Air Refueling Cheat

[SharpeXB]

40 minutes ago, Черный Дракул said:

Having DFUA visual aid is not different in any way. If these are too distracting for someone, I presume these can be turned off in Options or via keyboard shortcut. 

And for training purposes I would add draggable 3D envelope to refuelling aircraft, like training gates in some landing missions, so that people would understand AAR better. 

This kind of training aid won’t help because

1. it’s too distracting and takes your attention from the actual task

2. Is not a substitute for practice. The real problem people have is simply not putting enough practice in. Colored gates won’t change that. 
The only visual reference you need and can actually use is the tanker. 

 

[Черный Дракул]

31 minutes ago, Furiz said:

the whole reason for his post is that he is using a gamepad and he can't AAR with it

which is kind of user-unfriendliness from the game since it can be mitigated by the ways described above, which are also valid for other controller users (unless one uses a home cockpit and have no need for such measures, lucky him!). So from a user perspective it is an unmotivated user-unfriendliness. 

Besides, I've never seen anyone complain about, say, TrackIR "Precision mode" which is exactly the case described above. Kudos for Naturalpoint for creating it, although I don't use it myself. 

 

34 minutes ago, Furiz said:

What do you mean they serve no purpose? they do serve their purpose at night, during daytime as he already explained they use the tanker for reference.

Tanker still has its position and formation lights which can be used for the same purpose (of referencing the tanker) anyway? 

 

35 minutes ago, Furiz said:

Why is this a weak argument?

Exactly because of what was quoted right before this question. 

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

As it happens, during the night it's much harder to look at the tanker due to night being, you know, dark.

As explained in the upper part of this post, position and formation lights will give the same reference to the same ship, so these are still unnecessary -- and, what's more, harmful since they require the pilot to switch to another refuelling control method. And it's still unclear how visual aid with same lights, being dim at day time and bright at night time, is not helpful. 

 

 

  

19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

it’s too distracting and takes your attention from the actual task

It... is not? Watching these lights gives enough information to maintain formation even in difficult patterns, so having an aid with these will do exactly the same (unless you have to turn your head around to see it). Remember since it's on screen it would be available at a glance. 

 

20 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Is not a substitute for practice. The real problem people have is simply not putting enough practice in. Colored gates won’t change that. 

Colored gates actually help people understand and feel the landing process. You can practice in many ways, often the wrong ones. Having visual aids can help one remain on the right track and avoid many of the wrong ones. 

[Furiz]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

This kind of training aid won’t help because

1. it’s too distracting and takes your attention from the actual task

2. Is not a substitute for practice. The real problem people have is simply not putting enough practice in. Colored gates won’t change that. 
The only visual reference you need and can actually use is the tanker. 

 

 

Exactly this.

[Exorcet]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

This kind of training aid won’t help because

1. it’s too distracting and takes your attention from the actual task

2. Is not a substitute for practice. The real problem people have is simply not putting enough practice in. Colored gates won’t change that. 
The only visual reference you need and can actually use is the tanker. 

 

You don't know what will work or won't work for other people.

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, Черный Дракул said:

Colored gates actually help people understand and feel the landing process

Have you learned to AAR in DCS? Because this suggestion makes it seem like you haven’t. If you have learned you would know this won’t help. 

[SharpeXB]

18 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

You don't know what will work or won't work for other people.

I know what does work. Lots a lots of practice. Weeks of practice. Colored gates to fly through aren’t a substitute for that. And your attention and vision need to be completely disciplined. Any distracting colored screen graphics wouldn’t help at all, they’d hurt. 

[Tippis]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

This kind of training aid won’t help because

1. it’s too distracting and takes your attention from the actual task

2. Is not a substitute for practice. The real problem people have is simply not putting enough practice in.

…except that both of those assumptions rely on a fundamental ignorance of how learning a new task works.

 

This kind of training aid will very obviously help because

1. It gives you something obvious to pay attention to, in a situation where you have no idea what you should be looking at. This is not something that a new player will intuitively know, and this kind of aid would allow the game to guide your eyes to where they need to be. The notion that it would be distracting is disproven by just about every advance in pilot workspace in the last 100 years.

