Air Refueling Cheat

[Harlikwin]

1 hour ago, Tippis said:

I went over all of that in my post.

The tl;dr is quite simple: lolno.

 

The difference compared to a static, non-interactive video is obvious and massive.

The vast majority of the parts are already in place.

A video would give you 10% of the value because, again, it's static and non-interactive.

 

I mean we can agree to disagree. 

[Tippis]

29 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

I mean we can agree to disagree. 

Sure. It's more that I feel I've described quite extensively what I base my judgement on, whereas the opposing view has not really been explored in any depth.

If the counter-argument is just "nuh-uh", it rather seems like "yuh-uh" is good enough a response to that – silly as it may be.

[freehand]

The funniest part of this thread is how Tippis is constantly trolling SharpXB and now Harlikwine because some one does not agree with him.

[Tippis]

2 minutes ago, freehand said:

The funniest part of this thread is how Tippis is constantly trolling SharpXB and now Harlikwine because some one does not agree with him.

I'm not really trolling Harli — I just know he can present an argument and demonstrate a point better than this.  

[Черный Дракул]

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

I don’t quite understand how you’re so confused

I'm not.

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

you can literally all see this by watching the tanker

You cannot.

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

You can see your own relative speed, climbing, sinking etc visually without any extra aid except your own eyeballs.

Again, you cannot. IRL or with VR -- IDK, maybe you can, but on a monitor the difference in 0.2-1.5mph or sink rate of ~0.2m/s is hardly, if at all noticeable. Especially if you have an unpaused head tracker. 

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

The boom is marked

Trying to catch the boom is the first step in unbalancing your aircraft and failing the task. 

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

there are lights on the tanker

Which are almost invisible and there's no interface doubling of these -- unlike, say, carrier landing visual aid that already exists in the game. 

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

you just need to learn

I have. 

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

All of what you’re asking for is already shown to you. 

, except it's less than half of what's required and it's "shown" in the old, 80's way. Like I described above. And, like I described above, DCS can do way better than that, at least in training. 

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

there are lights on the belly of the tanker to show you the correct position.

They do not. The lights are for the case when you're already connected. And even when you are connected, these display not the envelope or the sweetspot, but deviation from the sweetspot. That's backwards, even if you happen to actually see them. 

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Learn what these are instead of saying there’s “no clear indication”

I have -- and understand perfectly there's no clear indication of required aircraft position or envelope. If there was -- like a towed basket -- this would be easy to display with a screenshot. 

 

3 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

just find a visual cue on the tanker

This visual cue, like I have clearly expressed above, is the root of the right wing. And it is not an indication of required aircraft position. Like I have told above at least two times. 

 

Please review my 3 last posts in this topic, where I have clearly described problems with the required aircraft position. Constantly telling me to "learn" does not add value to the discussion -- we are literally discussing the ways to improve learning. Besides, I'm pretty proficient in AAR, which gives me the perspective to judge the whole idea of "practice practice practice" bluntly offered by some members. And I judge it the worst possible case, since without pilot instructor you're just wasting your time and working up bad habits and wrong methods, reinventing the wheel in the process. 

Edited June 27, 2021 by Черный Дракул

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, Черный Дракул said:

Besides, I'm pretty proficient in AAR

Whatever you say… but from your posts you seem like you have no idea how to do it at all. 

Edited June 28, 2021 by SharpeXB

[Tippis]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Whatever you say… but from your posts you seem like you have no idea how to do it at all. 

You're confusing him with yourself  

 

Quote

See you’re just amazingly confused… VR is

…not what he's talking about. Let's try that again and see if you can spot where you fumbled this time. I'll mark it up for you.

 

This is what he said: “IRL or with VR -- IDK, maybe you can, but on a monitor […]. Especially if you have an unpaused head tracker.” Notice the punctuation here. The “IDK, maybe you can” bit relates to “IRL or with VR”; the “but on a monitor” relates to a different situation than IRL or when using VR. This is further reinforced by the mention of a headtracker — something you don't use IRL (because it serves no purpose) or in VR (because it would be redundant). It's not the most straightforward set of sentence fragments and subclauses, perhaps, but parsing it is still pretty darn trivial. And yet, you decided that you had to call him “amazingly confused” because you read this really really simple sentence incorrectly. Good job.

