like in Harrier, you get the RWR data on there.

But I do have a hypothesis for it now, the SPO-15 is meant to be a back-up instrument and primary RWR is displayed on the HDD, as that is the function in the more modern Flankers that got even more displays.

 

This as lot of things is not modeled in the FC3 aircraft.

 

On 1/20/2021 at 1:54 PM, B_Tank88 said:

The position of the M2000C's radar display requires me to look down and I just really struggled to get used to this. There are also simple things, like using degree values intead of a bearing arrow to determine target vector in the M2000C that just seems to cost more mental concentration to create a picture. These things add up to make a big disadvantage for me, and I just feel right at home again when I fly the Flanker.

 

The Soviet design is interesting. At first it might/can cause trouble to understand why something works some way, until it just "clicks". And when it does, it becomes obvious how the systems were designed to be easy to use and understand in a high stress environments where pilot is required to do critical decisions in limited time window.

 

I feel sad that we do not have the proper Su-27S simulation as we would need to use left hand more to switch between targeting modes and systems, as well have far more advanced capabilities on right side for targeting and engagements. Even the stick "BVR missiles - WVR missiles" switch doesn't work properly that would be so much nicer as the weapon systems would be even easier.

 

If we even would have the Su-27 datalink working in the multiplayer, it would be a huge improvement, same way for the targeting systems lacking makes it just not so capable as should.

 

On 1/20/2021 at 1:54 PM, B_Tank88 said:

The Tomcat with its extremely basic HUD is a real turn off for me. Simple things like not having airspeed and bearings in the HUD, again I really struggle with.

 

Well, the pilots did say that "your hands are all over the cockpit" to fly it when they compare it to F/A-18C.

Year back I liked to fly a lot with Flanker against Tomcat for just training dog fighting and it was so easy to control the fight with Flanker. The feeling is like you are the cat that is playing with the mouse and in F-14 it is like if you don't have the RIO with you, you are half blind.

Funnily though, I love to go against MiG-23's with the F-14. There is something in that pair. Maybe as they are both so limited by front visibility and both have sweep wings etc.

 

On 1/20/2021 at 1:54 PM, B_Tank88 said:

Does everyone else feel this way or is it just me? Am I too reliant on these Flanker ergonomics or am I missing something in the M2000C and Tomcat?

 

IMHO the F-14 requires you to have a human RIO. It is like 3-4x better that way than flying with Jester.

The M2000C is.... It is something unique, not bad but requires you to take the French way of thinking. There are many things I love in that, but I have not flown it after it got the "Ada update". I might say that I prefer M2000C over what Hornet or Viper are, it is just so unique.

And this is why I am waiting a lot (for my surprise) the F-1 fighters from Aerges (Aviodev).

 

 

 

[WinterH]

On 1/20/2021 at 2:54 PM, B_Tank88 said:

I really, really miss the radar/HUD integration and the position of the HDD radar display

Well if you get fixated on these you really can't enjoy anything else. Radar on HUD is almost exclusively Russian. Displays being up high is somewhat more common, but it tends to be a feature on older designs.

 

MiG-29 should feel familiar, same features as Su-27 but a smaller airframe. Has a considerably worse radar though. J-11A is basically Su-27 but with R-77s. Upcoming MiG-23MLA will also have the radar displayed on the HUD, but will otherwise be more old-school. F-15C also has radar display mounted up high. Hornet and JF-17 also feature displays that are relatively easy to see without going too much head down, and their HUDs are informative. Hornet also features a good helmet mounted display.

[Hodo]

On 1/20/2021 at 6:54 AM, B_Tank88 said:

The Flanker is the first jet that I tried in DCS and after years of flying it, even though my A2A skill sucks, I can comfortably say I am very comfortable flying it and I understand how to operate it very well.

 

I didn't try anything else until recently, where I tried the M2000C and then gave the Tomcat a go during it's trial. I just didn't gel properly with any of them. I really, really miss the radar/HUD integration and the position of the HDD radar display that we have in the Flanker. I can fully create a picture in my head without looking down and this adds to much more easte to creating a picture, for me.

 

The position of the M2000C's radar display requires me to look down and I just really struggled to get used to this. There are also simple things, like using degree values intead of a bearing arrow to determine target vector in the M2000C that just seems to cost more mental concentration to create a picture. These things add up to make a big disadvantage for me, and I just feel right at home again when I fly the Flanker.

 

The Tomcat with its extremely basic HUD is a real turn off for me. Simple things like not having airspeed and bearings in the HUD, again I really struggle with.

 

Does everyone else feel this way or is it just me? Am I too reliant on these Flanker ergonomics or am I missing something in the M2000C and Tomcat?

 

You are missing a big thing with the Mirage.  It has a helmet mounted display for the radar.  You can display the radar on your visor top right.  No need to look down any more.  

 

I have had my Mirage the longest and is by far my favorite full fidelity aircraft.  But I also spend a lot of time in the JF, AV8B Harrier and the Su-27/33/11.  I can say the strength of the Su-27 is it's long range engagement capabilities and pretty large missile load.     

 

The Mirage is very much like the MiG-29.  It is an interceptor with very limited air to ground capacity.   All of the systems on the Mirage are very easy to use and the cockpit is well laid out.    

[Fri13]

4 hours ago, Hodo said:

You are missing a big thing with the Mirage.  It has a helmet mounted display for the radar.  You can display the radar on your visor top right.  No need to look down any more.  

 

Has it received a such feature?

