not planned Canopy/Display fogging/icing

[WobblyFlops]

No idea why people are actively against making the sim more realistic. The idea that it would be a factor makes sense (fogging, icing, different ECS modes are definitely something that are relevant to high performance jets) so someone assuming that it would be the same for the Apache makes sense from a logical point of view. Now, SMEs are required to explain why it may not be a factor in reality, but anything that makes the experience closer to the real operation of the aircraft is a welcome addition. If defogging is only an issue during the startup, model that. If the downwash keeps the canopy clean even in bad weather the game should reflect that.

 

Sims exist to replicate the operation of an aircraft as accurately to reality as possible, which is constrained by OPSEC/lack of available data and technical limitations. Not sure why there's this resistance against adding functions to supposedly high fidelity modules that aren't an issue whatsoever. In fact, these mundane and innocent aspects are the ones where the developers can really go in depth modelling interactions, limitations and quirks.

 

On 10/15/2021 at 4:28 AM, kgillers3 said:

a fun for the peeps who want to just have a good time

How can they make it both as realistic as possible while simultaneously making it fun for the ***thunder refugees?

[kgillers3]

1 minute ago, WobblyFlops said:

 

How can they make it both as realistic as possible while simultaneously making it fun for the ***thunder refugees?

I think they are doing it tbh, I’m assuming you meant casual dcs players, and yeah I think if you don’t wanna study you can still teach yourself how to rip things off the rails fly around and have a good time. I mean that’s what I do in most the platforms. 

It’s really up to the individuals if they like it or not or how in-depth. 

[kgillers3]

At the end of the day what you enjoy is what you enjoy whether it be procedural and as close as you can or just flying around. 

[stormrider]

2 hours ago, WobblyFlops said:

No idea why people are actively against making the sim more realistic. The idea that it would be a factor makes sense (fogging, icing, different ECS modes are definitely something that are relevant to high performance jets) so someone assuming that it would be the same for the Apache makes sense from a logical point of view. Now, SMEs are required to explain why it may not be a factor in reality, but anything that makes the experience closer to the real operation of the aircraft is a welcome addition. If defogging is only an issue during the startup, model that. If the downwash keeps the canopy clean even in bad weather the game should reflect that.

 

Sims exist to replicate the operation of an aircraft as accurately to reality as possible, which is constrained by OPSEC/lack of available data and technical limitations. Not sure why there's this resistance against adding functions to supposedly high fidelity modules that aren't an issue whatsoever. In fact, these mundane and innocent aspects are the ones where the developers can really go in depth modelling interactions, limitations and quirks.

 

How can they make it both as realistic as possible while simultaneously making it fun for the ***thunder refugees?

What you talking about mate, I'm totally with you, not only I want a fully simulated defog system, but also, a fully simulated ray traced sun refraction off spattered insects. We are all for it !  I even took a year off so I can enlist to a virtual dcs apache milsim squad and am ready for our meet-ups at the local rpg store so we can brag about our rtfm prowess

[WobblyFlops]

24 minutes ago, stormrider said:

store so we can brag about our rtfm prowess

Good, I'm sure that a little bit of studying will be very beneficial to you. MAC really can't come soon enough.

 

Edited December 2, 2021 by WobblyFlops

[Mike Force Team]

Maybe the ground crew, ground chief, and pilots could play tic-tac-toe on the icy winds.  It would create great wonder.

 

[kgillers3]

8 minutes ago, Mike Force Team said:

Maybe the ground crew, ground chief, and pilots could play tic-tac-toe on the icy winds.  It would create great wonder.

 

Typically when launching you're getting 1 dude to help you launch for a crew chief so it'd be just him.  Farp ops for rearming there's usually more but they're all busy rearming the aircraft so not with them and also the one crew chief is probably helping.  Rule of thumb, 1-2 peeps for just launching, quite a few for rearming, only a couple for refuel. Situation and personnel availability dependent.  Refueling warm / hot, 1-2 fuelers in the vicinity.  Not an abundance of people to play tic-tac-toe with Maybe other nations / units run it different. 

