Wind Direction

[plexi]

Am i missing something here. Other than the Radios for Weather is there any Wind Socks around. Cant say i have seen any yet at the Airfields. Would be nice to have a visual referance as well. What do you think?:pilotfly:

[159th_Viper]

Chimney-stacks. A dime-a-dozen. Throw a stone and you'll hit one.

[Merlin-27]

Still a valid question. How hard could it be to add this feature? If my R/C aircraft simulator from 5 years ago has a well rendered wind sock I can't imagine it could be too terrible of a request. But that being said, I'm just your average user and I'm sure there is a great explanation, but the standard "use a smokestack" seems like a departure from the fidelity that I know ED strives for. I'm on a flight line pretty much every day and I can assure you our pilots use wind socks... I can only guess that the cost of building a factory nearby as a wind indicator, was a slightly cost-prohibitive. Now, if I was in north Jersey we'd have plenty of smokestacks...but that smell...:cry:

[Razor5-1]

Military helo pilots are trained to use any means necessary to detect wind direction for landing in remote areas, and the smoke from houses are actually used, as are trees

But I agree it would be a very nice feature.

[Cookie]

Now, if I was in north Jersey we'd have plenty of smokestacks...but that smell...:cry:

Are you saying North Jersey smells? :D

[Outlaw24]

The wind sock would be a welcome addition

[Kameni]

Also, it would be nice if ATC informed us about the ground wind BEFORE we get to like a final of the final... Supposedly - the moment you switch from VZV to POS (RTN to ???) you are granted that "cleared for visual" and when you check in your approach - you get the wind information.

It is a fact that it's annoying to get a wind reading at 1-2 km from the runway at speed of 320-350 kmh. No time for any planning of approach, and add to it that other people use the runway as well, often in the same time as you do.

[JG14_Smil]

I push a button and it shows wind speed and direction. Windsocks and smokestacks all have aspect angle errors and they can change as you fly around them.

[blaster454]

.... Now, if I was in north Jersey we'd have plenty of smokestacks...but that smell...:cry:

 

Hey! I'm in Northern NJ and I don't smell anything sour up here ... air is actually kinda clean and fresh today. I think you

been down in the Pinelands or on a tomato farm too long ;-)

[Flamin_Squirrel]

It is a fact that it's annoying to get a wind reading at 1-2 km from the runway...

 

That's not unrealistic.

[Kameni]

That's not unrealistic.

 

I know, but it would be nice to get wind reading when you start your final, and afterwards 1, 2 km before touchdown.

[DUSTY]

I would love to have animated windsocks also, I think it would help the realism of the sim but more importantly I think some implementation of ATIS would go very well.

 

The reality of the planning an approach goes something like this...

 

First of all, in the real world it's quite rare that aircraft like the fixed wing jets we fly in DCS:W would ever be flying to uncontrolled airfields (no tower/approach ATC).

 

At controlled airfields (with Tower ATC) not only are there weather briefings available in the format of TAF/TTF and METAR (usually checked prior to departure but also available via the internet and datalink to aircraft in flight) but prior to contacting tower or approach, aircraft tune the Automated Terminal Information System (ATIS) frequency. ATIS is usually a recorded message which gives the current weather info, runway in use and any other pertinent operational information.

 

Now, not all airfields have an ATIS but surely something like a simulation of ATIS could be modeled in DCS without to much trouble? Aircraft could get weather information prior to commencing or even selecting their approach simply by tuning the designated ATIS frequency and either see it as text or have the audio play just as if it were the AI generated ATC comms.

 

On another note, there would be plenty of non-controlled airfields in the Georgia/Russia theater that don't have an ATIS. In these cases aircraft will usually join overhead (above circuit altitude) to check the windsock and then position from overhead to join the desired approach. At night, lit windsocks are a much more realistic aid than trying to spot the smokestacks in pitch darkness.

