Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Questions regarding the FM

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

    #41
    Originally posted by Aluminum Donkey View Post
    I'm not entirely sure how, since the F-16 is hard-limited to about 9g and there's no way to bypass it. ...
    I was told once:
    The maximum g experienced can be higher
    than 9.5 g depending on flight conditions, type
    of maneuver flown, stores configuration, gross
    weight, and CG. Full aft stick maneuvers started above
    500 KCAS are more susceptible to
    over-g. In some cases, aerodynamic changes
    occur rapidly and the g limiter cannot prevent a
    brief increase in g. Similarly, a brief increase in
    g can occur if an inadvertent roll input is made.

    • A false maximum g indication may be displayed
    in the HUD due to INU vibration while
    the aircraft is at maximum g. G indications
    above 10 (e.g., 0.2 for 10.2g) have been observed.

    • On D models, due to the location of the accelerometer,
    it should not be used to determine maximum g
    force.
    Last edited by mvsgas; 09-03-2020, 07:00 AM.
    To whom it may concern,
    I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.
    Thank you for you patience.


    Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true.
    .

    Comment


      #42
      Originally posted by Spectre11 View Post
      Sorry to say so, but that's a misleading statement. Every modern combat aircraft and even older 2nd and 3rd generation designs could pull 9g and more. From an aerodynamic perspective it's not an issue. The problem, in addition to G-LOC, is that over-ging an airframe can physically damage and even destroy the airframe. Every aircraft has a design load limit, which is typically 9 g for most modern fighters. Opposed to older designs which had no g-limiters, inferior aerodynamics and thust modern fighters can sustain 9 g and reach 9 g or more at lower speeds which translates into higher STR and ITR . The risk of airframe damage or destruction still exists and that's the reason why even over-g capable modern airframes limit the amount of g-exceedance. The Eurofighter's FCS doesn't permit over-g atm, albeit the airframe could handle it in theory.
      Indeed, I once heard of an F-15 pilot who reached 14G to avoid ground collision. The aircraft was seemingly fine, but as the integrity of the internal structure could not be trusted anymore after such high over-G, the aircraft never flew again and ended up as a gate guard.
      Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

      DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

      Comment


        #43
        The F-16's DFLCS allows for 9.3 G's symmetric, anything above that is an overshoot, and I believe above 9.8 G's symmetric indicates a DLFCS error. That said 10+ G's with cross control is apparently normal.

        Anyway as for the EF, with an onset rate of 15 G/s there has to be a temporary allowable overshoot, and 9+0.5/1.0 G should in theory be enough.
        Last edited by Hummingbird; 09-03-2020, 04:28 PM.

        Comment


          #44
          for arguments sake lets say tg have the exact data (or have it well enough memorized etc) how does it work legally?
          ie can they be sued/jailed if they redproduce it too faithfully?
          will they just have to guess how close they can actually make it legally or will there by discussions back and forth with the relevant military about what they will allow?
          7700k @5ghz, 32gb 3200mhz ram, 2080ti, nvme drives, valve index vr

          Comment


            #45
            Originally posted by Hummingbird View Post
            The beauty of many of the jets in DCS, and the reason they fly so close to reality, is in large part due to official EM charts being available to the developers. Hence I was wondering how the EF2000 will be taking on here?

            In other words: Will it be purely calculated? Or will you have official EM charts to follow?
            Nobody knows if they fly like the real thing. It's a video game for entertainment, not a military training simulator.

            It's probably pretty decent, but there's no reason to think that these modules really handle and perform like the real aircraft other than that we like to believe it

            AD
            Kit:
            Asus Z170-P, i5-6600k at 4.5 GHz, 1.35V w/ CM Hyper 212 EVO, 2 x 8GB GSkill Ripjaws 4 @ 3000MHz 15-15-15-35, Zotac GTX 1080 Ti AMP Extreme Core Edition, EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 PSU, HP Omen 32" 2560x1440 single screen, Thrustmaster Cougar HOTAS fitted with Leo Bodnar's BU0836A controller.

            Flying is the art of throwing yourself at the ground, and having all the rules and regulations get in the way!