[Mike Force Team]

Well, so much for socializing.  Not likely to happen. Shucks.

If there is a lot of snow, then everyone will have to grab snow shovels to clear away the snow and ice.  They will be busy.

[kgillers3]

1 hour ago, Mike Force Team said:

Well, so much for socializing.  Not likely to happen. Shucks.

If there is a lot of snow, then everyone will have to grab snow shovels to clear away the snow and ice.  They will be busy.

Not during operations that suite dcs and as far as where I’m at the pilots are apart of that. Brooms maybe on the efabs and spray for blades and canopy or heat 

[FalcoGer]

I don't know why everybody is bitching about my suggestion and making fun of it. It's in the manual, it's in the real world and it's not impossible to implement without a major performance impact (unlike ray tracing light refracted off insect splatters). The jeff has it already. I want the apache to have it too, if appropriate. But everybody is like "Sure, let's postpone launch to 2060" or "I also want to write little messages and images with my finger on the fogged up canopy that persist because let's model the fat on the window."

You're just toxic.

If you think this is a bad idea then make some real arguments.
Otherwise this is a wish list.

Unlike you lot, I actually put some thought into what I want. And it's neither unrealistic nor impossible.

[kgillers3]

 

5 hours ago, FalcoGer said:

I don't know why everybody is bitching about my suggestion and making fun of it. It's in the manual, it's in the real world and it's not impossible to implement without a major performance impact (unlike ray tracing light refracted off insect splatters). The jeff has it already. I want the apache to have it too, if appropriate. But everybody is like "Sure, let's postpone launch to 2060" or "I also want to write little messages and images with my finger on the fogged up canopy that persist because let's model the fat on the window."

You're just toxic.

If you think this is a bad idea then make some real arguments.
Otherwise this is a wish list.

Unlike you lot, I actually put some thought into what I want. And it's neither unrealistic nor impossible.

Look I’ll be as literal as possible with no joking or smart assery. 

This post came after a flurry of other posts that you had commented on with your interpretation on if Ed and the development team are doing a realistic job or not. It was like watching you turn the pages of the tm. 

First of all I admire your passion and desire and dedication to go page by page through the tm but also remember there are a team of people who are just as passionate attempting to make the thing as realistic as possible but within the bounds of being reasonable as possible.  Most of these peeps have real world experience with the aircraft and in-depth knowledge of its systems. 

Canopy Defog will probably make it in at some point, when you will likely use it if it’s being realistically modeled as answered earlier will be during cold start prior to blades turning most of the time. I’m sure there is very specific instance on when it would be in flight, but common on a hot humid day immediately after apu start. Haven’t personally experienced it too much on a cold day, maybe not enough humidity idk. Both can be mitigated / avoided if you set your cockpit temperature appropriately right after the displays power on. 

I think canopy pitting / scratches and bug splatter are realistic, I wouldn’t want to deal with it especially if I was flying day into the sun at home on dcs but that’s just me. I also think it’d be cool to have to actually dodge birds but I’m cool with the current situation. 

You’ve also posted really great questions, chop button is an example. You stated what you thought it did, but weren’t sure, nor on the purpose. Good question. 

 At the same time you’ve stated things were not worthwhile on other peoples wish list items. While being completely ignorant and naive on it’s purpose. I’ll use the bag in this is instance. Which is contrary to your statement  above.

Now I don’t know what version of the tm you have and honestly I don’t care, what I will say is if it’s not the period accurate one there will be more things that are different. In addition, this aircraft has tons of supplemental information that’s not fully covered in the tm.  So when the module releases and you find differences, I think you would find it more informative to ask what’s accurate rather than making an assumptions because you read something in the tm.

I say this because there are things I’m wrong about every single day, and I learn new things every single day. 

I promise you the people working on this project want to provide the best module and experience that they can.  They are just as passionate and dedicated. 

I apologize for to the smart assery. In the future if and when we communicate I’ll attempt to stay as literal as possible. No promises but I’ll try.  

Edited January 3, 2022 by kgillers3