Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Your latest experiences with the updated F16s dogfighting potential

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Your latest experiences with the updated F16s dogfighting potential

    I wanted to know what your dogfight experiences are with the F16 we have in DCS right now.


    I was playing the "other" F16 simulator for many years, but just dogfighting AI. When I heard the F18 is about to come to DCS I switched, because I felt transitioning to the F18 should be not too difficult. Which in fact was the case. Now with the F16 progressing I am slowly switching back to the F16.
    I think the updates on it have a huge positive impact on its dogfighting potential, but I feel I'm not capable to use it.


    Few days ago I was on the "justdogfight" server and fought against a guy who was equally skilled like me in the F18. We were asking each other if the other guy was using the paddle switch and we both never used it.

    So when I picked the F16 vs him in the F18 he was just able to get into my control zone behind me every time.

    No matter what I did. I tried to merge with 450 kts bleed down to 330 kts and maintain 330 kts. Or even not to bleed down from 450 kts. He always went behind me and shot me down.
    Well, some might argue that the F18 FLCS is very tolerant, even if he didnt use paddle. But if so, he might just have advantages in snap shots which he didnt use either.

    With the F16 being around and updated for quite some time, what are your strategies in a guns only dogfight? Especially against an F18. I feel the only way to beat it is not to bleed down from 450 kts and use face shots every new merge. Which I feel should not be the way to fly the F16.

    Any ideas?
    Last edited 10-17-2020, 12:55 PM.

    #2
    Stay fast (450 is OK), force the fight two-circle, drag him to the deck, rate him to death. If he's on your 6 watch for him pulling lead, jink the shot then resume the max sustained rate turn (nose low to pull harder without bleeding speed as long as you have altitude). Eventually he won't be able to keep up and you just come all the way around on him.
    VC

    =X51= Squadron is recruiting!
    X51 website: https://x51squadron.com/
    Join our Discord: https://discord.gg/d9JtFY4

    Comment


      #3
      The DCS Viper bleeds off speed in turns more than the other sim. I beleive the DCS version is the one that needs more work to be correct.
      Buzz

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by darkman222 View Post
        No matter what I did. I tried to merge with 450 kts bleed down to 330 kts and maintain 330 kts. Or even not to bleed down from 450 kts. He always went behind me and shot me down.
        The F-16 is a "rate fighter". In DCS this means you need to run away, fly around the entire planet at Mach 1.6, and then reappear behind the bandit when he least expects it. Simple. Elegant.

        Comment


          #5
          Matt Dillon would never fight that way.
          Buzz

          Comment


            #6
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RliJrrRCV-I
            VC

            =X51= Squadron is recruiting!
            X51 website: https://x51squadron.com/
            Join our Discord: https://discord.gg/d9JtFY4

            Comment


              #7
              proves nothing, we had this discussion hundreds of times already, in DCS, a hornet driver who knows how to fight (with or without paddle switch), will almost win every rate fight with Viper right now.

              Viper`s only chance will be zoom up to higer alt try to force a head on shot.


              For this thread:
              Maybe it`s not about the viper`s performance problem. If ED`s statment is true. Viper has very accurate performance, but what if you fight against other aircraft which performance is not so "accurate" ?
              Last edited 10-17-2020, 04:50 PM. Reason: wording
              sigpic
              I9-9900K-Gigabyte 2080Ti Gaming OC, 32G DDR4000 RAM,
              Track IR5, HOTAS Cougar + über Nxt Hall Sensor Mod, Slaw Device RX Viper

              Comment


                #8
                Real pilots are saying the Viper's FM is accurate?
                Buzz

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by BuzzU View Post
                  Real pilots are saying the Viper's FM is accurate?
                  "what do you expect? It's a video game" -Former F-16 pilot on a recent DCS competition stream when asked about why the DCS F-16 can't win a straight up rate fight in DCS.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Contact409 View Post
                    proves nothing, we had this discussion hundreds of times already, in DCS, a hornet driver who knows how to fight (with or without paddle switch), will almost win every rate fight with Viper right now.
                    I'm not trying to prove anything, I don't have a stake in this FM argument.

                    The OP asked for advice on how to fly the Viper against the Hornet. I posted a very well explained video demonstration of how the Viper can win. The OP can learn from that and probably he will win against his Hornet friend at least some of the time.