 

He's explicitly saying that he isn't making a statement about VR, but about 2D. You chose to instead interpret this as him saying something about VR. That is spectacularly silly, even with your long-standing history of wilful misrepresentation of what has been said. You utterly failed to actually address the point he made, and instead injected not just your ordinary strawman, but a 100% inversion of his point just so you could follow that strawman up with an ad hominem.

 

Amazingly confused, indeed.

Edited June 28, 2021 by Tippis

[SharpeXB]

2 hours ago, Черный Дракул said:

except it's less than half of what's required and it's "shown" in the old, 80's way.

Your DCS looks like this? Are we playing the same game?

[Tippis]

6 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Your DCS looks like this?

As always, that's not actually what he said, now is it?

[Harlikwin]

On 6/27/2021 at 11:16 PM, Tippis said:

I'm not really trolling Harli — I just know he can present an argument and demonstrate a point better than this.  

 

I mean I could, I'm just not really that opinionated about this. In general I'm against "skill-replacement" in DCS philosophically speaking. I am pro correct learning and training though. But TBH the hardest part of the refuel for me is holding the position right. And no "aid" I can think of is gonna help with that its just down to practice, good controls help IMO, but as I have seen dudes with xbox controllers can do it, so its possible even with crappy hardware. So thats it in a nutshell. I mean you can break AAR down to "parts" or whatnot but at the end of the day its being trimmed right and then not  it up while you take fuel. 

Edited July 11, 2021 by BIGNEWY
1.1 profanity

[Tank50us]

On 6/28/2021 at 2:40 AM, Harlikwin said:

 

I mean I could, I'm just not really that opinionated about this. In general I'm against "skill-replacement" in DCS philosophically speaking. I am pro correct learning and training though. But TBH the hardest part of the refuel for me is holding the position right. And no "aid" I can think of is gonna help with that its just down to practice, good controls help IMO, but as I have seen dudes with xbox controllers can do it, so its possible even with crappy hardware. So thats it in a nutshell. I mean you can break AAR down to "parts" or whatnot but at the end of the day its being trimmed right and then not  it up while you take fuel. 

 

The issue I have is throttle management, especially since I like big, heavy, and fast jets (like the F-14, which is my main go-to aircraft in DCS), and trying to link up with an aircraft that is significantly slower than me isn't exactly an easy thing to do for me.

 

To that end, that's why I make the suggestions that I do, because while I can fly in formation with some marginal success in some aircraft (namely the Harrier), it's not that easy to maintain the formation for me. That said, when it comes to the actual process for hooking up, assuming it's your turn, I see it going like this:

1. when you back off to get in position for 'pre-contact', a small, barely noticeable dot will appear in the spot where you need to be in order to call Pre-contact, as well as a 'throttle ghost' showing you the correct throttle setting you need to catch up to the tanker, this will move back and forth depending on your speed, and the distance to the tanker.
2. When you get in position for pre-contact, and call it, a diamond will appear over the point where your eyes should be when linking up. For example, if you're hooking up to a KC10 (I know there isn't one in DCS officially, but hear me out), this diamond will appear at the form-up lights under the plane (this should train your eyes to look at them). This diamond will have two lines in it, as well as a smaller diamond that grows and moves, the one that moves represents your aircraft, and its size represents how close you are to the hook up point.
3. Assuming you follow the prompts, it should guide you into the near exact position to link up, and start taking fuel.
4. While linked up, if the tanker is about to make any turns, a warning will appear on screen telling you that the tanker is about to make a turn, and what you'll need to do to stay hooked up.
5. Once you've taken all the fuel you need, or are topped up, the next thing that happens is another dot will appear on the starboard side of the tanker, indicating your position to wait for your wingmen to gas up before continuing the mission.