2. It is not meant to be a substitute for practice. That's just some nonsense you've made up and you'd have to be pretty clueless to think that, especially when it is being described as a “visual aid”. In fact, to confuse the two, you'd have to be deliberately misinterpreting what people are asking for just so you can stomp your feet and say “no” without a shred of argument to support your stance.

3. Being a training aid, it helps people get the most out of their practice. It turns that practice into a ladder rather than two discrete and widely separated discrete steps. If you want people to practice more, this will make that happen. As always, you actually argue in favour of the very thing you don't want to see for no cogent or coherently explained reason.

4. It has already proven to work. You're just not familiar enough with the genre or with the methodology or with learning in general to know this.

5. Learning by being shown is one of the most powerful methodologies out there.

6. Learning by being shown interactively is the one thing that is even more powerful than just being shown passively.

 

6 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I know what does work.

No you don't. For the simple reason that you have never tried it. You're just guessing based on your narrow, inapplicable, and wholly irrelevant personal experience.

 

As always, you want to deny access to a solid, pre-existing, proven, and much asked for learning tool for no other reason than that you didn't have it so now everyone else must suffer as well. That is not a valid argument against learning tools in what is supposed to be a study sim, or in a sim that is meant to cater to both veterans and complete newbies. DCS is both of those.

Edited June 25, 2021 by Tippis

[Exorcet]

2 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

And your attention and vision need to be completely disciplined. Any distracting colored screen graphics wouldn’t help at all, they’d hurt. 

The graphics aren't distracting, they exactly like a HUD. A whole bunch of fancy graphics that assist you in operating your aircraft. If you're not great with processing information like that, it is what it is, but I find it hard to argue against something very similar to what is used in real aircraft. Most people are likely to benefit from the addition.

[SharpeXB]

41 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

I find it hard to argue against something very similar to what is used in real aircraft

None of the aircraft in DCS have a “HUD” for AAR. Sure there’s HUD info you can already see but I don’t think anyone focuses on that while refueling. 

 

Can you AAR yourself? Because it sounds like you can’t when you make these suggestions. 
 

This stuff has already been discussed ad nauseum and ED already stated they have no plans for “Easy AAR”

Edited June 25, 2021 by SharpeXB

[Tippis]

6 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

None of the aircraft in DCS have a “HUD” for AAR.

Yes they do. It's the regular HUD, and also commonly a set of canopy-mounted lights. It offers all kinds of useful cues and information that help you approach and hook up properly. Maybe all that struggle and practice you've had to do is due to your unfamiliarity with these tools that would make it easier for you?

 

7 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Can you AAR yourself? Because it sounds like you can’t when you make these suggestions. 

So you're saying that he has insights into what is needed to learn and overcome the difficulties that you don't? Because it certainly sounds like you don't quite understand the problem and how it could be solved, whereas he does. Or is what he and you know and don't know not actually relevant to the topic at hand, and you're just going after him because you don't have an actual argument and have to rely on fallacies to keep your foot-stomping going?

 

8 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

This stuff has already been discussed ad nauseum and ED already stated they have no plans for “Easy AAR”

…and as has been stated every time you helplessly stomp your feet and try to keep the game unapproachable at all cost, “plans” change.

You know what else ED has already stated? That the “best way to not support a wishlist item is to not comment on it. Please dont come in here picking fights please.” So why is it you like to quote them on one thing but not the other…?  

[Dragon1-1]

Why do you think we're commenting on it?  We don't want any form of "easy AAR", especially if it would take away resources from important stuff. Therefore, it makes sense to comment on those wishlist items (and pick fights about them), so that they never get considered.

[Tippis]

2 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Why do you think we're commenting on it?  We don't want any form of "easy AAR", especially if it would take away resources from important stuff. Therefore, it makes sense to comment on those wishlist items (and pick fights about them), so that they never get considered.

They get considered anyway, and picking fights trying to stop it will only ever get you locked out of the conversation entirely. So no, that doesn't make much sense.