                    That it doesn't work in some theoretical perfect scenario with flawless aces piloting each aircraft, that really doesn't matter. It is the correct technique and it will work for average pilots.
                    VC

                    =X51= Squadron is recruiting!
                    X51 website: https://x51squadron.com/
                    Join our Discord: https://discord.gg/d9JtFY4

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by VC View Post
                      That it doesn't work in some theoretical perfect scenario with flawless aces piloting each aircraft, that really doesn't matter. It is the correct technique and it will work for average pilots.
                      To be fair, the video you posted is from Growling Sidewinder who just happens to be a nearly flawless ace, and his opponent was really good too. So the advanced techniques he used to survive the multiple snap shots from the F-18 as well as the sheer luck of getting to the ground with his opponent going slow enough to deploy landing gear and then panicking and giving up the hornet's turn rate advantage aren't going to apply to the vast majority of situations that most Viper pilots find themselves in vs even average pilots in the multiple craft with better AoA and STR (pretty much all dogfighters in DCS).

                      He should still watch the video though, if only to understand that it's not entirely hopeless going guns only vs a competent Hornet driver, if you're really good and you get lucky.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Syndrome View Post
                        "what do you expect? It's a video game" -Former F-16 pilot on a recent DCS competition stream when asked about why the DCS F-16 can't win a straight up rate fight in DCS.
                        That appears to be a real pilots low opinion of video games/sims. Does he feel the same way about official simulators? If not, why can't a video sim be just as accurate?

                        I always thought the difference between a video game and a video sim was the sim is more accurate.

                        If a plane is too slow? Make it faster.

                        If it's too fast? Make it slower.

                        It's not brain surgery.
                        Buzz

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by darkman222 View Post
                          We were asking each other if the other guy was using the paddle switch and we both never used it.
                          IIRC here the few hornet pilots has said that you should not touch it at all, as it is not there to improve your flight characteristics but make it just worse. Meaning you should leave it out of the question to even consider to use it as the computer knows far better how to maximize your flight capabilities than you can ever be.
                          i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
                          i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by BuzzU View Post
                            I always thought the difference between a video game and a video sim was the sim is more accurate.
                            Many does that wrong assumption.

                            A video game can be same as a video simulator. It doesn't really mean anything that other is better.

                            simulator
                            : a machine that is used to show what something looks or feels like and is usually used to study something or to train people
                            So question is that WHAT is to be simulated and for what purpose.
                            To simulate something, you don't need to know what is inside a "black box". What is only required is to know that if X goes in and it is suppose to turn to be Y, then X is changed to be Y when it is simulated correctly.

                            In emulation it is different:
                            : to strive to equal or excel
                            Emulation means that you will model with software or hardware exactly the same parameters that the original hardware or software is doing. It means that you need to know exactly what happens inside a black box so you can emulate its functions properly, that if you input a unknown X² in the box, then the valid Y² will appear regardless it is known what would happen, as the machine itself is properly emulated, instead simulated.

                            In the simulation many steps can be forgotten, completely ignored as they are irrelevant when the known output is known.
                            Example, if one knows that when a 1 kg mass is dropped from a 100 meters height, one can just make the object look to behave properly simulating it, without running any emulation for the physics parts like gravity, air etc etc. All those are irrelevant informations.
                            But you get proper input and output just with simple simulation without emulation.

                            And that is what video games does. You take something that is expected, you can make it to be something expected with something else. Accuracy and rest is nothing else than question of the opinion "good enough".

                            If you make a video game for a 5 year old, it doesn't need to be anything such complex and fine tuned as one that is made for a 35 physics student.

                            For a ignorant player lots of things can be overseen and ignored, while a Subject-Matter Expert can grin for pain of lack of details and imprecise information, because own opinion for the details is not there.

                            For a person who just wants fun, as "things go boom" then it can be enough that things are just simulated as "it can be seen expected to happen so". While for person who is more interested about the details and mechanics than "things go boom", it can be moment of shock that there is no such emulation as required in the simulation.


                            Like here we are again, about "F-16 should always win the ________" where so many things are totally under assumptions, and out of the context. Like neither of the players are not really feeling any G's. They have no "butt feeling" to fly, they have no limitations for how they can look around middle of the turn fight, they have no fear for death as there is no death etc.

                            DCS World is nothing more than a video game, an entertainment system. And that is not a talking down at all what it is in the capabilities. As it is a piece of accuracies, but it is as well lacking so huge amount of stuff because lack of resources to invest getting them in.

                            And that doesn't mean DCS World couldn't be used for simulation (training or studying) as it is best there is to study how a military aircraft is operated or what is the procedure to drop a bomb on a target. It just doesn't have high accuracy to details for stuff outside the cockpit, but it is not a infantry simulator or a MBT crew simulator or even a SAM simulator. It is for cockpit operations and behavior.

