Old Envy

[REL]

Going over the old "Falcon 4.0 Original Manual" for BMS purposes made me think...

 

Too bad that the ATC depth and authenticity seems to be on the far end of ED‘s To-Do List ,and with all the new products who know when or if we will get to see it’s done.

 

I personally think that ED should give those features priority as they are the very basic foundation of a good simulation.

 

What do you guys think?

 

 

CHAPTER

24

24-2

If you think the missionÕs over once youÕve dropped your bombs and headed for home, think

again. As a fighter pilot, you are merely one small part of a huge theater of operations. That

means getting airplanes in the air and back on the ground must happen efficiently. If departure or

recovery operations get fouled up at any of the bases, it will delay some packages from making

their missions on time and will leave other members of a package out in enemy territory without

the added support of their whole package.

This chapter covers the procedures for getting you and your flight members in and out of your

airbase. Since several other missions could be departing or recovering within a short period of

time, follow ATC (Air Traffic Control) procedures to keep airport operations running smoothly. If

problems occur, you also need to know what to do to get yourself onto the ground safely.

Ground Operations

Missions in Tactical Engagement and Campaign begin either on the ground or in the air. In

Campaign, if you select a mission that has not yet taken off, you will begin your mission on the

ground and you can start from taxiing or directly from takeoff. Once you select and set up your

mission, load your ordnance and get your flight briefing, itÕs time to climb into your jet and execute

a combat mission from start to finish. Select the Fly icon to start the mission.

Select Takeoff to be placed on the runway at your takeoff time ready to launch. Consider yourself

cleared for takeoff, so Òlight the wickÓ and get on your way. Other aircraft will be trying to land or

be waiting to take off.

Select Taxi to begin right in the thick of ground operations at a combat airbase. Your flight can be

in line with other packages getting ready to take off and other aircraft returning to land. As you

start taxiing, you will be cleared to Òtaxi in sequenceÓ and the tower may give you a sequence

number for departure. If nobody in front of you delays getting onto the runway, then you should

be able to taxi with the flow of aircraft and get cleared for takeoff in time to make your mission.

The actions of aircraft on the airfield can affect the package flow of your flight and that of other

packages, preventing them from making their missions on time. If you get out of the taxi flow and

waste time driving around the airfield, expect the tower to ask you whatÕs going on. If you delay

too long and you cannot catch up with your package to make your mission on time, your flight will

be canceled by the mission director. A computer-controlled aircraft will take over for you and

youÕll be heading back to the squadron with your tail between your legs, looking for another

mission to fly.

Departure

Once you are Ò#1Ó for takeoff (the next aircraft to take the runway), you may be directed to Òhold

short,Ó probably for landing traffic. If so, you can taxi up to the edge of the runwayÑbut donÕt

enter it unless you want someone on final approach to put his landing gear through your canopy.

You also might be cleared to Òposition and hold.Ó If you hear this, taxi onto the runway and hold

 

24-3

C H A P T E R 24

 

AIRPORT OPERATIONS

your position for takeoff. Someone else probably hasnÕt cleared the runway yet. As soon as you

are Òcleared for takeoff,Ó you are expected to get on your way to do your part in pounding your

enemy into the dirt. DonÕt waste any time getting in the air, especially if the tower tells you to

ÒexpediteÓ your departure.

Once you are airborne, select and fly to the next steerpoint on your route so you can meet up with

other flights in your package and make your time on target. Since you no longer need to talk to

ATC, change radio channels to monitor your enroute frequency and begin listening to AWACS and

other flights involved in the battlefield.

You do need to get your flight rejoined for the mission. Once safely airborne, the flight lead will

accelerate to 350 knots (the standard airspeed for departure) and then pull his power back

slightly. This gives the other flight members a chance to join up and get into the proper formation.

Once the flight is joined up, you can then maintain whatever speed you need to make the timing

work on your mission.

 

Recovery

The mission isnÕt over until you get your aircraft on the ground safely so that it can be prepared for

the next flight. You could very well be returning to your base at the same time as several other

packages. This means ATC has to sequence all of this traffic into the airfield for a smooth recovery

of aircraft. If you decide to blunder straight into the field without getting clearance to land, you

could cause traffic conflicts with other aircraft being sequenced on the approachÑand you can at

least expect to hear about it from the tower.

