Light an afterburner on the GFM project

[Gunfreak]

With the F4 now out a lot of people who has mostly flown updated 4th Gen aircraft are now getting a taste of what the singleplayer cold war guy have experienced for years.

The AI flight behaviour on the early jets, MiG15, 19, 21, F5 etc. Having an MiG21 over preform by a lot is an annoyance in an F16. But not a major problem. Having a MiG21 over preform by a lot is a major issue in the F4.

Now that DCS has this high profile extremely well made 3rd Gen Aircraft. 

It's rather important that it's natural enemies behave somewhat realistically.

It's fine for those that go online and fly against humans. But us that prefer singleplayer content, be it paid campaigns, dynamic campaign programs or our own missions. It would be nice if we don't have to fight X-Wing21s.

Edited May 31, 2024 by Gunfreak

[Silver_Dragon]

When its done...

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

17 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

When its done...

We thank you for your most helpful comment...

[irisono]

vor 17 Stunden schrieb Gunfreak:

With the F4 now out a lot of people who has mostly flown updated 4th Gen aircraft are now getting a taste of what the singleplayer cold war guy have experienced for years.

The AI flight behaviour on the early jets, MiG15, 19, 21, F5 etc. Having an MiG21 over preform by a lot is an annoyance in an F16. But not a major problem. Having a MiG21 over preform by a lot is a major issue in the F4.

Now that DCS has this high profile extremely well made 3rd Gen Aircraft. 

It's rather important that it's natural enemies behave somewhat realistically.

It's fine for those that go online and fly against humans. But us that prefer singleplayer content, be it paid campaigns, dynamic campaign programs or our own missions. It would be nice if we don't have to fight X-Wing21s.

 

It's not just a big nuisance for the F-4 jockeys, but for everyone who likes to play SP campaigns and Cold War era missions. Commercial campaigns, pre-80s modules like the F-5E, F-1C/E, F-86, all Migs -15, -19, -21, and even modern modules are thereby massively devalued since playing against AI opponents with such a crappy FM spoils the whole fun. In my opinion, it's a disgrace that ED is fobbing off its largest and most important customer group (SP users) with such poor quality AI FM and AI wingman behavior. It's very frustrating to see that the promise ED made years ago to remedy the situation with GFM has not been kept.

vor 17 Stunden schrieb Silver_Dragon:

When its done...

I cannot accept such statements. Especially since ED has made it clear that it will promote trends such as Cold War era simulation with the corresponding maps and modules. But Cold War air battles mean ACM/BFM with early Fox-1, rear aspect IR missiles and cannons. These weapons, but above all the behavior of the AI planes and the AI flight models, must be reasonably realistic; otherwise none of this makes sense. The prerequisites for such scenarios must be created before the maps and modules are introduced. Today we are a long way from having reasonably plausible ACM/BFM. In the meantime, ED sells us the modules which actually have little value to us due to the missing prerequisites. They keep us waiting for years with promises to improve the AI situation e.g. with GFM.

[Silver_Dragon]

22 minutes ago, irisono said:

I cannot accept such statements. Especially since ED has made it clear that it will promote trends such as Cold War era simulation with the corresponding maps and modules. But Cold War air battles mean ACM/BFM with early Fox-1, rear aspect IR missiles and cannons. These weapons, but above all the behavior of the AI planes and the AI flight models, must be reasonably realistic; otherwise none of this makes sense. The prerequisites for such scenarios must be created before the maps and modules are introduced. Today we are a long way from having reasonably plausible ACM/BFM. In the meantime, ED sells us the modules which actually have little value to us due to the missing prerequisites. They keep us waiting for years with promises to improve the AI situation e.g. with GFM.

The GFM has only apply on the use of AI flight behaviour FM, has nothing to do with ACM/BFM tactics, that has work appart. Remember the GFM stamemt and AI Tactics on Beyond newsletter:
 

Quote

 

Unit AI Improvements
In 2022 we saw great improvements to the Beyond Visual Range (BVR) and Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM) AI for our jet aircraft. Moving forward, we now intend to improve multi-ship BVR and Air Combat Maneuvering (ACM) tactics and appropriate AI tactics for World War II aircraft.

For ground units, our primary AI tasks include improved pathing and implementing suppression effects for more than just infantry units.

General Flight Model (GFM) for AI Aircraft
Whilst the updated BFM AI can make a significant difference in how the AI flies, the General Flight Model (GFM) will provide improved flight dynamics for AI aircraft that better constrain the aircraft to true-to-life performance.