                            The dog fight aspect in the DCS World is very much stretch in its capabilities, but better compared to anything else that there is! Because people misuse the DCS World in their tests and arguments.

                            Like start using DCS world more as a real thing, go to fly a 4 vs 12 scenarios. Where you have 4 of F-16's and enemy has 12 of MiG-23's. Make it perma-death, that if you die then you can't fly for that and next day training sorties.
                            Make there realistic mission types, with semi-realistic target defense systems and layers. Like if a F-16's are suppose to engage a one MBT platoon, then there is almost a 1500 soldiers with MANPAD's, few dozen AAA, few SAM's types and those 12 MiG-23's. No one cares about "It is a unfair" as it would be closer to realism than "I can't outturn a Hornet".

                            As correct answer for argument "I can't outturn a X" is that your wingman should be there with you, as well should be X's wingman, and his wingman... If you are 1 vs 1 situation in real world, it is more likely a training scenario than real combat.
                            i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.
                            i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              The hornet seems to be able to out rate the viper in a sustained rate fight. But, the viper can hit 9Gs briefly, where the hornet is limited to 7.5 Gs.

                              So.... A good gameplan would be to try and gain angles at each merge with a lead turn, while fighting 2 circle (taking advantage of turn circle shrink) and gaining energy with an unloaded acceleration between merges.

                              Don't do what growling sidewinder did in his video... That was a lot of wasted time -- the guy really has a very basic understanding of this stuff. Instead, start at .82 mach, perform a limiter pull at TCE to gain angles (you can hit 9Gs and the hornet can only hit 7.5.). Your turn circles will shrink as you slow down. Viper should slow about 100-125 knots in that lead turn. But, you now have to drive to the next merge. Unload with the bandit at 1 or 2 clock positions above your nose. Get back to 400-450 knots, and do it again. 2 or 3 of those and you will be in the control zone -- then you just need to be aware of the hornet's defensive ditch gameplan and not fall for the bait.

                              For reference, look at the Korean 3-3 for the viper and check out the turn circle shrink section in the BFM chapter.

                              Caveat, this doesn't work against a 9X capable bandit.... You need another gameplan for that. If you guys do this with 9Xs, you end up with a simultaneous death at the 2nd merge.



                              Dances
                              V65th AGRS



                              Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

                              Comment


                                #16
                                Originally posted by BuzzU View Post
                                That appears to be a real pilots low opinion of video games/sims. Does he feel the same way about official simulators? If not, why can't a video sim be just as accurate?

                                I always thought the difference between a video game and a video sim was the sim is more accurate.

                                If a plane is too slow? Make it faster.

                                If it's too fast? Make it slower.

                                It's not brain surgery.
                                Indeed, but as we all know, it's not really that easy. DCS is a very good simulacrum, but a 100% accurate simulation? Many of these jets are still in military service today, so they will always have to balance simulation and simulacrum for a variety of reasons.

                                If you asked that pilot that question, they would be obligated to say essentially nothing. I think the one above said as much as can be said when asked directly. Like us, they are clearly a fan of DCS if that helps to clear up their meaning though. It seemed pretty obvious that they meant the F-16 rate fighting and AoA in particular was significantly under performing in DCS. So maybe they said too much.

                                Even if they can't make it 100% accurate for security reasons, I really do hope that they address the issue enough so that it takes a rightful seat as a competitive rate fighter when they bring the FCS out of the WIP stage.
                                Last edited 10-17-2020, 08:59 PM.

                                Comment


                                  #17
                                  Don't real pilots also complain the F/A-18C in DCS lacks engine power?
                                  VC

                                  =X51= Squadron is recruiting!
                                  X51 website: https://x51squadron.com/
                                  Join our Discord: https://discord.gg/d9JtFY4

                                  Comment


                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by Fri13 View Post
                                    Many does that wrong assumption.

                                    A video game can be same as a video simulator. It doesn't really mean anything that other is better.

                                    simulator


                                    So question is that WHAT is to be simulated and for what purpose.
                                    To simulate something, you don't need to know what is inside a "black box". What is only required is to know that if X goes in and it is suppose to turn to be Y, then X is changed to be Y when it is simulated correctly.

                                    In emulation it is different:


                                    Emulation means that you will model with software or hardware exactly the same parameters that the original hardware or software is doing. It means that you need to know exactly what happens inside a black box so you can emulate its functions properly, that if you input a unknown X² in the box, then the valid Y² will appear regardless it is known what would happen, as the machine itself is properly emulated, instead simulated.