 

Whether you want it or not isn't all that relevant — that's why the moderators offered the suggestion to just not comment on it — because if that was a determining factor, nothing would ever be added to or improved in DCS. As for the “more important stuff” that is always brought up as only actual argument, the problem is that no-one can ever give an example of what that would be. Doubly so in these instances, where what's being suggested sits right in line with what ED themselves claim that DCS is supposed to be.

 

Actually fulfilling the ambition “to offer a more relaxed gameplay to suit the user and his particular level of experience and training [and] to hand hold users from novice pilot all the way to the most advanced and sophisticated operator” seems like a pretty darn important thing to do, after all.

[Dragon1-1]

You can tell yourself whatever you want, but the fact that they didn't even add regular training missions for AAR makes me think that they don't consider making that part more accessible to be very important. If they added training missions, that would be OK with me, but nothing beyond that is needed, because AAR can only really be learned by practice. Finding alignment cues is the tricky part, and a fake UI won't really help you with that.

 

How about you take your own advice and don't comment on it? Because I am quite happy offering counterarguments and whatever. It does serve a purpose, too, namely to show that it's not something that everyone wants, so it doesn't get mistaken for a high-demand feature.

[SharpeXB]

37 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Why do you think we're commenting on it?  We don't want any form of "easy AAR", especially if it would take away resources from important stuff. Therefore, it makes sense to comment on those wishlist items (and pick fights about them), so that they never get considered.

Exactly

Edited June 26, 2021 by SharpeXB

[Tippis]

24 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

You can tell yourself whatever you want, but the fact that they didn't even add regular training missions for AAR makes me think that they don't consider making that part more accessible to be very important.

Who are “they”, and in what context “didn't” they add those missions?

Because there most certainly are training missions for AAR in the game. So presumably, “they” do indeed consider it important after all.

 

The problem is that the tools to make them good training missions just aren't there. If “they” didn't add those missions, it's because of a missing toolset more than anything. It's trickier than the static training aids that can be added for landings and weapon delivery and most cockpit manipulation, but the foundational puzzle pieces are already there for the most part.

 

24 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

because AAR can only really be learned by practice

Same as everything else, then.

So again, by that logic, all the learning aids available in the game should be stripped out because, after all, at the end of the day you just have to practice. Learning tools definitely have no place in a study sim… right?

 

Quote

Finding alignment cues is the tricky part, and a fake UI won't really help you with that.

Of course it will.

A UI overlay would be the best way to show those cues by far. If there is anything that can help you find them, it's exactly that kind of UI.

 

Quote

How about you take your own advice and don't comment on it?

Because it's not my advice, and because the advice wasn't directed at the people discussing how an idea could be made to work. It was directed at the regular set of complainers who have made a habit out of derailing any wishlist thread that they don't like — commonly for no adequately explained, cogent, or even intelligent reason other than that they suffered so others must suffer too.

 

24 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Because I am quite happy offering counterarguments and whatever.

Then please do.

Explain why a good quarter of the triggers in the game should be removed and also explain how AAR is somehow so exceedingly special and unique that it must under no circumstances be allowed to have the same tools that are available for all other tasks…

 

e: Oh and…

25 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

It does serve a purpose, too, namely to show that it's not something that everyone wants, so it doesn't get mistaken for a high-demand feature.

This is a really silly worry.

If it's not in high demand, it will reveal itself as such by how little traffic it gets. Again, just because it's not something “everyone wants” doesn't mean it's not worth-while, and if the regular spammers try to fight it by increasing that traffic, they will only ever manage to make it seem more in-demand than it really is. Doubly so if it's just the same old naysayers naysaying it as is their habit: tons of posts + the same few guys saying no like they always do (and who can therefore safely be ignored) = maybe there's some merit to the idea after all.

 

19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Exactly 

Funny  how you can only ever respond to that, and not to the actual on-topic arguments made…

Edited June 26, 2021 by Tippis

[Dragon1-1]

18 minutes ago, Tippis said:

Because there most certainly are training missions for AAR in the game. So presumably, “they” do indeed consider it important after all.