GFM is a significant improvement to the Standard Flight Model (SFM) that is based on drag and thrust characteristic trajectories. The SFM can provide a good Center of Gravity trajectory model, but it relies on reliable source data to tune the overall performance that includes the entire flight envelope, sustained and instantaneous turn rate, energy gain, etc.

GFM adds additional short-period aircraft movement by adding our base solid body, contact models and aerodynamic moments. This results in more realistic control displacements during maneuvers that provide more human-like appearances. With GFM, the AI will also encounter wake turbulence.

 

None of that points has release yet by ED, and meanwhile dont put more news about your progress, only we need wait.
 

[irisono]

vor 45 Minuten schrieb Silver_Dragon:

The GFM has only apply on the use of AI flight behaviour FM, has nothing to do with ACM/BFM tactics, that has work appart. Remember the GFM stamemt and AI Tactics on Beyond newsletter:
 

None of that points has release yet by ED, and meanwhile dont put more news about your progress, only we need wait.
 

I don't think you've even come close to understanding the problem. Have you tried doing ACM with AI Migs with their current FM? It's like fighting UFOs, completely unrealistic. So, ACM and improved AI-FM behavior by using GFM do have something to do with each other, don't they? I won't no longer comment on your posts here until I've seen that you've understood the problem.

[Silver_Dragon]

21 minutes ago, irisono said:

I don't think you've even come close to understanding the problem. Have you tried doing ACM with AI Migs with their current FM? It's like fighting UFOs, completely unrealistic. So, ACM and improved AI-FM behavior by using GFM do have something to do with each other, don't they? I won't no longer comment on your posts here until I've seen that you've understood the problem.

That has a problem of the old AI Flight Model..... Remember the newsletters...
https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/newsletters/a134f231fe8269e1c78dd6d0dd8c3c9d/

Quote

Before describing our new General Flight Model (GFM) for AI, it may be useful to review the development history of flight models in DCS since inception. Initially, we used a trajectory model called Standard (SFM) for human players and a very simple model for AI which used primitive laws of physics. Eventually, the Advanced Flight Model (AFM) and its successor, the Professional Flight model (PFM) were developed and the SFM was adapted for AI aircraft. Although SFM produces accurate trajectory parameters such as turn rate, specific excess power, flight envelope, etc. it suffers from a lack of natural short-period movement and switched models for ground and flight.

Expanding the use of PFM or even AFM for AI aircraft wouldn’t be smart due to several key factors, notably AFM and PFM both require substantial work to create each individual aircraft flight data model. In addition, processor workload for runtime data in the mission would be excessive and greatly affect performance, especially when many different aircraft are present in the mission.

The approach in our new GFM will deliver accurate AI trajectory performance and copy the PFM’s short-period characteristics from the player-controlled models that we already have. The GFM ‘pilot’ will use the same control surface deflection as PFM and can naturally stall and spin as well; the GFM also experiences air turbulence. It is interesting to note that the short period characteristics of the new models also naturally depend on Mach numbers.

The greatest challenge when starting the work on GFM was creating a unique multi-level autopilot system capable of controlling any and all aircraft. Unlike standard autopilot programming approaches, which demand that each aircraft be adjusted individually, the new approach permits automatic use of aircraft flight parameters. This saves substantial time and delivers more accurate and realistic auto-pilot behaviour that is particularly appreciated for trans-sonic and supersonic regime changes, which now no longer require substantial tuning.

This fundamental work required about two years of programming with formation flying alone requiring an additional 5 months of intense development. The main task was to teach the AI to fly correctly but not as a supernatural drone but rather as a human pilot would, including micro-delays, errors and limitations. Soon, every pilot can practice the formation lead role and develop highly realistic skills without having to play online and depend on inadequate wingmen to hone his talent.

 

Quote

 

GFM
Development Progress
Mig-29 Fulcrum
Following the completion of tight formation GFM implementation our current GFM task is development of algorithms loose formation behavior. Due to the large turn radius for loose formation modes, wingmen must follow their own independent trajectories in order to position correctly on the leader. New algorithms are being developed to take both kinematic trajectories and pilot/aircraft visibility conditions into account, similar to what real pilots must to keep their lead aircraft always in sight.