 

EDIT: I just checked some of the real world approach plates for airports like Kutaisi and Batumi. Although these airfield are controlled by a tower and approach controller, they do not have ATIS. In this scenario the Approach controller would presumably give the runway in use to arriving aircraft on initial contact. Later in the approach when the aircraft has switched to the tower controller, the tower will often give a 'wind check' to aircraft as part of the landing clearance. I use the in game AI ATC so little to remember whether this actually happens in the sim already but I can't imagine it would be to hard of an addition if not.

 

Cheers.

Edited May 6, 2013 by |DUSTY|

[Kameni]

Excellent commnet above.

I would just add: How hard it is to script ATC not to tell you the same runway in 99% of cases?

Ever heard of "scramble"? No? Yes? Well - that is what actually happens all the time in DCS:

Bunch of planes need to be put up there ASAP. Scrambling is a planned manner of raising as much as possible aircraft in as short possible period. So, all the serious servers have the "Right" or "Left" side rule. Why can't we choose what approach we want to use? I am sure it can be done in a jiffy.

[Nealius]

Speaking of improving ATC, what's the deal with "request startup?" I have never heard of pilots having to request permission to start their engines in the US....maybe it's another overseas thing like using QFE instead of QNH?

[Kameni]

Imagine yourself sitting in cockpit. You don't see what they're doing behind down there :D Now, crew must tell when they finish loading weapons, plane checkup and all the other preflight activities. Maybe ATC giving permission is a compromise, and it's done by ground crew commander or marshall.

[DUSTY]

Speaking of improving ATC, what's the deal with "request startup?" I have never heard of pilots having to request permission to start their engines in the US....maybe it's another overseas thing like using QFE instead of QNH?

 

It's usually just specific to each airfield. You're correct though, at many airfields requesting engine start is not required.

 

Commercial airliners almost always need to request startup (and of course pushback) at major airports in the US.

 

Requesting engine start can also have to do with fitting aircraft into the air traffic sequence. I used to fly a C152 out of an airport that had domestic RPT traffic and in certain cases the tower would only clear you for engine start to deconflict with the commercial jet movements.

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Russia does it :)

 

This video, on the 3:29 mark, he says "12-1, start-up." (ATC replies) "Copy, starting-up." (to ground crew) "Engines."

Edited May 6, 2013 by Lucas_From_Hell

[Robert1983NL]

Though I agree we need windsocks, and I agree that ATC in DCS sucks completely, it's normal to get the wind info 1-2 km's from the runway. You get it together with your landing clearance.

[Robert1983NL]

Speaking of improving ATC, what's the deal with "request startup?" I have never heard of pilots having to request permission to start their engines in the US....maybe it's another overseas thing like using QFE instead of QNH?

 

Requesting startup is VERY normal. Maybe not for small Cessna's at a local yokel airfield, but normally you request start-up. ATC would like to know how many POB you have and keep an eye out just in case anything would go wrong during startup. Ofcourse you also want to know the winds and if the airfield is operational and the fire department is standby. Just a couple of reasons from the top of my mind.

For as far as I know, QFE is only used in the UK. Though I'm used to working with QNH, I think that especially for IFR flights QFE makes a lot of sense.

[Nealius]

"Very normal" for military operations? As I read from another thread lurking around here startup clearance in the military world is apparently done before stepping to the jet, and there's no reason to alert anyone to keep an eye out for something going wrong since the ground crew is already there anyway...

 

I guess it's only for commercial operations or at certain airfields, then?

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Nealius, see my reply above. The option is probably there for Russian pilots, and for situations like high-alert when you're already all strapped in. It has to be there - even though you don't use all the time :)

[Nealius]

It would be nice it were an option but you pretty much have to use it all the time to get wind info :P

[Lucas_From_Hell]

AFAIK "taxi to runway" gives you that, correct me if I'm wrong :)

[Nealius]

Unless it changed in 1.2.4. I haven't tried the update yet. In 1.2.3 "taxi to runway" was not an option unless you already requested startup, and wind information was only given after requesting startup. Requesting takeoff gives QFE.

[Robin_Hood]

We are not flying commercial airliners, and AFAIK, US military jets operating at a military airbase do not need to ask permission for start-up. I have always read of pre-briefed angine start times. So you just start you're engines when the clock tells you to.