As you head for home, make sure your TACAN is set with the right channel for the airfield you are

set for recovery. Since hopefully youÕre to land at the same base you took off from, you shouldnÕt

have to change the TACAN channel. Not only will this help you navigate back to the right field, but

it keys your radio into the right approach controller for your airfield. You certainly wouldnÕt want to

receive vectors from the Osan airbase controller when you are trying to land at Chungju! For more

information, see ÒNavigation SystemÓ in Chapter 17: The Consoles.

 

Approach Procedures

To recover back at your base, you first need to contact Approach

Control (press T for tower) and let them know you are inbound to

land. ATC monitors the general area within 30 nm around each airbase

to sequence the landing traffic with aircraft waiting to depart. If you try

to contact ATC too far from the field, you will be notified that you are

Òoutside of their airspaceÓ and to contact them when you reach 30 nm

from the field. If you wait until you are too close to the field to call

Approach, then things will get extremely busy and confusing as ATC

tries to vector every one of your flight members (along with whomever

else is arriving to land) all at once.

24-4

Even with everything flowing smoothly, things can get busy as youÕre returning to the field, so

here are the procedures to follow to help ATC manage the flow of aircraft during the recovery.

Contact Approach for landing about 30 nm from the base. If your flight is returning to the base

together, then Approach Control knows that the flight leadÕs Òinbound to landÓ call applies to the

whole flight. (Each member of the flight can still make the same request, but it isnÕt necessary.) If

your flight has been separated during the mission and you are returning to base at different times,

then go ahead and make your own call to approach when you recover to the field.

If you are returning to the field by yourself, Approach should tell you to Òcontinue inboundÓ and

expect vectors to final. If you are part of a flight returning together, Approach will also advise you

to Òtake spacing.Ó Each member of the flight will eventually be given individual vectors to final

when you get closer to the field. If you can get some separation between flight members sooner,

you wonÕt be receiving vectors for everyone at the same time.

ÒTaking spacingÓ during the recovery simply means to begin spreading your flight out as you

continue inbound toward the field. The flight lead should maintain airspeed while the others slow

down. Once they get some distance behind the flightmate in front of them, they can then resume

their original airspeed. HereÕs an example. YouÕre in Hammer 1 flight heading into Osan airbase at

350 knots. At 30 nm from the field, Hammer 11 calls up Approach requesting to land. Approach

tells the flight to continue inbound and take spacing. If you are Hammer 11, maintain your speed

while the other flight members slow down about 50 knots. If you are Hammer 12, wait about a

minute after youÕve slowed down and then speed back up to 350 knots. This should put you

about a mile behind Hammer 11. If you are Hammer 13, then slow down for about 2 minutes

before resuming your speed, putting you about a mile behind Hammer 12 (and 2 miles behind

Hammer 11). If you are Hammer 14, slow down for about 3 minutes.

DonÕt worry if you donÕt

have time to do this or if

you get vectored before

you have time to spread

out. Approach will still give

each of you vectors to

sequence you into the field.

Once that happens, you

donÕt have to worry about your other flight members; just follow ATCÕs instructions.

Approach Control will assign you a specific vector and airspeed to fly the approach pattern. For

fighter aircraft, pattern airspeed will usually be around 250 knots, but Approach Control could

adjust that for pattern sequencing. If all the fighter aircraft in the pattern maintain a fairly

consistent airspeed, it will help Approach sequence aircraft in for landing much more efficiently.

If Approach determines no landing slot is available at the moment, you may be directed to ÒorbitÓ

while Approach finds the spacing to fit you in and gives you further clearance. This could also

happen if you fly so far off your assigned pattern you get yourself out of sequence for landing in

 

24-5

C H A P T E R 24

 

AIRPORT OPERATIONS

the traffic flow. In this case youÕll want to get out of the way of other traffic, so make a turn away

from the airfield and set up an orbit to hold while you wait for Approach to resequence you back

in for landing. Do this by making 360° turns at 250 knots with about 30° of bank and continuing

the orbit until Approach Control gives you new vectors for the approach. Once it does, just

continue your present turn until you can roll out onto the assigned heading. Then follow

instructions in for landing.

