Jump to content

snipy

Members
  • Content Count

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About snipy

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 04/01/1983

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS
  • Interests
    Electronics
  • Occupation
    Software

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not sure if useful, or n of 1 example, but I have noticed if I fast forward a track, there is just no telling what I will get out of it. But if I never alter the playback speed, it seems to play back what happened. That can be tedious, when what I want is at the end of the track, but it's an option if trying to use a track.
  2. Something for me to play around with then, by creating some different missions and advancing time, and looking at the time on the DED, and sunrise on that particular date, etc. Thanks for the help.
  3. Ahhh, yes. I did misunderstand. I already knew DCS considered it night, because the logbook logged the hours as night. What I'm interested in knowing is... why. FAA rules? Bug due to UTC?
  4. I very much doubt there is a bit of code running that is determining night based on brightness settings. That seems like a life hack someone came up with to justify why their log book shows night and not. Which means, not ED... but, us. I'd bet the code uses time. And it's just got a bug in which time is sent over to determine if day or night.
  5. I can't say otherwise, but that seems very arbitrary, and a "rule of thumb" concept someone came up with to explain log book timing. Imagine if you were tasked to write a method that returns a boolean value as to whether the logbook should record time as night (true) or not (false). Doing so based on a "brightness setting" would be rather finicky and difficult, but instead, suppose you wrote it like this: bool Logbook::IsNight(time_t currentTime, time_t sunrise, time_t sunset) { if (currentTime >= sunRise && curentTime < sunset) return false; return tru
  6. Maybe reported, but couldn't find in search as date and time are too general, but date on DED seems to be backwards for days. Image attached, showing 06/41/16. It should be 06/14/16, as there aren't 41 days in a month. Also, for logbook, does it use UTC time? Because I'm flying a 06:00 mission on Caucus on 06/14 (or 41)/16 and it is logging it as night flight hours.
  7. This may or may not be F-16 specific, except that the F-16 has a hook, so, in theory, the procedure might be to take an arrested landing. But in DCS, that is not feasible at the moment. So... is there a procedure for landing with a blown tire, or is it just put it close and eject? I've been playing around, as sort of a challenge, and just cannot seem to stop the jet with a blown tire. It is easy to replicate, so it's rather fun as a challenge. Get an F-16, put external tanks on the wings, get your ground speed up real high, before rotating. Most times
  8. And if I was in the F-5, I wouldn't have noticed it, because trim is part of the package. But it seems like the F-16... trim is meant to be an odd thing, done in certain instances. I'm kind of surprised the flight control system can auto trim the aircraft, but loses its shit the second the gear come down. Maybe manually adjusting the trim turns the auto trimming off complete, no idea. Just seemed odd to me.
  9. Yea, that is why it seems odd. It should be the same AOA to land, but it feels different. I'm going to keep practicing, and if I can't get it, just add "switch to CAT I" on downwind. That way, if it's mental, I'll be good to go.
  10. CAT III on a clean jet seems to lands different, to me, as well. I can also land an asymmetrical jet easier on CAT I. It doesn't seem like it is just asymmetry, if setting the symmetry the same, and just flipping the CAT I and CAT III switch makes a difference.
  11. In this training mission, the first missile off was one off the left wing in a 1 on 1 head on engagement. The second is 2 on 1, which sends one on the right and one on the left. So now I'm two off the left wing and one off the right wing. The third engagement is a mad dog 120, off the tip, so holding the side button with a long name (NWS AAR Discon MSL Step) switches to the 120Cs, then bore, and release. If somewhere along the way, I quick hit the MSL step, which I did, then I'm now three off the left wing and only one off the right wing. It's not terribly difficult to do, for me. But, I
  12. To start, I'm a terrible pilot, been playing DCS less than a year, and have fewer than 24 hours in any flight simulator, and 20 of it are in the F-16. Doing the AIM-120 training yesterday, for about the 10th time, I set up the jet as CAT III, as it has external fuel, and then was playing around with switching between missiles when doing the two targets at once. Anyway, I ended up, after all four targets were down, with 120s on 9 and 8, and nothing on the left side. I put some pretty heavy LWD trim, and decided to fly around to run the external tanks out. Nothing really felt too
  13. And I think that is why the F-14 was increased, for this competition, because tactics existed back from when it was a 7.5 jet, and it might have become common to over-G it just because of the change to 6.5. Folks that flew that thing forever at 7.5 probably would have balked at the idea of going to 6.5, and so... it became a thing. Logically, we can look at this and say, the F-14 drivers seem to behave differently, what's different? Well, that is one concrete difference. And maybe it is sufficient to explain the anomaly.
  14. I think saying something like "This guy over G'd the jet to get a kill, but it wasn't a good idea, even though it worked." would go a long way. Because the disconnect seems to be not the existence of the action, but the existence of the action... and its validity as a common tactic. If we're just discussing things that have happened, I, and you, could argue that kamikaze should be a valid method. Right? We can prove its existence. (Which you've done.) We can prove its semi effectiveness. (Which you've done.) But its hard to argue its validity as a common tactic.
  15. These are again, one offs, not repeat use, and one example of Schrödinger's cat--if he didn't check the G meter, then he didn't over G... But the logical argument is that if it was not trained, it was not meant to be employed. Snodgrass going up against another fighter is war games, and he gamed the game. What seems to be forgotten is that these jets are weapons, meant to be used in combat, to gain or maintain aerial superiority, to support or allow boots on the ground to gain and maintain strategic objectives. If everyone pulls G and breaks their jet, because they want a kill, we'r
×
×
  • Create New...