            If man was meant to fly, he would have been born with a lot more money!

            Comment


              #46
              Originally posted by Aluminum Donkey View Post
              Nobody knows if they fly like the real thing. It's a video game for entertainment, not a military training simulator.

              It's probably pretty decent, but there's no reason to think that these modules really handle and perform like the real aircraft other than that we like to believe it

              AD



              I bet you're fun at parties...

              Comment


                #47
                Originally posted by Aluminum Donkey View Post
                Nobody knows if they fly like the real thing. It's a video game for entertainment, not a military training simulator.

                It's probably pretty decent, but there's no reason to think that these modules really handle and perform like the real aircraft other than that we like to believe it

                AD
                Actually AD, this is a flight simulator, in the study sim class no less, hence things are expected to be accurate.

                Only thing not expected to be accurate are classified weapons & detection systems.

                Comment


                  #48
                  Originally posted by Aluminum Donkey View Post
                  Nobody knows if they fly like the real thing. It's a video game for entertainment, not a military training simulator.

                  It's probably pretty decent, but there's no reason to think that these modules really handle and perform like the real aircraft other than that we like to believe it

                  AD
                  You new here? Interesting statement...
                  Considering that subject matter experts (aka pilots that have flown the things, maintainers that worked on them, etc.) work very close with the developers on assuring that the aircraft in this high fidelity study sim actually are as close to the real thing as possible. And as some of these "modules" are actually originally developed for "real military training" we can expect that most things, not classified are pretty much accurate...
                  Shagrat

                  - Flying Sims since 1984 -
                  Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 32GB | GeForce RTX 2080S - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs | a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

                  Comment


                    #49
                    What's the point in calling it a study sim if there's no documentation to study and the entire thing is based on SME input :/ a single SME at that. No disrespect intended but even though his credentials are great and these are undoubtedly very passionate devs... Pretty sure if I talk to 10 different pilots I get 10 different opinions aside from the fact that their jet is the best one out there.

                    Weird to me how so many endless discussions are fought on these forums on these kinds of topics, but no worries, if we like the jet it's fine whichever way it's modeled.
                    Last edited by Noctrach; 10-18-2020, 11:19 AM.

                    Comment


                      #50
                      Originally posted by Noctrach View Post
                      What's the point in calling it a study sim if there's no documentation to study and the entire thing is based on SME input :/ a single SME at that. No disrespect intended but even though his credentials are great and these are undoubtedly very passionate devs... Pretty sure if I talk to 10 different pilots I get 10 different opinions aside from the fact that their jet is the best one out there.

                      Weird to me how so many endless discussions are fought on these forums on these kinds of topics, but no worries, if we like the jet it's fine whichever way it's modeled.
                      They have several SME's afaik, and a PhD in aero working the FM. Also the SME's probably have access to the EM diagrams, and thus can ensure a close match in terms of performance.

                      That said, my worries are the same as yours, i.e. that performance won't match the real EM diagrams due to lack of data or secrecy. However I hope, and have faith, that this won't be as big of a problem as my fear says it could be.

                      Comment


                        #51
                        Originally posted by Noctrach View Post
                        What's the point in calling it a study sim if there's no documentation to study and the entire thing is based on SME input :/ a single SME at that. No disrespect intended but even though his credentials are great and these are undoubtedly very passionate devs... Pretty sure if I talk to 10 different pilots I get 10 different opinions aside from the fact that their jet is the best one out there.

                        Weird to me how so many endless discussions are fought on these forums on these kinds of topics, but no worries, if we like the jet it's fine whichever way it's modeled.
                        It's not just one SME, but a couple of them! But I agree thta these circle running discussions are somewhat exhausting and pointless. Instead of being grateful of getting one of the most advanced tactical combat aircraft available today in DCS many are just ehining and complaining about all sorts of things from "how can it be realistic" over "it will spoil multiplayer balance" etc. I think that this is precisely not the kind of discussions and feedback that the developers should receive just for trying to get a modern type of aircraft into one of the best commercial combat flight sims on the market. And yes, DCS is still a game for entertainment purposes, even if it offers a great potential for being used as a cheap training sim for professional purposes. The waste majority of people here have no real world connection to military aviation at all, yet many seem to pretend to "know" and being in the position to "dpeak with authority" on subjects that they often barely understand to a full extend. Whatever I hope the Truegrit team will suceed in their quest to bring the most credible, realistic representation of the Typhoon to DCS World. I have been waiting for this since DID's superb EF2000 and am hopeful that this finally happens a quarter century later.

