FC3 Bug thread

[RIPTIDE]

World ... something. You should always pick up friendly SAMs; a long time ago this was eliminated in an effort to eliminate some of the random friendly fire from SAMs, IIRC.

In MP play, sams deactivate themselves when enemies are outside their detection range (actually it's a bit beyond their nominal detection range). When bandits come closer nails appear.

 

I've also noticed that if I'm in a FC3 flyable, when I'm between a SAM and a bandit, I get a lock tone at the range the SAM would lock the bandit.

[159th_Viper]

@Viper or GGTharos: many issues were raised on this topic that were said not to be this topic related. Could you then tell us on wich topic we ought to report these issues (such as AI aircraft lately activaated not having ejection seats inside untill aircaft is trigger activated)

Than you

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=185

[159th_Viper]

In MP play, sams deactivate themselves when enemies are outside their detection range (actually it's a bit beyond their nominal detection range). When bandits come closer nails appear.

 

Normal.

 

One could even argue that this is a rudimentary simulation of an IADS where these SAM systems would be getting information relayed to them via datalink from an ERW, thus facilitating late activation and last-minute engagement. Thankfully for the player this last-minute engagement is not simulated *yet*.

 

 

 

I've also noticed that if I'm in a FC3 flyable, when I'm between a SAM and a bandit, I get a lock tone at the range the SAM would lock the bandit.

 

That would also make sense if you are, as you say, between the tracking radar of the SAM and the bandit being tracked. Your RWR does not distinguish friend from foe as it relates to SAM systems. As far as it is concerned, all systems are displayed - it's up to the player to filter accordingly.

[RIPTIDE]

Normal.

 

One could even argue that this is a rudimentary simulation of an IADS where these SAM systems would be getting information relayed to them via datalink from an ERW, thus facilitating late activation and last-minute engagement. Thankfully for the player this last-minute engagement is not simulated *yet*.

 

 

 

 

 

That would also make sense if you are, as you say, between the tracking radar of the SAM and the bandit being tracked. Your RWR does not distinguish friend from foe as it relates to SAM systems. As far as it is concerned, all systems are displayed - it's up to the player to filter accordingly.

Yep. I thought so. Just for clarity, I wasn't reporting them as a bug only the ARM missiles issue. Friendly SEAD missiles in the air at a target area for example will light up the friendly sams back at base.

[Maraudeur]

:thumbup:Thanks Viper

[59th_LeFty]

@Viper: The new dynamics for friendly sams activating when bandits are near and giving mud nails to friendlies ALSO occurs in the absence of bandits when friendly SEAD missiles are fired in the general area.

 

EDIT: Is this a World or FC3 bug? Or is it a bug really?

 

Probably they are not programmed to consider any missile as friendly. And I guess they are right, given the number of blue-on-blue cases :)

 

However in the mission editor you can setdefault values to their alarm state as Green or Red. Green sets them to go R&R and don't give a dump about what happens, while RED keeps them scanning all the time, regardless of activity.

[GGTharos]

F15 HUD BUG

 

What are the bottom row of numbers in the HUD data block under the Airspeed tape, they are there in all modes ?

 

These should be Own aircraft G I believe ?

 

Current G, OWS permitted G. This is correct.

 

Also I notice that passing around 20units AOA Mach number is replaced by AOA XX is this correct ?

 

Yes, it should be, at least according to some version of the -34.

[IvanK]

Current G, OWS permitted G. This is correct.

 

 

 

Yes, it should be, at least according to some version of the -34.

 

Ok thanks. Though that doesn't tally with 3 separate F15 A-D Flight manuals I have referred to, So I guess its a reasonable late (>March 1996) change ?

 

Just went searching an "E" manual and I see the G OWS G values there.

Edited December 7, 2012 by IvanK

[GGTharos]

Actually it seems to be that way in the '88/'89 HuD ... I'm a bit foggy on this though, and I don't have the manuals handy. You're probably right. I'm not looking at the -1 for this though, I think.

 

Edit: '88 -34-1-1 1-44, 1-48 Window 8.

Edited December 7, 2012 by GGTharos

[RIPTIDE]

However in the mission editor you can setdefault values to their alarm state as Green or Red. Green sets them to go R&R and don't give a dump about what happens, while RED keeps them scanning all the time, regardless of activity.