Once Approach begins to give you vectors, expect to be flown around a ground track resembling

a standard traffic pattern (see the figure below). If you are mostly lined up with the active runway

as you approach the field, you might simply be given vectors straight in for a landing. If your

position is near 90° off the end of the runway, you will probably enter a base leg (near

perpendicular to the final approach course) before getting turned down final.

If you are coming from the opposite direction of the active runway, expect to fly a downwind leg

parallel to the runway until getting turned to a base leg and then down final. Remember, since

Approach might be sequencing you into

the flow of any number of recovering

aircraft with different vectors, the traffic

pattern wonÕt always look the same each

time you return to the field.

Remember, in this combat theater of

operations, the job of Approach Control is

simply to help sequence aircraft for

recoveries and takeoffs. (DonÕt count on

them to land your plane for you!) YouÕve

still got fly the jet down the approach and

get it on the ground safely, so refer to Chapter 3: Landing and Navigation if you still need

practice with landing.

As Approach Control gives the last call to line you up on the final approach course, it will advise

you to slow to approach speed. This is a good time to drop your landing gear, pull the power back

and slow down from your pattern airspeed. This is also the time when Approach Control will hand

you off to the Tower Controller.

 

Final Approach

As you continue down the final approach, the tower will give you a call either letting you know

what your sequence is for landing (such as ÒYou are #2 for landingÓ) or giving you clearance to

land if you are the next one down and the runway is open. The tower will also give you an advisory

call to make sure your landing gear are down.

For help in flying the approach at your destination, refer to Appendix C: Airport Maps.

Standard traffic pattern

Final

Base

leg

Downwind leg

 

24-6

 

Landing

If you have followed Approach ControlÕs vectors, you should

be lined up with the final approach course. As you make the

turn to final is a good time to lower your gear and begin

slowing down. Then at 6 nm from the field, begin your descent

down final as you intercept the 3° glide slope.

Make sure your speed brakes are out. Pull your power back to

reduce your airspeed until you are flying at an 11° AOA

approach speed. (This speed varies depending on how much

fuel and stores you still have on the aircraft at the time.) As you

fly down final, your flight path marker should be at 3° on the

HUD pitch scale and sitting on the end of the runway. If you

are on a glide slope that is too steep (flight path and touch down zone below 3° on the HUD

scale), then push the nose over to get back on glide slope and reduce your power to control your

airspeed. If you are too shallow, then level off or climb until you intercept the 3° glide slope again.

It will be much easier to land

if you can keep the jet on a

stable glide slope and

airspeed. This will help you

judge your height above the

ground and determine when

to flare. As you approach the

runway, keep the flight path

marker on the landing end of the runway until you flare. When you get over the end of the runway,

pull your power to idle and ease back slowly to begin the flare. Let the jet settle to the runway,

slow to taxi speed and clear the runway quickly, as other traffic is landing or waiting to take off.

 

Emergencies

Remember, this is a combat environment. What happens if your airfield is attacked and the

runway is damaged before you can get back on the ground? Expect the tower controller to divert

you to an alternate airbase. Get your gear up and speed brakes closed, start climbing and turn to

the divert heading you are given. DonÕt forget to set the divert base TACAN channel on the way.

What if the runway is closed only temporarily? Then expect to be directed to execute a missed

approach or to go around. In this case, however, you will probably be told to contact Approach for

resequencing. Give them a call requesting clearance to land, and they should set you up with new

vectors to final.

If you are returning to base with an emergency, such as battle damage or low fuel, then tell ATC

you are declaring an emergency. Head for the field and get your jet on the ground as soon as

possible. Hopefully, you wonÕt close the runway or delay other aircraft from taking off or landing

for too long!

 

Edited September 18, 2012 by REL

[upupandaway]

I would mostly agree with your point since some of the things I would very much like to see are apparently low priority and might only some day make it into DCS. ATC is one of them as well...

Especially since much more obscure bugs have been fixed in the past and ATC for example seems rather big in comparison.