                        Comment


                          #52
                          The issue is that ED would not make a module with only (a couple) SME as sources. 3rd party devs will, apparently, especially if the module will be a hot seller.
                          P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

                          Comment


                            #53
                            All modules in DCS are held to the same standard. If something flies like a UFO, like say, the Mig-19 at release, it gets changed. Simple as.

                            Ultimately, there doesn't seem to be more information on the JF-17, Mirage or Hornet than there is on the Typhoon, yet people are making a fuss only about some of those..

                            Comment


                              #54
                              Originally posted by TLTeo View Post
                              All modules in DCS are held to the same standard. If something flies like a UFO, like say, the Mig-19 at release, it gets changed. Simple as.

                              Ultimately, there doesn't seem to be more information on the JF-17, Mirage or Hornet than there is on the Typhoon, yet people are making a fuss only about some of those..
                              Something, something, Typhoon is too new, compared to the other modules in terms of their timeline, etc, etc.
                              sigpic

                              Comment


                                #55
                                Not like we will know how real this team represents the EF to begin with. Only when and if we get our hands on original declassified documents to compare with will we know.

                                Since we will pretty much not have any real data for long time, I am happy enough we have Actual pilot SME trying to give us the experience which they had already experienced themselves.

                                A full functional cockpit is also a major plus. For me, simulation is not all about the flight profile but also system employment.
                                Current Hangar : A-10C II ¦ AJS-37 ¦ A/V-8B ¦ F-14A/B ¦ F/A-18C ¦ FC3 ¦ JF-17 ¦ Ka-50 ¦ Mi-8 ¦ M2000-C ¦ SA342 ¦ UH-1H

                                Other Modules : Combined Arms ¦ Persian Gulf

                                TRAINED - LEARNING - UNTOUCHED - ABANDONED

                                Comment


                                  #56
                                  Originally posted by Noctrach View Post
                                  What's the point in calling it a study sim if there's no documentation to study and the entire thing is based on SME input :/ a single SME at that. No disrespect intended but even though his credentials are great and these are undoubtedly very passionate devs... Pretty sure if I talk to 10 different pilots I get 10 different opinions aside from the fact that their jet is the best one out there.

                                  Weird to me how so many endless discussions are fought on these forums on these kinds of topics, but no worries, if we like the jet it's fine whichever way it's modeled.
                                  I'm picking this post as a hook into the discussion, so don't feel personally addressed...

                                  We know the A-10 does not have the actual RL performance. This has been the case for many years. Still, it's considered the most accurate and detailed module in the game by many. What is this obsession with EM diagrams? They exist, the developer has seen them and has access to them. This module will not have the precise performance that those classified EM diagrams show. But given that they are experienced in the Typhoon, it's not a far fetch that the deviation from the actual EM performance is very intentional and in accordance with restrictions placed upon them by the military.

                                  So... my question is... if we can make a reasonable assumption that the model is based on the actual EM diagrams as a starting point (which they will never confirm, because why would they go through the trouble of dealing with the military asking them what the heck they mean with that exactly), why is that not good enough for some here but it's fine for the A-10? Do people actually think the developer sits in his room and throws dart at a chart to figure out the FM? Of course it's going to be based on EM diagrams and his experience. And of course it's going to deviate from those, maybe even substantially, like everything in DCS does for obvious reasons. That should be enough for anyone in this thread.

                                  Now... the real trick question is: Can they manage to deviate from the EM performance in a way that it feels "real enough" to us? That is where their experience comes into play and why it's so important to have SMEs.