Stab and trim position during speed changes
Stab trim position during acceleration and deceleration
The above graph is a recording of the stab trim position during acceleration and deceleration. As increased power creates a nose-up pitching moment, the stab trim positions are not the same for acceleration at max AB and deceleration at idle, especially at low speeds and requires more nose-down input. Mach-related changes are noticeable near Mach 1. We are really excited with the progress being made and are confident that the wingman GFM and general AI aircraft GFM will be unique in any simulation worldwide. Please follow the news for more information as we continue to enhance this highly complex general flight model.

 

None of them has a easy task, and that has maked on the Backends.... include AFM / BFM tactics.... That require has patience and ED put a develop update.

Edited June 1, 2024 by Silver_Dragon

[Exorcet]

GFM is a significant undertaking and we need to wait for it. However if something is a long ways off, a temporary solution might be worth investing in.

The current AI flight model reacts to weight, so adding additional weight and perhaps some drag universally or on a case by case basic would be a good idea. We have some methods of doing this already in the sim. Adding extra fuel and weapons or with the cargo command:

https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/DCS_func_setUnitInternalCargo

Having the option somewhere to apply cargo by default to any unit of a given type sounds like a good stop gap until GFM is more mature.

[SharpeXB]

My assumption is that this also has to wait for multicore to be finalized and perhaps Vulkan as well due to performance implications. Right now the game can fill the sky with B-17s. I can imagine giving all those planes better flight models will create a significant performance hit.  

[Gunfreak]

7 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

My assumption is that this also has to wait for multicore to be finalized and perhaps Vulkan as well due to performance implications. Right now the game can fill the sky with B-17s. I can imagine giving all those planes better flight models will create a significant performance hit.  

If I remember correctly when they first announced the GFM project. It would actually lead to better performance

[irisono]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Exorcet:

GFM is a significant undertaking and we need to wait for it. However if something is a long ways off, a temporary solution might be worth investing in.

The current AI flight model reacts to weight, so adding additional weight and perhaps some drag universally or on a case by case basic would be a good idea. We have some methods of doing this already in the sim. Adding extra fuel and weapons or with the cargo command:

https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/DCS_func_setUnitInternalCargo

Having the option somewhere to apply cargo by default to any unit of a given type sounds like a good stop gap until GFM is more mature.

Yes, I know you can set in the Advanced Waypoint Actions menu the attributes "restrict afterburner", "restrict jettison", force "passive defense" to your Mig-21 opponent. But in my opinion that's a pathetic botch and not worthy of such a renowned air combat simulation as DCS.

[F-2]

GFM and AI improvements are probably the most important single player issue to come so of course support.

[Exorcet]

1 hour ago, irisono said:

Yes, I know you can set in the Advanced Waypoint Actions menu the attributes "restrict afterburner", "restrict jettison", force "passive defense" to your Mig-21 opponent. But in my opinion that's a pathetic botch and not worthy of such a renowned air combat simulation as DCS.

It's not ideal but it is what we have now. Though the set cargo command is better than all of the other options as it doesn't interfere with hardpoints of limit/exaggerate fuel. My suggestion was also aimed more at ED to give us some way to tone down the AI until GFM arrives.

[Gunfreak]

8 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

It's not ideal but it is what we have now. Though the set cargo command is better than all of the other options as it doesn't interfere with hardpoints of limit/exaggerate fuel. My suggestion was also aimed more at ED to give us some way to tone down the AI until GFM arrives.

Can you add cargo to any aircraft?

Anyone actually done testing to see how to add just the right amount of cargo to get more correct performance for the old cold war stuff?

[NineLine]

On 5/31/2024 at 1:14 PM, Gunfreak said:

MiG15, 19, 21, F5

MiG-15 is reported already, I tried the MiG-21 tonight vs a couple of different aircraft and saw no real issue but If you have examples I am happy to take a look (please make a separate report in the AI Aircraft section) for the other aircraft again we need reports with tracks, I will try to check soon, but if you see weird things please save a track and post it to the forums. I would love to have the GFM but it's nothing like anyone has done for AI aircraft to date, its proved very challenging and very work-intensive. Because of this, it's important to have any and all bug reports on current AI behaviour. 

[diego999]

8 hours ago, Exorcet said:

It's not ideal but it is what we have now. Though the set cargo command is better than all of the other options as it doesn't interfere with hardpoints of limit/exaggerate fuel. My suggestion was also aimed more at ED to give us some way to tone down the AI until GFM arrives.

Didn't know about this option, just tried and it works great. Thank you.