 

 

[GGTharos]

No, it's just the radar displayport ... it's no helmet mounted anything.

[Hodo]

7 minutes ago, Fri13 said:

 

Has it received a such feature?

 

 

It is basically a repeater of the radar screen on your visor for your helmet.  Also you only use the radar for BVR after that switch to dogfight mode and use the mark 1 I-ball.

[Fri13]

8 hours ago, GGTharos said:

No, it's just the radar displayport ... it's no helmet mounted anything.

So it is a assisting feature (a cheat)?

[GGTharos]

Yep, it's there to allow you to display the VTB on a separate monitor.

[draconus]

9 hours ago, Hodo said:

It is basically a repeater of the radar screen on your visor for your helmet.  Also you only use the radar for BVR after that switch to dogfight mode and use the mark 1 I-ball.

This?

 

You can do that with every module that has some cockpit display screen. How does it make a special M2000C feature? How is it visor/helmet thing?

Edited February 3, 2021 by draconus

[Hodo]

9 hours ago, draconus said:

This?

 

You can do that with every module that has some cockpit display screen. How does it make a special M2000C feature? How is it visor/helmet thing?

 

No when you are in first person.  I have it mapped to the "I" key to bring up the HMD radar.   I can't see it at all in third person.  

 

I will look it up tonight in my key mapping.  If I could take a screenshot I would but since my upgrade I have been having an issue taking any.

 

One better here is a YouTube video of it.

https://youtu.be/xHnRi1RVYCM

Edited February 3, 2021 by Hodo

[GGTharos]

9 hours ago, draconus said:

You can do that with every module that has some cockpit display screen. How does it make a special M2000C feature? How is it visor/helmet thing?

 

It isn't, RAZ just made it possible to display on the same screen, so it might give someone the illusion that it's a helmet thing ... but the M2KC has no such feature at all.  It's a DCSism.

[Hodo]

44 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

 

It isn't, RAZ just made it possible to display on the same screen, so it might give someone the illusion that it's a helmet thing ... but the M2KC has no such feature at all.  It's a DCSism.

From the research I can find, the mid-life upgrade on the 2000C added a helmet mounted radar repeater.  They have a full HMD on the other 2000 models, like the -5 models.  

 

 

[GGTharos]

57 minutes ago, Hodo said:

From the research I can find, the mid-life upgrade on the 2000C added a helmet mounted radar repeater.  They have a full HMD on the other 2000 models, like the -5 models.  

 

I did research too, and I didn't find any evidence of any such upgrade until after 2019.  Would you care to share your research?

 

Edit:  I re-checked.  The MLU upgrades are for bringing the 2000C up to essentially 2000-5 level at minimum.  You do NOT have this upgrade in DCS, and RAZBAM should IMHO vacate this HMD thing with prejudice.

Edited February 3, 2021 by GGTharos

[WinterH]

This was discussed ad nauseum back when they have introduced it too. It isn't representing a helmet sight or anything. It is a gameplay convenience feature, because Mirage 2000C has radar display at an inconvenient spot for some people... I personally don't like things like that, but it is what it is...

[Hodo]

1 hour ago, GGTharos said:

 

I did research too, and I didn't find any evidence of any such upgrade until after 2019.  Would you care to share your research?

 

Edit:  I re-checked.  The MLU upgrades are for bringing the 2000C up to essentially 2000-5 level at minimum.  You do NOT have this upgrade in DCS, and RAZBAM should IMHO vacate this HMD thing with prejudice.

 

It would not bother me one way or the other.  I have said they should fix the mixed weapons loadout on the Mirage.   

 

But if DCS went through and removed a lot of the things that the real aircraft don't have.... There would be a lot of really unhappy people.

 

I don't understand all of the focus on the hate of the M2K?  

 

It does have a helmet display for the radar.  In RAZBAM subforum they even talk about the MLU for the M2K.  Now I haven't looked at it in a while but I do recall seeing the post.  

 

If ED were to remove things that aren't in use .. then the F-16 would lose two HARMs.  The F-18 wouldn't haul 10 AMRAAMs around, and the Su-25T would be removed.

Edited February 3, 2021 by Hodo

[GGTharos]

30 minutes ago, Hodo said:

But if DCS went through and removed a lot of the things that the real aircraft don't have.... There would be a lot of really unhappy people.

 

I think it would only be a few.  There's not that much to remove.

 

Quote

I don't understand all of the focus on the hate of the M2K?  

 

It's merely the foxus, that's all.

 

Quote

It does have a helmet display for the radar.  In RAZBAM subforum they even talk about the MLU for the M2K.  Now I haven't looked at it in a while but I do recall seeing the post.  

 

You don't have an MLU M2K.  Did you notice MICAs or anything other features that the MLU would have anywhere?   The aircraft you have does not equip an HMD.

 

Quote

If ED were to remove things that aren't in use .. then the F-16 would lose two HARMs.  The F-18 wouldn't haul 10 AMRAAMs around, and the Su-25T would be removed.

 

And possibly the triple maverick rack, or at least, add the damage that launching from it causes.

As for the F-18 yep, it can haul 10 ... it just doesn't.  That's a mission design issue and player issue.

And sure, the Su-25T has always existed in some state that we don't really know of.

MiG-21 should lose the Kh-66s, and there are probably a few other things to go around.  But as you can see, not really that many.

 

In any case, none of those particular things does what putting the VTB where it doesn't belong does:  enhance SA.  The same reason we turn off the 'minihud' feature for FC3 first for example.

Edited February 3, 2021 by GGTharos