Now, the key thing to remember here is that at the end of the day, all of these visual indicators should be designed to be as non-intrusive as possible, while at the same time, being easy enough to understand that a person can use them, and eventually, remove them when they feel they can kick off the training wheels, which should always be up to the player in question. Also, each of these should be local to your machine only, no one else can see it, and no one will know you are using it unless you specifically state it to the other players that you're using it.

[Furiz]

7 hours ago, freehand said:

The funniest part of this thread is how Tippis is constantly trolling SharpXB and now Harlikwine because some one does not agree with him.

 

Yea haha, even the OP gave up few pages before, now Tipps, Tank50us and Черный Дракул (had to copy paste) managed to ge this to page 6.

 

To sum this up, Tippis and the crew are trying to say that using a game pad controller and a dot on the screen, to tell them where they need to be, while trying AAR will not create bad habits, and doing it without a dot is inefficient and potentially self-harming way of doing AAR.

So there you have it guys, sell your HOTAS and buy gamepads.

[Tank50us]

41 minutes ago, Furiz said:

So there you have it guys, sell your HOTAS and buy gamepads.

 

OK, you do realize that not everyone plays DCS with $1500 machines and $300+ HOTASs right? Heck, for the better part of about 8 months last year actually getting a HOTAS for anything less than $500 was like finding a dinosaur fossil in your back yard, and right now if you can get a decent GPU for anything less than $700 you're doin' pretty good.

 

DCS is a free to try game, we all know this. But it had very serious competition from games like War Thunder, Ace Combat, World of Warplanes (for the WW2 stuff), and of course, MSFS. Many of these games can be played with just a keyboard and mouse with little to no difficulty, and as such, have a much easier learning curve compared to DCS's learning cliff. Those two factors alone mean that if ED wants to continue selling modules, they have to be more open to the more 'gamey' players, instead of the super-hardcore sim players like the people who make similar statements to the one you just made.

 

Not everyone has the money to buy those high end setups, and not everyone has the time to build those custom pits even if they can afford them. Not everyone can afford VR, and not everyone can afford an X56 or better. Some people just have to make do with an old Sidewinder stick or 360 controller on a machine that can barely run DCS as it is. Are you seriously suggesting that DCS should only be played by those willing to dump upwards of thousands of dollars into hardware before they even download the game in the first place? Or would you rather the game be open to anyone, regardless of what kit they have available? If you want the latter, you'll have to accept some gamification. And that means training aids to help people get up to speed.

 

Hell, as someone who runs a group that is dedicated to be an open group to new and experienced players alike, with absolutely no requirements to join, I would rather build a mission knowing that the people flying it can do everything asked of them, even if they have to rely on training aids to get the job done. The whole "Git Gud Scrub" attitude is only going to drive new people away, and when they go, they don't come back. And worse yet, because they don't come back, the 3rd Party Devs and ED aren't selling modules, and if they aren't selling modules, how can they fund the development of new modules? More players means more chances for selling modules, more modules sold means more development and interest, and more interest means more 3rd party devs who come in to make more content.

[Tippis]

1 hour ago, Furiz said:

To sum this up, Tippis and the crew are trying to say that using a game pad controller and a dot on the screen, to tell them where they need to be, while trying AAR will not create bad habits, and doing it without a dot is inefficient and potentially self-harming way of doing AAR.

Nope.

[Wrcknbckr]

My impression is that they are claiming there is more information in 2D aids (rectangle or even a dot), then the actual 3D representation.

[Tank50us]

1 minute ago, Wrcknbckr said:

My impression is that they are claiming there is more information in 2D aids (rectangle or even a dot), then the actual 3D representation.

 

in this case, yes, because for most people, while the battlespace is in 3D, it's still a 2D representation because it's on a screen rather than through real space and our eyes. Game designers have struggled with this for a long time, and as it currently stands, outside of VR, there isn't much substitution for the human eyeball when it comes to depth perception. Look at indoor practice ranges as an example. The system is able to perfectly model the flight path of a bullet, but when a soldier with the rifle is aiming at the target on the screen, they have a hard time judging how far away their target is, and more often then not have to be told. Compare that to an actual rifle range, where the exact same soldier can go "That looks to be about 250yrds", and could probably expect to hit the target at that distance, or get close enough to adjust with one or two rounds.