"They" (ED devs) do not. BalticDragon does, and he's made a proper AAR training mission for... one plane, this being the Harrier. That's a 3rd party module, though. The Hornet has practice missions for AAR. Not training, by which I understand a mission in the training menu with a voiceover explaining the procedure.

 

Here's the thing: unlike every other thing you can do in the jet, the procedure for AAR is simple, but the execution is not. For most things, practice is highly useful, but you can learn things like takeoff and landing procedures by rote, and as long as you can follow them, you should be able to perform the things in question (don't expect to be any good when things go wrong if you haven't practiced, though). There's no "magic trick" in AAR, except for knowing canopy cues for proper alignment. You've got to build up the proper muscle memory yourself.

 

You'll notice it's the exact same thing as with dogfighting: there's no one trick to it. The only way you can get good at dogfighting is practice, and guess what, there are no magic training wheels for that, either. The training missions tell you how to shoot the gun and use the sight, but they do not tell you what to do if you're in front of the bandit and want to get behind him. 

[Tippis]

21 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

"They" (ED devs) do not.

Ehm. Yes they do.

 

Quote

The Hornet has practice missions for AAR. Not training, by which I understand a mission in the training menu with a voiceover explaining the procedure.

That's a wholly arbitrary label — there is no mechanical difference between a “training” mission and a “practice” mission. as you try to distinguish them They use the same (inadequate) tools and the only thing that sets one apart from the other is file placement. Basically, what you have here is something of a no-true-scotsman argument: by defining these missions to only qualify if they fulfil a narrow set of rather irrelevant criteria, you conclude that the missions that do actually offer training scenarios don't count… because reasons.

 

Quote

Here's the thing: unlike every other thing you can do inthe jet, the procedure for AAR is simple, but the execution is not.

Oh, so it's like landing, (dumb) weapons deployment, navigation, and just coordinated flight in general. That's a whole lot of stuff that somehow doesn't count as “every other thing”. The only things that really differ are getting the jet started and the deployment of complex programmable weapon systems. In actuality, it's not really all that different. In fact, it's mostly just coordinated flight on a finer scale. And yet, all of those those execution-reliant activities have all kinds of helper systems and learning aids attached to them, whereas AAR has not.

 

Quote

There's no "magic trick" in AAR, except for knowing canopy cues for proper alignment. You've got to build up the proper muscle memory yourself.

…and guess what would help with both of those? A solid set of helper tools and on-screen UI hints, similar to what exists for the other execution-reliant activities.

 

Coincidentally, the same tools would be very helpful for teaching dogfighting. I'm guessing it wasn't your intent, but you're offering a pretty good argument in favour of the implementation of these kinds of systems by illustrating that it's not a unique problem but rather something that could be generalised to serve a broader range of purposes.

 

The difference is that there are training wheels in place for dogfighting already, and it's not actually very difficult to figure out how (and what) a training mission could tell you to do depending on your relative position to the opponent.

 

 

Edited June 26, 2021 by Tippis

[Exorcet]

2 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

None of the aircraft in DCS have a “HUD” for AAR. Sure there’s HUD info you can already see but I don’t think anyone focuses on that while refueling. 

 

Can you AAR yourself? Because it sounds like you can’t when you make these suggestions. 
 

This stuff has already been discussed ad nauseum and ED already stated they have no plans for “Easy AAR”

 

 

The point is "fancy graphics" are useful enough that they comprise the most important display in modern military aircraft. To dismiss them as a distraction is short sighted as best.

 

I don't know why you're asking if I can AAR when I've said yes multiple times in the multiple threads we've been in on this subject.

 

That ED has no current plans for easy AAR doesn't mean it can't be discussed or that their plans will change. My post wasn't even on AAR assistance but rather on the benefits of visual aids like HUD's and tanker lights which apparently are useful enough to exist in reality.

 

2 hours ago, Tippis said:

Yes they do. It's the regular HUD, and also commonly a set of canopy-mounted lights. It offers all kinds of useful cues and information that help you approach and hook up properly. Maybe all that struggle and practice you've had to do is due to your unfamiliarity with these tools that would make it easier for you?