                                    In the simulation many steps can be forgotten, completely ignored as they are irrelevant when the known output is known.
                                    Example, if one knows that when a 1 kg mass is dropped from a 100 meters height, one can just make the object look to behave properly simulating it, without running any emulation for the physics parts like gravity, air etc etc. All those are irrelevant informations.
                                    But you get proper input and output just with simple simulation without emulation.

                                    And that is what video games does. You take something that is expected, you can make it to be something expected with something else. Accuracy and rest is nothing else than question of the opinion "good enough".

                                    If you make a video game for a 5 year old, it doesn't need to be anything such complex and fine tuned as one that is made for a 35 physics student.

                                    For a ignorant player lots of things can be overseen and ignored, while a Subject-Matter Expert can grin for pain of lack of details and imprecise information, because own opinion for the details is not there.

                                    For a person who just wants fun, as "things go boom" then it can be enough that things are just simulated as "it can be seen expected to happen so". While for person who is more interested about the details and mechanics than "things go boom", it can be moment of shock that there is no such emulation as required in the simulation.


                                    Like here we are again, about "F-16 should always win the ________" where so many things are totally under assumptions, and out of the context. Like neither of the players are not really feeling any G's. They have no "butt feeling" to fly, they have no limitations for how they can look around middle of the turn fight, they have no fear for death as there is no death etc.

                                    DCS World is nothing more than a video game, an entertainment system. And that is not a talking down at all what it is in the capabilities. As it is a piece of accuracies, but it is as well lacking so huge amount of stuff because lack of resources to invest getting them in.

                                    And that doesn't mean DCS World couldn't be used for simulation (training or studying) as it is best there is to study how a military aircraft is operated or what is the procedure to drop a bomb on a target. It just doesn't have high accuracy to details for stuff outside the cockpit, but it is not a infantry simulator or a MBT crew simulator or even a SAM simulator. It is for cockpit operations and behavior.

                                    The dog fight aspect in the DCS World is very much stretch in its capabilities, but better compared to anything else that there is! Because people misuse the DCS World in their tests and arguments.

                                    Like start using DCS world more as a real thing, go to fly a 4 vs 12 scenarios. Where you have 4 of F-16's and enemy has 12 of MiG-23's. Make it perma-death, that if you die then you can't fly for that and next day training sorties.
                                    Make there realistic mission types, with semi-realistic target defense systems and layers. Like if a F-16's are suppose to engage a one MBT platoon, then there is almost a 1500 soldiers with MANPAD's, few dozen AAA, few SAM's types and those 12 MiG-23's. No one cares about "It is a unfair" as it would be closer to realism than "I can't outturn a Hornet".

                                    As correct answer for argument "I can't outturn a X" is that your wingman should be there with you, as well should be X's wingman, and his wingman... If you are 1 vs 1 situation in real world, it is more likely a training scenario than real combat.
                                    I don't disagree with what you said. However, I was just talking about a part of the FM. Speed and how it holds it in a turn. I wouldn't mention that the Viper is supposed to beat such and such a plane. Too many varibles.

                                    Real Viper pilots have flown DCS and BMS and say the DCS Viper bleeds off speed too fast. How ED goes about programming that is their business. It certainly does have to do it like the real plane. The results are all that matters.

                                    Mover said when he flew the Viper he beat every Hornet he went up against. Shouldn't DCS be simulating that or close to it?
                                    Buzz

                                    Comment


                                      #19
                                      I didn't want to make this thread to become a discussion about WHY the F16 still seems to be inferior to the F18. We had that before and I know ED is working on it.

                                      And they did a lot of beautiful updates, including the g modelling.

                                      So I was just asking if the F16 we have right now, october 2020 is getting that much improved, so people who fight fair, like the F18 guy, not using paddle etc, can be beaten.

                                      Because in guns only dog fights I tend to still use the F18. So I might not be experienced enough in the DCS F16.

                                      Or maybe I missed something, and the F16 has gotten a lot better, so I just need to practice more in it.

                                      I know what you mean that it bleeds a lot of energy right now. So fighting against an F18 is not a balanced fight as it should be.

                                      Which means to me, DCS, the F18 and the F16 are not yet in the right spot. And its not just me struggling against an F18 but other people too.

                                      Basically that was my main question.
                                      And thanks for your opinions guys!
                                      Last edited 10-17-2020, 11:17 PM.

                                      Comment


                                        #20
                                        Darkman.... The turn circle shrink gameplan to exploit your 9G capability for 3-4 seconds at each merge. That's your ticket, not a sustained rate fight. Look at the Korean 3-3 on turn circle shrink. I tried to explain it above.

                                        Cheers,

                                        Dances
                                        V65th AGRS

                                        Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X