 

There's also other things that just can't be simulated in DCS, no matter how hard ED tries. The feeling of acceleration, the slight pull of G, the vibrations in the aircraft, and all the things the pilot can feel that tell him/her what their plane is doing without the need to look at the instruments. Also remember that unlike the real world, you don't need perfect (or near perfect through correction) vision to fly a plane in DCS, but you do in order to fly a real F/A18 or F-16. Basically, accessibility is going to be key to the future DCS expansion. If someone wants to play the game, they shouldn't get told 'no', because of things outside their control. The only thing that should stop them from playing DCS, is if their computer simply can't run it, which they can most certainly overcome given enough time. But being told "Nah, you can't play with me because you don't have a $5,000 sim pit with VR", or being told to just "Git Gud", will turn people away, and ultimately hurt ED, and you because no one else will invest in DCS to add content if they won't see any money from the work.

[Черный Дракул]

12 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

from your posts you seem like you have no idea how to do it at all.

 

11 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Your DCS looks like this? Are we playing the same game?

At this point, you're just trolling.

My points have been made as crystal clear as humanly possible. They have merit, as I and some others here see it, and have decent counterparts for other operations like navigation, landing and even carrier landing (which has its own mini-HUD popping up at the proper point). 

Yours, based on the idea of "practice practice practice, no matter if it's a bad practice", has been defeated (even with this single sentence). I think it's a great thing to reflect on.

 

 

10 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

the hardest part of the refuel for me is holding the position right

Like, the exact part that could be demonstrated with a point you're supposed to hold and relative movement of which could tip you if you're slipping? Tanker is far and it's huge, you will always have trouble judging small, gentle plane attitude differences based on its flat image on a flat screen. A point just outside the cockpit, on the other hand, is the minimum you need to instantly judge these and correct yourself, providing you with muscle memory of control positions. Having another point to aim at, some distance away, can help you with aircraft alignment by all axes. And when one is proficient enough, he can turn these off since he can easily imagine these, since he has seen them dosens of times and knows exactly how his aircraft reacts to the controls. 

And yes, alignment aids on the cockpit and the tanker hull can help you get into this AAR stuff if you're brand new (or even experienced with the aforementioned "practice practice practice" "training", since it's bound to teach you the wrong way to approach this). 

Edited June 28, 2021 by Черный Дракул

[Черный Дракул]

  

6 hours ago, Furiz said:

So there you have it guys, sell your HOTAS and buy gamepads.

My point is not having a HOTAS should not block one from doing complex tasks. And in the process it will help the ones without floor-mounted extended joysticks. 

 

4 hours ago, Wrcknbckr said:

My impression is that they are claiming there is more information in 2D aids (rectangle or even a dot), then the actual 3D representation.

My point is both 2D and 3D aids are in order to learn things properly and efficiently. Thankfully, the simulator provides the capacity that exceeds 80's semiautomatic information systems and may even exclude pilot instructor from the actual excersise. 

Edited June 28, 2021 by Черный Дракул

[SharpeXB]

7 hours ago, Tank50us said:

To that end, that's why I make the suggestions that I do

Trust me when you finally “get it” you’ll realize all these things you’re suggesting won’t help, they’d actually divert your attention and hinder you in developing the reflexes. 

[SharpeXB]

5 hours ago, Tank50us said:

Many of these games can be played with just a keyboard and mouse with little to no difficulty, and as such, have a much easier learning curve compared to DCS's learning cliff

You can play DCS with a keyboard and mouse too. Playing any of these flight sims with those is going to be severely awkward though. None are any different in that regard. 

[Exorcet]

  

38 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Trust me when you finally “get it” you’ll realize all these things you’re suggesting won’t help, they’d actually divert your attention and hinder you in developing the reflexes. 

 

You're again making the mistake of thinking that what works for you, works for all. To be honest at this point I'd even question that you'd find assists distracting if you were learning how to AAR. You just seem to dismiss them without consideration.

Edited June 28, 2021 by Exorcet

[SharpeXB]

22 minutes ago, Черный Дракул said:

My points have been made as crystal clear as humanly possible.