But currently the more global architecture of the sim is being worked on and understandably it´s the highest priority. Best wait for the next patch, as always. Something always makes it in besides the major issues.

[Spadje]

In all honesty couldnt they outsource that aspect of the sim? Its just voice recordings and triggers. Mind you I am a hardware engineer and not software so I look at things completely differently :)

[Echo38]

I personally think that ED should give those features priority as they are the very basic foundation of a good simulation.

 

What do you guys think?

 

Since you asked, I think that they aren't even close to the basic foundation of a good aircraft simulation. There are a thousand other things which are more core to a flight sim than air traffic controllers. Why do I say this? Well, it's because, in real life, it is possible to fly an airplane (even a military one) from an uncontrolled airfield. Whereas, you can't fly a real airplane without, for example, drag. So, things like realistic fluid & ground physics, realistic systems & avionics, and accurate aircraft specifications are at the very core, the most important things in a flight sim. Second to that are things like wind (second because, in reality, you can fly without wind, because sometimes it really is truly calm), weapons (with realistic ballistics), and a detailed terrain, and only tertiary are things like ATC and ground forces.

 

ATC is necessary for a complete sim, sure, but, for the same reason, technically, so are sheep in the fields. Of course, the former are more relevant than the latter, but neither is strictly necessary for a flight sim to be realistic, particularly one which has a limited focus. The reason why they aren't necessary in a realistic sim is, again, because it is possible in reality to fly real airplanes without ATC (just as it's possible in reality to fly over empty fields and not see any sheep).

 

E.D.'s study sims are more of a detailed simulation of a particular aircraft, and not a survey sim or a battlefield sim. For that reason, as well as the others, they don't truly require ATC or other elements of R.L. communication & logistics. Would it be nice if they modelled all that in detail? Sure, it would, but there is an immense number of things I'd rather see first, such as wingtip vortices and propwash from other aircraft, which are crucial to the realism of the simulation (as you can't fly behind another airplane in reality without those things affecting you), or even less critical things like improved ejection physics and an improved system for getting out on the ground, walking around, and getting back in.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Echo38

[159th_Falcon]

Since you asked, I think that they aren't even close to the basic foundation of a good simulation. There are a thousand other things which are much more core to a flight sim than air traffic controllers. Why do I say this? Well, it's because, in real life, it is possible to fly an airplane (even a military one) from an uncontrolled airfield. Whereas, you can't fly a real airplane without, for example, drag.

 

So, things like realistic fluid & ground physics, realistic systems & avionics, and accurate aircraft specifications are at the very core, the most important things in a flight sim. Second to that are things like wind (second because, in reality, you can fly without wind, because sometimes it really is truly calm), weapons (with realistic ballistics), and a detailed terrain, and only tertiary are things like ATC and ground forces.

 

ATC is necessary for a complete sim, sure, but, for the same reason, technically, so are sheep in the fields. Of course, the former are more relevant than the latter, but neither is strictly necessary in a realistic flight sim, particularly one which has a limited focus. The reason why they aren't necessary in a realistic sim is, again, because it is possible in reality to fly real airplanes without ATC (just as, although you'd usually see various life forms below you in the fields when you look down, it's possible to fly over empty fields in reality and so not see any).

 

And how much percent of global airtraffic flies without ATC??? very little.

Furthermore, all other things you mentioned already are in DCS:World for the largest part.

 

So i'd say its a good time to improve the ATC (once again).

[badger66]

I reckon a very basic command needed , is for a damaged approach .

 

Requesting imediate landing request from any degree , and a request for a claer runway .

 

Way too much time is spent trying to type this stuff in chat , and can lead to some hairy moments if not listened too .

 

Perhaps , only the command could be allowed when your really in a tough spot .

[wess24m]

Last night ATC cleared me to land while there was both aircraft taking off on the active runway AND my wingman on final (10 sec from touching down). I'd say we at least need a functional ATC. The biggest immersion killer for me is the random crashes CTDs, nothing like taking 10-15 mins getting all started up, setting up the cockpit (*cough* DATA CARTRAGE) then CTD, happens in both MP and SP.

