SmokeyTheLung Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Su-27 6DOF cockpit is my guess. :megalol: System specifications: Computer, joystick, DCS world, Beer
JosefK Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Well I'd love to try flying the PAK-FA... or the J-20. Surprise me!
Kenan Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Is it out yet? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Commanding Officer of: 2nd Company 1st financial guard battalion "Mrcine" See our squads here and our . Croatian radio chat for DCS World
59th_LeFty Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 [sIGPIC]http://www.forum.lockon.ru/signaturepics/sigpic5279_1.gif[/sIGPIC] I could shot down a Kitchen :smartass:
Dudikoff Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 (edited) I'd like that too. Especially a flyable F-14 or F/A-18 maybe? After they said it took them a year to build the F-15 3D cockpit, isn't this a bit unrealistic to expect? :) YOU'RE GODDAMNRIGHT IT IS! Edited October 5, 2012 by Dudikoff i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
104th_Crunch Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Su-27 6DOF cockpit is my guess. Negative. There is already another thread in which it was reavealed that ED are using Ricardo's Cockpit textures for the Su-27. So, no full 6DOF. Still, better than default FC2 for sure.
luza Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 I wouldn't get your hopes up guys, that's a little steep expectation :) I'm sure however they had some last minute quirks, and took the time to also add a few features, and getting that step closer to their "ultimate" goal. :thumbup: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
joey45 Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 I wouldn't get your hopes up guys, that's a little steep expectation :) I'm sure however they had some last minute quirks, and took the time to also add a few features, and getting that step closer to their "ultimate" goal. :thumbup: World Domination.... The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. "Me, the 13th Duke of Wybourne, here on the ED forums at 3 'o' clock in the morning, with my reputation. Are they mad.." https://ko-fi.com/joey45
Kenan Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 ^^Well they sure dominate our lives.. :D [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Commanding Officer of: 2nd Company 1st financial guard battalion "Mrcine" See our squads here and our . Croatian radio chat for DCS World
Milene Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 where my fulcrum at ED ! Flanker, Flanker 2.0, Flanker 2.5, Lockon, FC1, FC2,FC3, BS1, BS2, A10C, CA and World [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
MaverickF22 Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Even with the tiniest effort, there should be a lot more seconds before blacking out! Do i really need them that much? ED should do that if they can't put a close enough value from what they could see, that is not my job! And even if nobody has them..., you don't necessarly need a pinpoint value to start working on it or making it at least as close to the real thing by just tweaking the damn values which affect the ammount of seconds before the blackout starts developing at 9G, until you find something which compares a lot closer to reality than just leaving it like that because you have no perfectly accurate data! I gave you some videos of how normal USAF pilots (and normally not just them) are able to withstand 9G for at least 16 seconds, and they were average/regular pilots for this kind of training, not the best..., and yes, they have withstanded that force primarly due to the good procedures training and less due to their body shape..., skinny/fat, whatever, and that's what they are called pilots for! A short person gains not more than 25% more time at 9G before blacking out (if a skinny stands 16 seconds at least..., the short fatty should stay at least 21), than a tall one..., so again, it's not the body as important, as it is the pilot..., and in the sim, we expect to have trained pilots already, so we don't need to set them on a training course with points for training and 9G experience to have them better, because maybe that could complicate the simulator even more, although it could be an interesting aspect for a simulator! So don't tell me that need to simulate in the game, how fed/muscled or tall/short the pilot is in order to make the sim calculate how many seconds sepparate him from the blackout since he was at 9G (rapid onset only)! When you want to do something..., you do it from your heart, not because someone asks you to do it, and you don't waste very much time on perfectioning it in the first phases..., but even if it takes time to set some better values (closer to real +/- 1-2 seconds, because it is impossible to have a REAL value for each individual), you still don't get this kind of crap..., blackout at 9G in 5 seconds!:doh: :bash: Afterall, here it is: a good G tolerance/time graph for a pilot with G-suit!: http://media.wiley.com/mrw_images/compphys/articles/cp040240/image_n/ncp04024014.jpg This is a real 9G pulling pilot: http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cke9D-OPBBM/0.jpg:pilotfly: This is ED's 9G pulling pilot: http://www.aero-news.net/images/content/general/2003/gforce-0303a.jpg Mistakes, obviously, show us what needs improving. Without mistakes, how would we know what we had to work on! Making DCS a better place for realism. Let it be, ED!