Yeah it’s clear that you haven’t quite figured this all out. If you had you would realize all these things you’re suggesting wouldn’t help.

18 minutes ago, Черный Дракул said:

Thankfully, the simulator provides the capacity that exceeds 80's semiautomatic information systems and may even exclude pilot instructor from the actual excersise. 

This isn’t “crystal clear” in fact I have no idea what this means…

19 minutes ago, Черный Дракул said:

My point is not having a HOTAS should not block one from doing complex tasks. And in the process it will help the ones without floor-mounted extended joysticks. 

And see if you could AAR you’d know this statement isn’t true. You don’t need an expensive controller to do this. 

[Tippis]

34 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Trust me when you finally “get it” you’ll realize all these things you’re suggesting won’t help

You have offered nothing to support this.

So… prove it.

 

Why should anyone trust you when you've so blatantly and deliberately misrepresented what has been said in the thread?

 

28 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Playing any of these flight sims with those is going to be severely awkward though.

Not really. You just need to practice. You do like to practice, right?

 

19 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

This isn’t “crystal clear” in fact I have no idea what this means…

That's because as you amply demonstrated previously, you haven't actually read anything that has been written, per your standard troll tactic.

It is crystal clear to anyone who actually reads. You should try it. The only reason you have no idea is because you've wilfully and deliberately chosen to remain ignorant so that you can keep throwing out your long disproven nonsense, your unfounded assumptions, your laughably silly strawmen, and your red herrings until the thread gets lock for being so far derailed.

 

That is your only goal here: to troll the thread until it get shut down, and thus you can tell yourself that you got the lost word in as if that means anything, That is all you're here to do because you don't have anything to say in actual opposition of this idea. You just don't want things to improve. You don't want discussions about improvements to exist.

 

 

Edited June 28, 2021 by Tippis

[SharpeXB]

17 hours ago, Черный Дракул said:

Sadly, you cannot. The position is always a virtual one, with no clear indication of both the sweet spot and the envelope around it.

This statement tells me you don’t actually know how to AAR. When you say the correct position is always virtual, maybe there’s a language barrier here because “always” means applying to every aircraft in DCS. All but the 3 USAF aircraft (A-10, F-18 and F-18) use a probe and drogue, so the position you need to be in is literally right in front of your face except in the Harrier. The A-10s port is on the nose, so again it’s right in front of your face. Only the F-16 and F-18 have this behind the pilot. When you say “no clear indication” again “no” in English means nothing, none. There is certainly some indication of the spot you’re supposed to be and to remain in provided by the belly lights and markings on the boom (probably these are most useful to the A-10). The F-16 port is center mounted so it’s really obvious that you need to fly along the centerline of the tanker. That’s not a “no clear indication” situation. 
You’re also discounting the value of practice which tells me you haven’t practiced. With enough time you’ll understand the “envelope” ie how far you can move and still remain connected. It’s quite large especially with the drogue. 

I’ve been there and gone through this learning curve and I remember thinking it was just impossible until I “got it”. I can tell you’re still in the frustration stage.  

[SharpeXB]

37 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

  

 

You're again making the mistake of thinking that what works for you, works for all. To be honest at this point I'd even question that you'd find assists distracting if you were learning how to AAR. You just seem to dismiss them without consideration.

 

This task (to me) is akin to sim racing which is way more difficult than AAR (imagine a 40 minute long competitive AAR session) Some advice from a pro driving instructor is how where your eyes are looking influences your reflexes. No kidding, it works. But it involves “eye control”. (The eye tracking footage from an F1 driver shows how disciplined they are) Most common advice in AAR involves control over where you’re looking. Don’t look at the basket or probe except peripherally. Keep your foveal vision on part of the tanker and your peripheral encompassing that tanker using some cues. Vision is the only feedback we get on a PC sim, it has to substitute for all your other senses. Screen graphics or icons become like magnets for your eyes are are hard to look away from. So they wouldn’t help, if you can’t fly formation with the tanker how could you do it with icons? Worse they’d hurt your progress and become a visual crutch you’d never be able to switch off.