[BaD CrC]

Kinda agree with Echo38. The lack of high fidelity ATC in the sim can be compensated in MP with human controllers (OK, nothing for SP). My squad even benefits from real AWACS crew and military controlers during LANs. But if you have a lousy flight or weapon or system modeling, well,..there pretty much nothing you can do.

So I would say the realistic ATC is more for the moment on the "nice to have" list. Point to ED that did improve a bit the ATC since BS1.

[Echo38]

And how much percent of global airtraffic flies without ATC??? very little.

 

That's true, but it's irrelevant to the point I made--the point is that it's entirely possible to fly a real aircraft without using the radio, so a simulation which is realistic in all aspects of the aircraft and the physical world around it, but does not feature civilian life and the guy on the other end of the radio, can't really be said to be unrealistic, as it simply is incomplete in its scope rather than inaccurate in its modelling.

 

Whereas, with physics, you can't leave out the physics of anything encompassing the flying of an aircraft* and still end up with a realistic simulation, because an airplane that isn't affected by [insert physical phenomenon here] is, by definition, unrealistic.

 

* That is, pretty much everything that's more pertinent to flying than boob physics are.

 

Furthermore, all other things you mentioned already are in DCS:World for the largest part.

 

That's mostly true, and that's the good news. However, there are still quite a few things aren't yet modelled, or aren't modelled quite accurately, which are closer to the core of an aircraft simulation than ground life is. Like I said, you can fly a real A-10 without using the radio, but you can't fly a real A-10 without leaving wingtip vortices behind you.

 

And, of course, there's the even more important problem that others have pointed out: program stability & performance and GUI improvements, which are, in the big picture, even more important than bringing in the wingtip vortices (which is probably the biggest missing hole in the flight simulation itself).

Edited September 18, 2012 by Echo38

[upupandaway]

E.D.'s study sims are more of a detailed simulation of a particular aircraft, and not a survey sim or a battlefield sim.

 

This is certainly true up until the release of DCS: World. The keyword "battlefield sim" however sounds very much like the vague plans ED has outlined in the past for the whole series. Slowly coming along it is and I think a more elaborate ATC is a reqirement for such a game.

 

And how much percent of global airtraffic flies without ATC??? very little.

Furthermore, all other things you mentioned already are in DCS:World for the largest part.

 

So i'd say its a good time to improve the ATC (once again).

 

I can´t get rid of the feeling that this whole discretion going on about the full list of features of FC3 and current CA/EDGE/Next Jet status is just the "quiet before the storm". Major surprise releases for example aren´t uncommon for them.

To me personally , it seems just reasonable to tie FC3 into a new and more finalized version of DCS: World (1.2.1?) along with all the modules. This may or may not include new ATC functionality, of course.

[Echo38]

This is certainly true up until the release of DCS: World. The keyword "battlefield sim" however sounds very much like the vague plans ED has outlined in the past for the whole series.

 

Aye, but I said "study sims." CA and FC3 aren't study sims. I'm speaking solely of DCS: Ka-50, DCS: A-10C, and DCS: P-51D, because those are the realistic ones. The FC series is less than realistic, as it does not have accurate avionics or detailed systems (and so far it's also had simplified physics; while FC3 is supposed to change some of that, I'm under the impression it still won't be up to the standard seen in DCS: A-10C). I'm not much interested in less-than-realistic survey sims. I am, however, deeply interested in the DCS study sims, and I wish for them to be as much like flying the real aircraft as possible--and so things like wingtip vortices & propwash for other aircraft (and even less-important things like better ejection physics) are much more important to me than ATC. Which is not to say that I don't want to see proper ATC; I would like to see a good portrayal of communications. Just, not before the more central issues (program stability, sim physics, esoteric avionics, etc.) are improved.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Echo38

[upupandaway]

I would like to see a good portrayal of communications. Just, not before the more central issues are taken care of.

 

Yeah, I would love to see vortices as well as ATC, no argument there.

About central issues - like wing flex on the A-10 perhaps, prop wash or wing tip vortices maybe? What is central to ED? This can hardly go beyond mere speculation - unfortunately, they don´t really say anything about their specific plans with this.