 

Spot on, the HUD contains elements useful for pretty much any phase of flight, so in effect it's already a "AAR HUD". I don't see how adding additional aids is significantly different.

 

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Why do you think we're commenting on it?  We don't want any form of "easy AAR", especially if it would take away resources from important stuff. Therefore, it makes sense to comment on those wishlist items (and pick fights about them), so that they never get considered.

If you don't want easy AAR don't use it. Commenting to have something never considered is bizarre and a bit hostile. Easy AAR won't take away from the realism of DCS because realistic AAR will still exist. Also given the nature of software development and resource spread it's entirely possible for an AAR assist to be created without disrupting work elsewhere. Given that AAR in DCS could use updates and fixes, ED might as well work on an AAR assist while revamping the system. It would cost nothing.

[SharpeXB]

10 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

It would cost nothing.

There’s an unrealistic assumption…

10 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Spot on, the HUD contains elements useful for pretty much any phase of flight, so in effect it's already a "AAR HUD". I don't see how adding additional aids is significantly different.

Because unless the actual aircraft is equipped with some sort of refueling alignment aid, which none of the modules I own have, then by definition in wouldn’t be useful. If it was then the real aircraft would have it. You’ve already got a big obvious “aid” right in front of you. The tanker. 

Edited June 26, 2021 by SharpeXB

[Exorcet]

8 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Because unless the actual aircraft is equipped with some sort of refueling alignment aid, which none of the modules I own have, then by definition in wouldn’t be useful. If it was then the real aircraft would have it. You’ve already got a big obvious “aid” right in front of you. The tanker. 

 

This is contradictory. The M2000 has acceleration carets because they're useful. The F-16 doesn't have them. Are they not useful? No, they were just not implemented in the F-16. You can't take absence to mean anything but absence.

[SharpeXB]

2 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

This is contradictory. The M2000 has acceleration carets because they're useful. The F-16 doesn't have them. Are they not useful? No, they were just not implemented in the F-16. You can't take absence to mean anything but absence.

Sure the M-2000C has that. Is it useful in AAR? Not really, you can plainly see your acceleration or speed by simply looking at the tanker. 

[Tippis]

34 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Because unless the actual aircraft is equipped with some sort of refueling alignment aid, which none of the modules I own have, then by definition in wouldn’t be useful.

No, that's not what defines usefulness.

 

It is useful if it helps people with the task at hand — in this case, learning to AAR. Whether the real aircraft has it or not is not a factor. That's the beauty of a sim over the real thing: you can add extra layers of teaching tools to file the edges off the process and ease up the difficulty curve.

 

Quote

If it was then the real aircraft would have it. 

Lolno. That's not actually how aircraft systems are designed.

There are a bajillion systems that would be useful to any and all aircraft, and yet, most of them don't have them. That doesn't mean they're not useful. It just means that compromises had to be made to get the whole thing ready in time, or ready at a reasonable cost, or just ready full stop.

 

19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Sure the M-2000C has that. Is it useful in AAR?

Yes. It gives you an immediate graphical feedback of what your throttle position actually means long before looking at the tanker will do so. You're so focused on the tanker that you're completely missing the myriad of other cues available to you. No wonder you've had such issues with learning how to refuel that you cannot conceive of any ways of making it easier to learn. And if I recall correctly, your experience of the topic is mainly with the Hornet, which is the most trivial and AAR-aided aircraft in the entire DCS inventory.

 

By the way, even if that's not the case every single aircraft module you own has alignment aids. Again, your unfamiliarity with how these systems work does not translate into their not existing. It only means that you're continuously demonstrating how unqualified you are to have this discussion. As so many times before, you prove that arguing from a position of almost complete ignorance.

Edited June 26, 2021 by Tippis

[Harlikwin]

Two words...

 

GIT

 

GUD

 

 

[Tippis]

13 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

Two words...

 

GIT

 

GUD

That's four words at the very least, depending on whether you read the first as an acronym as well or not…  

 

But presumably, this means you're in favour of an improved and expanded learning (and teaching) toolset?

[freehand]

@Tippis you have 5 or 6 times replied with sarcastic digs at SharpeXB with no reply from him why the attitude ?