Yes, this also ties in with the same functionality we find in Combined Arms. Where you can silence them until the bandits have flown too close. Then RED, wait few seconds... BANG. :D:D:D:D

[IvanK]

Actually it seems to be that way in the '88/'89 HuD ... I'm a bit foggy on this though, and I don't have the manuals handy. You're probably right. I'm not looking at the -1 for this though, I think.

 

Edit: '88 -34-1-1 1-44, 1-48 Window 8.

 

Following on then display is slightly incorrect. Each digit should be seperated by a decimal with the letter G on the end ... like this:

 

[IvanK]

F15 AOA BUG REVISTED UNITS not DEGREES

 

I think there is a units AOA v Degrees AOA bug in all F15 AOA indications. I first brought this up in this thread on approach AOA:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1608826&postcount=1

 

For continuity I repeat that thread here:

 

I think there is an error in the F15 AOA indicating system. The F15 AOA IRL is displayed in UNITS NOT Degrees. Typical on speed approach AOA in the F15 according to the Flight manual is 20-22 UNITS AOA.

 

I think the AOA scale on the HUD is actually displaying AOA in degrees NOT UNITS.

 

In the HUD below we can determine actual AOA by comparing Nose position to the flight Path as depicted by the velocity Vector. Assuming he waterline symbol (W) represents the fore Aft axis or nose position (Edit : Flight manual states it does) we can deduce that the angle between the Nose position and the velocity Vector is 10 degrees, so actual AOA is 10 degrees.

The AOA scale also indicates 10 degrees. Conclusion AOA scale is displaying Degrees when it should be displaying units.

 

 

I didnt check the AOA instrument .. silly I should have, but I think its the same deal as the HUD AOA scale.

 

EDIT: Checked the AOA gauge .. its the same and displays the same value as the HUD AOA scale.

 

----End of original post---

 

Following on from the first post ,It is my belief that the Sim is using and displaying Degrees of AOA rather than units. The F15 only uses Units of AOA.

 

In general manoeuvring the maximum steady state AOA I can get indicated on both HUD and AOA gauge is 27 "things" !

 

 

The F15 flight manual states that full aft stick will result in the aircraft stabilising at 45units AOA. A general Manoeuvring limit in the real aircraft with Asymmetry issues and or external stores is 30units AOA. This cannot be achieved in FC3 even with a clean aeroplane. This further indicates that the wrong units are being used for AOA in the F15.

 

The Sim needs to be working (display wise) in UNITS not degrees. The exact relationship between Units and Degrees is not specifically defined anywhere in the F15 docs. Various other references in other types flight manuals indicate 1 degree AOA is approximately 1.5-2.0 units AOA. I believe it can be type specific. To achieve appropriate values in FC3 F15 I would suggest a value of 1.8units per degree. This would result in close on 45degress max achievable AOA in flight (close to Flight Manual values). On approach it would result in around 18 units (though Flight manual indicates 20-22 units AOA the norm). If a different value could be coded in approach configuration (say with Flaps down) a value of 2.2units per degree would result in correct 22unit AOA being displayed in the HUD an the AOA gauge at Approach IAS on a 3 degree flight path.

 

EDIT

Straight and Level Proof AOA is being displayed as Degrees and not units:

 

 

SUMMARY

1. FC3 F15 is displaying Degrees AOA instead of units of AOA. BUG

2. To fix display Units on both HUD and AOA gauge (not degrees)

3. If Degrees AOA is the Sim output convert Degrees to units by a factor of 1.8 with Flaps up and 2.2 with flaps down.

4. this will provide very close to correct AOA units indications in the FC3 F15.

 

A10A is displaying something other than degrees it would seem. Though sitting at rest on the ground the AOA gauge is reading 10 units. In flight this seems to be the minimum datum so exactly what it is displaying in Flight is anybody's guess :)

With Power applied I think the AOA gauge should be reading 0 units.

Edited December 10, 2012 by IvanK

[Frostie]

The missile ranges are really screwed. Typical ranges around the net for R-27ER and AIM-120C are 110-130km for R-27ER and 70-100km for AIM-120C5.

 

In FC3 I did a test at 14000m (46,000ft) mach 1.4.

 

AIM-120C achieved 110km before it started falling out of the sky.

R-27ER achieved a paltry 70km before it fell out of the sky and was pretty redundant at 60km!

 

Surely this should at the very least be the otherway around.

AIM120 110km.trk

R27ER 70km.trk

Edited December 8, 2012 by Frostie

[Cali]

That's a big difference in them I'd say. Especially when you have to keep lock on one of them the whole time.