I doubt that they would revise parts of the individual FMs for such additional effects and this sounds to me like possibly rather extensive modifications.

Also, I don´t want to look at it like "priority ATC vs. prop wash". It´s equally reasonable to request both features, because the actual or simulated experience of flying an aircraft encompasses more than just the experience of it´s flight characteristics. FC3 could still have one good side if you don´t care for it otherwise - the missile AFM. (maybe)

[Echo38]

wing flex

 

Yes, that's another big one! I've actually never seen any flight sim which features it. Someone to whom I once mentioned this told me that MSFS had it. I don't do civilian sims, so I can't confirm that, but what I can tell you is that none of the many aerial combat sim/games I've played over the years have featured visible wing flex. This is especially perplexing because dogfighting is where wing flex is really noticeable to me. Every time I've seen a video shot from the cockpit of a fighter jet, looking back, you can see the wings wobbling like a billy-oh whenever he makes a hard turn.

 

I don't want to be petulant or overly critical, though. As I mentioned in another thread, I feel that E.D. are doing things approximately 97% right and only 3% wrong. I am as much in love with DCS now as I was when I first tried it about three months ago. I still am astounded by the incredibly high standard, the quality, and how much better it does almost every aspect of the simulation than any other out there. That doesn't mean I'm blind to the various (mostly minor) imperfections and gaps, but, while I--as most of us surely do--want DCS to be even better than it already is (and also want some things that we'll probably never see), it's an unbelievably good sim.

 

All this is a tangent to the O.P., and doesn't have much to do with my earlier reply to it; I noticed that my critique of some of the things on my wishlist was reading awfully like a grouchy complaint, and I feel that E.D. has earned better than that. When so much is done right, I've noticed, it becomes regrettably easy to focus on what little is wrong. Pointing out how great the good stuff is can feel awfully like saying the obvious, while pointing out little problems has more obvious utility (as many of them might overwise not be known). But, I've worked on the beta team for a different sim-game, and I've seen how discouraging some of the harsh criticism can be for a team--or an individual--that works really hard on something for which there isn't an enormous payback.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Echo38

[Tailgate]

It's interesting because I hear suggestions (wish list) for dual cockpit / multiple station support. I don't know if there are hooks for that or if it's even possible without an entire re-write, but for 3P devs, that may be high on the priority list to give more range in the type of aircraft that can be developed.

[almonds]

I can't agree more. ATC is terrible and more of a nuisance than anything helpful.

[upupandaway]

Yes, that's another big one! I've actually never seen any flight sim which features it.

 

Seven-G´s F-18 does that I think, but I´m not 100% sure.

[sobek]

Some planes in X-plane feature it too. DCS BS does it too, btw.

[Tasmanian]

For complete sim need guys who will play as ATC. AI ATC is crap no matter how it is done. (read: they will never make AI ATC at acceptable level)

[Cookie]

like wing flex on the A-10

Does the wing of the A-10 even flex all that much? It looks quite stubby and beefy to me.

[Echo38]

All aircraft wings flex. Even short (e.g. 15-foot each) wings can flex at least six inches, and that's enough to see.

 

You can see a little bit of flex in this video, but it's difficult to see because of the wide-angle lens, which makes everything tiny (including the vibrations):

Edited September 22, 2012 by Echo38

[Cookie]

Not all wings flex, just modern ones (starting at around WW2). As for the A-10, I´m aware that its wings flex, it´s just that the flex is so small that I don´t think most people would even notice if it were modelled.

 

If it had the wings of the 787 however... ;)

[SUBS17]

ATC adds alot to immersion currently ATC has been upgraded a bit but it could use more. Mission creators can add options and communications options but its not the same as an upgraded ATC. The ATC needs to be upgraded as well as the AI so ATC requires extra options such as declaring an emergency and also the passing from one Air Space to another as well as weather freq etc. All AI must have audio and go through an automatic script process for vector to landing like F4AF. Maybe not constant vectors but the option for them to do it when necessary. Also the options for the approach like straight in or stacking. Added immersion could include such features as an emergency response script with fire trucks etc and the addition of ground crew and scripted fuel trucks. :thumbup: