Jump to content

How is a professional module made in DCS ?


syzygy

Recommended Posts

What exactly is involved when creating a module in DCS, i am not clear on it. I understand the aerodynamics part but others I dont know what exactly goes into making a professional module ? What are the steps involved ? How does the module go from flight manuals to a working simulation worthy module ? Is all the information for making a module available in NATOPS manuals or are there some other resources involved ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Hi, 

we can only use public data ( being on google dont make it public we have to be careful about ITAR ), so we do a lot of research. 

Modules can take years to plan and create, the team will start with design documents based on the research we have found, then we will work with subject matter experts who have first hand knowledge of the aircraft in question. 

  • Thanks 2

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, syzygy said:

Is all the information for making a module available in NATOPS manuals


not at all, to replicate an aircraft faithfully a lot of data comes from a real aircraft, for example, take a look at how the Mi-8 sounds were captured:

 

 

In the same way, the developers sits on a real aircraft and 3D scan the whole cockpit, to be able to model it precisely, and also 3D scan the exterior of the aircraft, to get detailed dimensions that are not available on any manual.

 

That’s probably the reason why it is impossible to bring to DCS aircraft’s for which there is not a surviving example.


Edited by Rudel_chw
  • Like 1

 

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

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

That’s probably the reason why it is impossible to bring to DCS aircraft’s for which there is not a surviving example.

It is not impossible, but it is much harder, and the result will be less accurate. Not every aircraft was made by laser scanning the real thing, the Hornet, for example, has a few cockpit dimensions fudged due to that. RAZBAM didn't record Harrier sounds from the cockpit at all, in fact, they incorporated a crappy sound mod that used a YouTube clip recorded from a GoPro (sounds exactly as bad as you'd think). Early stuff in particular was made from ground up just like any other 3D model. Of course, when you have access to the real thing, you can make it much more detailed, and avoid bloopers like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about the systems, how are they modelled for example the mechanical systems when I press the APU start in the hornet what happens behind the scenes ? What softwares are used for this type of modelling ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, syzygy said:

What softwares are used for this type of modelling ?


I have no idea, as I’m not a professional model developer … why do you need this info? Planning on becoming a developer? 🙂  

  • Like 1

 

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

Just now, Rudel_chw said:

why do you need this info? Planning on becoming a developer? 🙂  

No no, far from it. I am an aerospace engineer and I am wondering how these simulations are mimicked close to real life. I can understand the aerodynamics part since thats what I do for a living 😉 but others I have no clue.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, syzygy said:

No no, far from it. I am an aerospace engineer and I am wondering how these simulations are mimicked close to real life. I can understand the aerodynamics part since thats what I do for a living 😉 but others I have no clue.


I’m an IT business developer, so no real background on simulation beyond what I was taught in college, but I can imagine that the hardest part of a DCS simulation is being able to fit it within the processing capabilities of a consumer PC .. that cant be easy.

 

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

4 hours ago, syzygy said:

What about the systems, how are they modelled for example the mechanical systems when I press the APU start in the hornet what happens behind the scenes ?

Most of the internals do not have 3D models unless they are visible from the cockpit or from external views like front fans, opened gear, bomb bays, jet exhaust but also some can be seen when aircraft is damaged or have maintenance hatches opened.

What is not seen exists only as a program made according to manuals and schemes. So you just see effects of the working systems and how they are connected to each other.

Ex. starting APU drains battery power, starts spinning the engine, oil and hydraulic pressure raises... these are just values but some of it can be already seen like fans moving or in the cockpit gauges and it makes possible for other systems to start working like flight controls etc.


Edited by draconus
  • Thanks 1

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@syzygy

You're asking for a behind the scenes ''factory floor'' view of module development. There's not a huge amount of stuff like that around here, but it is available if you look around. Pay special attention to stickied dev posts on specific aircraft. I remember the F-14 had a devblog that went into great detail on how they modeled the radar, and some other devs made extensive posts also.

I tried to find some for you, but they're buried in the forum somewhere and I am having trouble locating them. But they're there. There were some extensive posts on the P-47 and F-4U also at different times. I think the Jf-17 did, too.

In short, they try to model as much of the function as possible, but as others pointed out, most of this is invisible to you for practical purposes. A circuit breaker may be simulated performing its function, for example, but the actual physical circuit isn't, it'a just ''in the computer's head'', as it were.

Another example of details that are simulated is with the MiG-15. Due to inferior machining in the real world Soviet Union, the wings were not EXACTLY symmetrical, which tended to produce a slight roll at transonic speeds either to left or right. This is replicated in DCS and everytime you spawn a MiG-15 it is randomised which direction it will roll (and is a leading cause of ''bug reports'' for the MiG-15).

Other examples include fuel sloshing in wings, individual fuel tanks draining at different rates, etc. They do not ACTUALLY replicate liquid in the wings as something you could see poking your camera inside it, merely the effects as if there is liquid there.

The extent and specific focus of simulation varies from module to module and dev to dev. The WWII birds place a premium on engine management as that's a key aspect of their flight, so fuel flow, radiator dynamics, oil, etc etc, are all much more detailed in them because you interact with it so much and it's such a key element with them. Some aircraft go to great length detailing radar and avionics, for example the F-14, if I remember right from the old devblogs, uses a form of raycasting to emulate the radar waves.

Again, most of this stuff is happening strictly in a mathematics sense, it's there, as far as the effects you have to deal with, even if it's not being physically directly replicated.

  • Like 4

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another one I remember from F-14 are different types of engine stalls simulated and randomised difference between engines as they are not perfectly the same so it can create additional yaw force.

  • Like 1

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mike Force Team said:

@syzygy Here is an example of the time invested.  For the Mirage-2000, the software developers spent 8 years real-world time creating it.

MFT

Although, they got it completely wrong for the first half (give or take) of that time period. 🙂 ADA (French air force) then stepped in and told them how it really worked, which has resulted in a total overhaul. 

However, M-2000 is also an example of a module that's easier to make that modern MFD-equipped aircraft. Development time greatly depends on complexity, for WWII modules it can be shorter, for modern ones, with all the MFDs and stuff, it's long with a similarly long EA period during which more systems are added.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For most of us, it's just magic!

  • Like 2

I'm Softball on Multiplayer. NZXT Player Three Prime, i9-13900K@3.00GHz, 64GB DDR5, Win 11 Home, Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 24GB, TrackIR 5, VKB Gunfighter III with MCG Ultimate grip, VKB STECS Standard Throttle, CH Pro pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Although, they got it completely wrong for the first half (give or take) of that time period.

 

I prefer to believe that the developers did the best they could with the information available at the time, I'm glad that years later they were given better information and they could rebuild a great part of their Sim to make it more accurate, and I thus got a better Mirage version for free.

  • Like 1

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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