 

[some1]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

I tried the MiG-21 tonight vs a couple of different aircraft and saw no real issue but If you have examples I am happy to take a look (please make a separate report in the AI Aircraft section)

Is that not enough? https://forum.dcs.world/topic/326798-ai-turn-performance-impossible-for-a-human-aircraft/#comment-5226532

You have a mission to test mig21 fm there. Have fun following him pulling 7-8 g.

Edited June 2, 2024 by some1

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

 

2 hours ago, NineLine said:

MiG-15 is reported already, I tried the MiG-21 tonight vs a couple of different aircraft and saw no real issue but If you have examples I am happy to take a look (please make a separate report in the AI Aircraft section) for the other aircraft again we need reports with tracks, I will try to check soon, but if you see weird things please save a track and post it to the forums. I would love to have the GFM but it's nothing like anyone has done for AI aircraft to date, its proved very challenging and very work-intensive. Because of this, it's important to have any and all bug reports on current AI behaviour. 

I would post some tracks, but am I going to get warned again for constructive criticism that isn't at all insulting? I'm sorry that the state of things in DCS aren't all peachy and some things are absolutely unacceptable, but how is it at all insulting to suggest it's a tremendous fumble to leave these features unaddressed for years? Who ever is deciding where the software is headed is making clear mistakes and pointing that needs to be done.

I don't know what AI MiG-21 FM you're using, but seeing it pull 8G without bleeding speed is not at all reflective of real life.  It's getting ridiculous how long these basic things go unaddressed. Do we really need brand new infantry models when other parts of the sim are in dire need of work?


 

Edited June 2, 2024 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[irisono]

vor 13 Stunden schrieb Exorcet:

It's not ideal but it is what we have now. Though the set cargo command is better than all of the other options as it doesn't interfere with hardpoints of limit/exaggerate fuel. My suggestion was also aimed more at ED to give us some way to tone down the AI until GFM arrives.

I don't know this command either. Would you be so kind and tell us where we can find this cargo command and with which tool we can add additional cargo to an AI aircraft?

[diego999]

5 hours ago, irisono said:

I don't know this command either. Would you be so kind and tell us where we can find this cargo command and with which tool we can add additional cargo to an AI aircraft?

Set a trigger -> do script -> copy the code in the text box. Change desired weight and edit the unit's name you want to add the load to.

That's it.

 

 

[irisono]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb diego999:

Set a trigger -> do script -> copy the code in the text box. Change desired weight and edit the unit's name you want to add the load to.

That's it.

vor 20 Stunden schrieb Exorcet:

It's not ideal but it is what we have now. Though the set cargo command is better than all of the other options as it doesn't interfere with hardpoints of limit/exaggerate fuel. My suggestion was also aimed more at ED to give us some way to tone down the AI until GFM arrives.

I am grateful to both of you for this tip. 

[Exorcet]

22 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

Can you add cargo to any aircraft?

Anyone actually done testing to see how to add just the right amount of cargo to get more correct performance for the old cold war stuff?

Yes the script works on any aircraft. I haven't actually incorporated it into my missions as standard yet so I don't have a weight to use per plane type, but that shouldn't be too hard to figure out with some testing. From tests of restricting AI jettison, the weight of a couple of bombs or fuel tanks seems to do a decent job.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

On 6/1/2024 at 9:44 PM, F-2 said:

GFM and AI improvements are probably the most important single player issue to come so of course support.

Indeed… There have been welcome changes already to BVR and BFM tactics the AI used but the UFO FM and their clairvoyant SA is seriously annoying.

That, and there being no difference in how fighters and bombers behave: today I had yet another Su-24 that came flying straight at me from 50nm away, merged and started dogfighting…

Su-17s are also a fine example: they’ll keep chasing you if you disengage from a dogfight with them…

[Gunfreak]

4 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Indeed… There have been welcome changes already to BVR and BFM tactics the AI used but the UFO FM and their clairvoyant SA is seriously annoying.

That, and there being no difference in how fighters and bombers behave: today I had yet another Su-24 that came flying straight at me from 50nm away, merged and started dogfighting…

Su-17s are also a fine example: they’ll keep chasing you if you disengage from a dogfight with them…

I had 3 SU-24s engage in a dogfight with 4 F-16s(me and 3 ace AI) and one of the Su-24s actually got a kill on a F16.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 minute ago, Gunfreak said:

I had 3 SU-24s engage in a dogfight with 4 F-16s(me and 3 ace AI) and one of the Su-24s actually got a kill on a F16.