[Kuky]

^^^

Frostie, I've added report with your description of the test and trk files

EDIT2: I had to put note in report that I could not replicate your findings in latest build

 

EDIT1: just tried myself R-27R fired at Rmax (25km) on non-manouvering KC-135 and it fell short, lost most of it energy even some 5km before it should hit the target and started falling out of the sky about 2km ahead of target.

 

BY the way Frostie, how did you measure the distance? You know the specified Rmax is not the distance missile will travel but range Rmax missile will show when you bug a target and if target keeps at same speed and altitude it should hit, but distance traveled by the missile is actually less than Rmax as target is getting closer to it.

Edited December 8, 2012 by Kuky

[GGTharos]

What was the starting speed of the shot? Anyway, these two missiles shouldn't have significantly different RMax's. The 120 should be more capable at range, but shouldn't have such a range advantage. Both should achieve 110-130km with a head-on closure launch at mach 4 and 20000m.

 

The missile ranges are really screwed. Typical ranges around the net for R-27ER and AIM-120C are 110-130km for R-27ER and 70-100km for AIM-120C5.

 

In FC3 I did a test at 14000m (46,000ft) mach 1.4.

 

AIM-120C achieved 110km before it started falling out of the sky.

R-27ER achieved a paltry 70km before it fell out of the sky and was pretty redundant at 60km!

 

Surely this should at the very least be the otherway around.

[Frostie]

BY the way Frostie, how did you measure the distance? You know the specified Rmax is not the distance missile will travel but range Rmax missile will show when you bug a target and if target keeps at same speed and altitude it should hit, but distance traveled by the missile is actually less than Rmax as target is getting closer to it.

I measured it with the range rule on the map (F10).

As a side note, Rmax at that altitude measures exactly the same for all missiles R-27ER right through to R-73 (approx 60km).

[GGTharos]

What's in game looks exactly like what is in my -34.

 

Following on then display is slightly incorrect. Each digit should be seperated by a decimal with the letter G on the end ... like this:

[159th_Viper]

As a side note, Rmax at that altitude measures exactly the same for all missiles R-27ER right through to R-73 (approx 60km).

 

Bug rectified in latest build.

[Frostie]

What was the starting speed of the shot? Anyway, these two missiles shouldn't have significantly different RMax's. The 120 should be more capable at range, but shouldn't have such a range advantage. Both should achieve 110-130km with a head-on closure launch at mach 4 and 20000m.

I've just tested again the R-27ER, AIM-120C and AIM-7, for clarity all missiles were fired from an F-15C at 46,000ft mach 1.4.

 

max speed

R-27ER = 5300

AIM-7 = 5900

AIM-120C = 6000+

 

distance travelled before falling out of the sky (measured on the F10 map)

R-27ER = 65km (35nm)

AIM-7 = 55km (30nm)

AIM-120C = 110km (59nm)

 

Even the AIM-7 beats the R-27ER over 20nm.

[GGTharos]

It's probably ok if it has a bit higher peak speed, as long as the range is a bit shorter for the AIM-7, it had a pretty capable rocket. It might be more limited by its seeker/hydraulic system than the rocket.

 

However the 120 is going too far. I would expect this sort of range from a D, not a C.

[Teknetinium]

I've just tested again the R-27ER, AIM-120C and AIM-7, for clarity all missiles were fired from an F-15C at 46,000ft mach 1.4.

 

max speed

R-27ER = 5300

AIM-7 = 5900

AIM-120C = 6000+

 

distance travelled before falling out of the sky (measured on the F10 map)

R-27ER = 65km (35nm)

AIM-7 = 55km (30nm)

AIM-120C = 110km (59nm)

 

Even the AIM-7 beats the R-27ER over 20nm.

 

Not gooood, I hope F-15 dosent get the aim-120D now, Should ER-not be faster then Aim-120 and AIM-7? I would assume that ER and R-77 should be able to pull more G as well.

Edited December 8, 2012 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

WHy would the ER be able to pull more g? It's limit for that is far lower than the other two missiles.

 

When you assume ...

[IvanK]

What's in game looks exactly like what is in my -34.

 

my F15C Dash 34 is a little long in the tooth so doesnt show this G OWS G option. My F15E Dash34 does and it shows a decimal separating the units with G on the end. I accept this is an E not a C though.

 

 

[Teknetinium]

WHy would the ER be able to pull more g? It's limit for that is far lower than the other two missiles.

 

When you assume ...

 

 

I believe that the aerodynamic on ER and R-77 make them turn tighter.