GGTharos Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Where's your STOHL chart? Videos of extremes are useless for modeling the average pilot. Do i really need them that much? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Witchking Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Negative. There is already another thread in which it was reavealed that ED are using Ricardo's Cockpit textures for the Su-27. So, no full 6DOF. Still, better than default FC2 for sure. yeah! Was disappointed to see that. Fine...they are incorporating Ricardo's textures which are great...but its not a replacement or even anywhere close to the league of that F-15C cockpit. WHISPR | Intel I7 5930K | Nvidia GTX980 4GB GDDR5 | 16GB DDR4 | Intel 730 series 512GB SSD | Thrustmaster WARTHOG | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR4 pro | |A-10C|BS2 |CA|P-51 MUSTANG|UH-1H HUEY|MI-8 MTV2 |FC3|F5E|M2000C|AJS-37|FW190|BF 109K|Mig21|A-10:SSC,EWC|L-39|NEVADA|
blkspade Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Where's your STOHL chart? Videos of extremes are useless for modeling the average pilot. One could ask "What's average about a fighter pilot?" Maybe it would be more accurate in saying that the blackout handling is seemingly modeled toward the in-game pilot being an average person that happens to be pilot, which happens to be flying fighter jet, for some strange reason. Possibly without the aid of a G-Suit. Perhaps that's where the issue lies. Barring an Independence Day movie scenario, we would assume the pilot in the cockpit has the training (knowledge of the 'hick' maneuver) and meets all other physical qualifications required to be in the seat. Is the in-game pilot modeled as not even trying? http://104thphoenix.com/
wasserfall Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Negative. There is already another thread in which it was reavealed that ED are using Ricardo's Cockpit textures for the Su-27. So, no full 6DOF. Still, better than default FC2 for sure. Are you sure it,s Ricardo,s cockpit, or is it confirmed? Intel Core i5-9600K, Gigabyte Z390 AORUS PRO, 16GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro, Gigabyte GeForce RTX 2080 WINDFORCE 8G
Nate--IRL-- Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Are you sure it,s Ricardo,s cockpit, or is it confirmed? Yep, ED bought them from Ricardo and made a few changes. Nate Ka-50 AutoPilot/stabilisation system description and operation by IvanK- Essential Reading
GGTharos Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 One could ask "What's average about a fighter pilot?" There are many pilots, there is an average. Maybe it would be more accurate in saying that the blackout handling is seemingly modeled toward the in-game pilot being an average person that happens to be pilot, They'd be blacking out before 9g, even with the g-suit. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
59th_Buncsi Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 They'd be blacking out before 9g, even with the g-suit. Depends on the pilot. Not everyone is the same... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
ED Team JimMack Posted October 5, 2012 ED Team Posted October 5, 2012 There are many pilots, there is an average. They'd be blacking out before 9g, even with the g-suit. If you read the official P51D manuals, pilots were advised not to pull more than 4G to avoid black out. The average 20 year old pilot was not trained to resist the effect of G. The manual that covered P51Ds used in Korea, the advice was not to pull more than 6G with the early G suits they had. That is why the performance charts are based on 4G (and 6G for the Korean version). One must not confuse between a short instantaneous G pull, and a sustained G pull. Having problems? Visit http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/Main_Page Dell Laptop M1730 -Vista- Intel Core 2 Duo T7500@2.2GHz, 4GB, Nvidia 8700MGT 767MB Intel i7 975 Extreme 3.2GHZ CPU, NVidia GTX 570 1.28Gb Pcie Graphics.
GGTharos Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 The average person will. Now, you might be above or below the average line on a graph for various reasons, so yes, everyone is different. But based on the average, the expetation is that you'll be having sweet non-dreams. Depends on the pilot. Not everyone is the same... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 Yes sir! Although now these limits have gone up significantly thanks to primarily AGSM training and other conditioning, and g-suits. This is a good example of 'average g-tolerance person in fighter plane', the P-51D. If you read the official P51D manuals, pilots were advised not to pull more than 4G to avoid black out. The average 20 year old pilot was not trained to resist the effect of G. The manual that covered P51Ds used in Korea, the advice was not to pull more than 6G with the early G suits they had. That is why the performance charts are based on 4G (and 6G for the Korean version). One must not confuse between a short instantaneous G pull, and a sustained G pull. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Moa Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 (edited) I have had some grey-out on the periphery of my vision doing a loop at four and a quarter g, as a young, fit 20 year old guy. No G-suit. Th G limit at which you are still combat effective is usually below the G limit at which you can still be conscious. This is probably the reason for the 4G limit recommendation for average pilots. A 9 G turn can only be held for a few seconds. IIRC F-16 pilots have to be conscious for 10 seconds at 9G in a centrifuge as part of their selection/training. Many pilots used to maneuvering still pass out. In an aircraft you notice even 2 G. You can function at 4 but it starts gettin' tough, and there are time limits. At 9 G only the fittest people with G suit can handle it. And then some muppet comes on here and says they routinely do 14 G in their aerobatic aircraft (I'm not counting the occasional millisecond transients, but your G meter won' show these). Lol, it is clear they haven't even done 2 or 3 G - or they would know how ridiculous that is. To reinforce this, take a look at the videos of young guys that pay for rides in Sukhois or MiG. They are struggling to concentrate even at lower Gs (although their screaming like little girls seems to be on autopilot). At higher Gs they do pass out, fortunately the pilot is conditioned for this during the few seconds it takes for an aerobatic maneuver. GGTharos is entirely right when talking about thinking in terms of average pilots. For example, the exceptional eyesight of Chuck Yeager and other aces was nearly twice that of the average pilot, IIRC. In a sim you have to go by the average values or it is not realistic. Even better than thinking about averages is getting technical and thinking about 'distributions'. For a normal shaped distribution the 'expectation value' is the mean or average. You can get different distibutions, bimodal under certain circumstances. Thinking in terms of distributions helps when considering a lot of pilot variables: fitness, eyesight, skill etc. For example, the distribution of pilot flight hours for the USAF is higher than Ethiopian air force for example. So on average you would expect a USAF pilot to beat his Eithopian counter-part most of the time (since combat skill is strongly correlated with flight hours). Now, because it is a distribution it may turn out that you have an Ethiopian of 'ace' quality vs a USAF nugget and the Ethiopian would probably win. That's all good. The *big problem* comes when you take that latter example from different parts of the ability spectrum and assume this is the 'expectation value' or average. That is why is is a mistake to say: * because you once read about a pilot doing 9 G for 20 seconds that all pilots can do it. * because you read that Aircraft A once beat Aircraft B is a dogfight that this would mean Aircraft A would usually beat Aircraft B. Applies to Eurofighter beat F-22 in a match, Indian pilots vs USAF in Red Flag etc. These 'upsets' can happen, due to exceptionally skilled pilots, but it is not the statistical expectation value (for an average pilot) * because Chuck Yeager used to spot Messerscmitts at 20 miles you should be able to see the MiG-29 at the same range * etc I hope that helps some readers put things in perspective - in the way that strange things can happen in aviation, but when you start thinking in terms of where does this even fit on a likelihood distribution then you can better judge whether what you heard/read is likely to happen often, or is a less likely event. So, thinking in terms of distributions, most pilots can function around 4G for useful time periods. Hence, as JimMack points out, 4G is what the manual says. Some pilots can do more (fit and feelin well), some can do less (less fit, and/or feeling exhausted/sick/hungover!). Make sense? Edited October 5, 2012 by Moa Typos, sorry 3
104th_Crunch Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 I have had some grey-out on the periphery of my vision doing a loop at four and a quarter g, as a young, fit 20 year old guy. No G-suit... So, after all those beers and many years later, maybe you could do 1 G now? I see. Just kidding. Excellent point about distribution.
cichlidfan Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 I hope that helps some readers put things in perspective - Well said. :thumbup: ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup:
evilnate Posted October 5, 2012 Posted October 5, 2012 I wonder if it would be a problem (complications with previous publisher) for ED or 3rd parties to make more AC that are equal in quality and fidelity as those in FC? If it's not a problem, wouldn't it take far less development time to crank out some low-fidelity modules? Maybe a F-18 at the same fidelity level as the F-15 perhaps?
Recommended Posts