85th_Maverick

Yes, regardless. with clean wings and the plane has laggy stick responses. Maybe the rudder might be ok in it's response delay as it is, but the F-14 doesn't have this kind of laggy aileron and elevators deflections, the F-18 doesn't have it, the M-2000 doesn't have it. No other FC3 fighter jet has it. This is one of the reasons why I find flying the F-16 accurately in inputs or in formation flying more difficult than with any other jet which has quick and precise responses. Not in roll and yaw, only in pitch for the Su-27! And speaking of witch, why does the Su-33 have a quick elevators response in contrast to the low elevators rate of the Su-27 if you happen to have in depth knowledge about the differences (why would there be any) between the Su-27's FCS and the Su-33's FCS? We were talking about the flight controls system lagg, nothing to do with game FPS or TGP influence (there is none from that anyway). The response delay from the stick inputs has nothing to do with the input curves. Linear or non-linear sensitivity settings, you get the same inputs lagg. Either the stick and the FCS receives the inputs with lagg or it outputs them with lagg, idk, I just see this difference between the F-16 and all other jets and no it's not me. Have you tried comparing the time it takes from the moment you apply aileron input from your physical stick to the time the ailerons or roll control surfaces actually start to deflect? Try comparing the F-16 and the F-18, F-14, etc and see the difference. Don't even wanna talk about the F-15 which not only that it has the quickest response ever (arcade mode FCS if you'd ask anyone) from input apply to surface deflection, but wow, just look at those surfaces deflecting from a full position to the full opposite in merely 0.0000001 seconds (but yes, the FC3 F-15 is a different kind of story).;)

Whenever you fly any other fighter jet with or without FBW flight controls logic, the flight controls response is as expected. The one of the F-16 isn't so expected and it's always laggy. From the moment you apply a full aileron, rudder, pitch input to the moment the flight control surface actually starts to move there's a delay unseen in any other jet. Despite another strange phenomena of AoA reduction only when applying pure left stick (no pitch input) only (right stick doesn't do it as the left stick input) which is more pronounced with heavier loadout and I have already reported about, the laggy flight controls system create a particular difficulty in flying the aircraft both in formation or when trying to precisely maneuver it. Nobody can have precise the controls over a vehicle with laggy controls responses compared to one which responds almost instantaneously. I doubt that the Thunderbirds would be able to fly so precisely together if flying with the lagg that we get in the DCS F-16 flight controls system. Anyone can check this without recording track for evidence. It's a direct play evidence by comparing the F-16 to the F-18 or F-14 or even Su-27 in DCS.

How many aircraft in DCS have this in real life? Lol you just came with a pointless answer and SharpeXB just said what was correct to say. And the #1 problem you mentioned there is still unfixed. Once there was a thing called "Impostors" and impostors.lua which was actually the best workaround so far by making vehicles and planes disappear much later from screen and although it wasn't realistic in essence, if tweaked good enough it could make flying or ground units get physically seen from more realistic distances. For whatever reason..., they gave up on that "impostors" feature and returned to the same initial problem which remained.

I totally agree with you. When I meant that zooming and and out is a cheating in multiplayer what did you understand? It's as simple as it sounds. Zooming in/out is a way to cheat in PVP. Having a bigger monitor, yes, covers more view, similar to having greater FOV and vice-versa with a small monitor, but being able to zoom in at the levels DCS allows us for we can see planes and ground units from impossible distances to the human eye and that's the cheat and it can and should be corrected (I hope) in the future by limiting the zoom as to be the equivalent of a 50 degrees (not 60) FOV and not below that. Anything higher can help those who don't have or not want to have a big screen and just use either a laptop or regular PC monitor. Said this just to be fair with everyone. On the other hand, having a big screen and also abusing the zoom in, heh..., I let you guys test this against another player in MP who has a smaller monitor and is a decent person not zooming in but rather flying with the default zoom level (as everyone else should). ONLY in VR (I use it most of the time) the zoom and field of view are exactly real (at least from what I can see compared to real life), but there's where it all limits to. Out of VR..., and you can abuse it quite a lot which personally disgusts me when I see others doing so and they most do, at least on YT videos. Thanks, but now this is the new technique as you define it here. Before X update, the "view.lua" file in DCS main folder and under CONFIG folder there was a line defining the default FOV which was global for the whole game and all vehicles. Now it's as you describe it here.:) Well, if he answered "SLAVA UKRAINI" it's already enough said=).