                                  As for the PVP crowd getting their pants in a twist and warming up to the inevitable (and equally stupid) balance discussion... rest assured that performances in the game typically are botched under the actual values. This excludes bugs, obviously, but in an ideal world without bugs (lol), you can be reasonably sure that the numbers are going to be worse than they are IRL.

                                  Just my two cents, this is quite a moot discussion. I would worry about this topic when... I don't know, EA suddenly decides to make a module for DCS, but not here and with the credentials of TrueGrit.

                                  Having said that, we'll have to see how it works out in the game. They are new to DCS and I am sure they are going to find many surprises trying to imiplement something into this eco system.

                                  Comment


                                    #57
                                    I don't see any reason why they couldn't make the kinematic performance of the aircraft almost exactly match the real thing, and I don't think Eurofighter GmbH would mind it either, as in this day and age outside analysts can very accurately predict this anyway. (You can be very sure that opposing sides have long since digitally reproduced either sides aircraft and CFD analysed the bejesus out of them) Furthermore the combat performance of modern day fighters is much more closely tied to their weapons & sensor systems, and hence THAT I would certainly expect not to be fully simulated, and for sure undermodelled. But maneuvering/kinematic performance, I don't see a reason it would be problematic for a developer to match this, as any potential enemy would get very little out of it vs what they've already quite accurately predicted.
                                    Last edited by Hummingbird; 10-23-2020, 03:45 PM.

                                    Comment


                                      #58
                                      Originally posted by TrueGrit
                                      On the other hand, are we not willing to bring a totally unrealistic representation to the user. That would make us not authentic and be contrary to the whole idea of Eagle Dynamics. That also means that we would rather not introduce a capability and wait a bit longer then try to fake one.
                                      http://www.checksix-fr.com/dcs-modul...glish-version/
                                      Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

                                      DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

                                      Comment


                                        #59
                                        Originally posted by Hummingbird View Post
                                        I don't see any reason why they couldn't make the kinematic performance of the aircraft almost exactly match the real thing, and I don't think Eurofighter GmbH would mind it either, as in this day and age outside analysts can very accurately predict this anyway. (You can be very sure that opposing sides have long since digitally reproduced either sides aircraft and CFD analysed the bejesus out of them) Furthermore the combat performance of modern day fighters is much more closely tied to their weapons & sensor systems, and hence THAT I would certainly expect not to be fully simulated, and for sure undermodelled. But maneuvering/kinematic performance, I don't see a reason it would be problematic for a developer to match this, as any potential enemy would get very little out of it vs what they've already quite accurately predicted.
                                        I'm not an analyst, but it seems to me that you are making some rather big assumptions about how well you can reverse engineer an aircrafts combat performance. Even with perfect photogrammetry and CAD models, there is a lot in the avionics, engineering design decisions and engine design decisions that affect performance, especially near the limits, which is what you'd be interested in as the opposing side. I would not push into that line of reasoning, as it is again not going to lead anywhere. Wait and see is unfortunately the best thing we can do. Let TrueGrit do their work, trust in their integrity and that they understand where we're coming from (which they have demonstrated again and again in their statements).

                                        If stuff goes wrong, hey, thankfully it's just code and not an actual multi-million dollar jet, they can always fix it and tweak it.

                                        Comment


                                          #60
                                          You'd be surprised by how accurately the other side can predict the kinematic performance of an opposing side's airframe design. Infact it's the main reason EM charts are at all publically available for many of the jets now in service, because it's widely known you can't really keep that stuff truly secret - and it has been like this for a while. Besides revealing kinematic performance doesn’t reveal how said airframe was constructed or what materials were used to achieve the listed weight or power figures.

                                          As such the type of performance that is truly secret is that of the weapons & sensor systems, and as such we naturally don't have any accurate figures for this in the public, and that goes for a lot of stuff that aint even in service anymore and hasn't been for a while as well - because this is the information the other side can't accurately predict and hence are very keen to acquire.

                                          Thus I certainly trust TG are going to be giving us a very accurately flying Eurofighter, as I cannot see any reason for them not to.
                                          Last edited by Hummingbird; 10-23-2020, 10:05 PM.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X