After the latest updates the view is now more stretched and I was wondering why. Although we now have key combinations which can modify the zoom (FOV angle) levels for each outside view, the default FOV within the "view.lua" file inside the CONFIG folder in the main sim's directory is now being set at 78? Why was it a good idea to make it even worse for looking around and spotting stuff as it was already almost impossible to see an enemy unit with the default view zoom/FOV? IRL one should be able to see a human on the ground even from 3km high if there's no haze and the weather is clear, but in DCS you can't see one even from 500m with the normal zoom/fov value. In fact, all units in DCS become extremely hardly visible from ranges at which in reality it isn't hard. This subject regarding the units visibility in DCS is a decade long debate and will most certainly continue if not finally done right. Zooming in or out is first of all an unrealistic feature, we all must agree with that. A human eye can't zoom. If one requires a bigger monitor or more in order to have more coverage is one thing, but to increase the FOV and distort the image for whatever sake is odd. Also, in multiplayer, the zooming feature must be blocked, because it's simply a big time cheat and exploit. The server admin should have the possibility to lock the FOV at 60 or have the natural zoom locked for everyone.

I believed you said that you need to have all the collective down as for preventing rotor overspeed due to that comparison. So, it's doable in the MI-24 as I've already showed in my track but it's just very difficult unless you have some lower weight and I was thinking that something might be wrong, but AeriaGloria better explained what goes on with the blades through his technically detailed reply.

You don't overspeed due to collective up, but due to collective down + increase in AoA on the advancing blades.

Copy that. So all in all it's the lower blades radius + the much lower blades washout (decreasing incidence towards the tips) and both reduce the aerodynamic autorotation of the main rotor as the AoA increases on the blades. The effect is there indeed, but I just thought that it's way too small to be true and now I understood why. So, it's a very bad day for a HIND pilot to lose both engines and rely on autorotation for landing. He can have a landing but he must do it at a much higher speed and much better coordinated aft stick and collective at the right moments in order to reduce the vertical speed as much as possible before touchdown. Thanks;)

Who's comparing apples and oranges? Did you read correctly? Both being 30mm AP and doing about 5 times different damage? Maybe not 5, but a couple of times anyway. You probably compare the 30mm HE of the 2A42 with the 30mm AP of the GAU-8...!

So I just wanna know if is there any script that I can run on a unit to make it engage an enemy target only after X amount of seconds of getting inside the launch range. Thanks!

Hi, I'm trying to make the manpads and other IR SAMs fire at aircraft with a bit of delay which is a realistic thing. In reality, most of the times a manpad wouldn't know when an enemy aircraft approaches and also from where, so after spotting an aircraft, the manpad requires a time to activate the missile's seeker and cool it enough to have a good quality lock on the target before firing. All of these would make sense to make the manpad and any other IR SAM system have a basic delay before engaging targets of opportunity or targets that aren't initially aware of being close to. Thanks!

Many thanks for putting this effort to answer about this topic. You've put a bit too much effort in what concerns the sudden pitch ups and I appreciate it, but when the wings on the helo stall (and basically any wing, fixed or rotary), the drag roughly doubles (more or less depending on design) the value it had at critical AoA, but it never drops as the lift does (the lift dropping to usually anywhere between 40% to 50% the max CL). Copy that about the much lower washout which is the only thing that can actually help generate autorotation torque on the main rotor. Thanks, so it has 5 degrees lower than for the MI-8. But..., is the MI-24's maximum takeoff weight actual in sim performance (ability to lift off at X IAS and Y altitude) that much lower compared to the MI-8? Cause then either the MI-8 has a bit overrated performances on the rotor (lift to drag) or the MI-24 has it a bit lower as it seems. Again, this is how it seems during comparisons. At MTOW, the MI-8 has a much better ability to vertically liftoff and hold a given altitude compared to the MI-24 for the same conditions. Many thanks!

So in your belief the MI-24 cannot use autorotation to land smoothly at all even when very light?!

I always felt that this helo has difficulties when it comes to blade stall which takes place rather quickly or at a quite low AoA which is also accompanied by an abrupt and uncontrollable pitch up whenever the blades pitch is at higher values compared to any other helo in DCS which don't have a great difference from one another. All other helos blades stall at a rather correct AoA, but these on the MI-24 stall at slightly above half the other helos. The stall AoA being a bit too small is one thing, but their drag is yet another thing. In autorotation tests, even with just 10% fuel, no heat suppressors, 0% ammo and clean loadout, the helo just barely flies on a high slope at some 200km/h with very little rotor blades pitch (some 2-3 degrees mostly) while the rotor rpm is visibly very low for all of these autorotation conditions which should keep the rotor rpm near 100% or at least that's what happens on either MI-8, KA-50 or UH-1. Although each helo has it's own autorotation performances, the differences should never be great between them or something is wrong somewhere. For short, the small stall AoA and too high blades requires some attention. Another thing (different topic maybe) is that below generator power rotor RPM, the controls trim does nothing anymore. Is this normal? Isn't the trim suppose to be mechanical like it happens on MI-8, KA-50 and so on, not requiring electrical power in order to work? Thanks!

Cheers bro..., you have the right thinking! Indeed that for constant turn rates you'd rather like the constantly held input variant that we have now, but you can see that even with an ON/OFF variant you can still wobble rather nicely around the desired AoA. I'm saying this from experience of more than 2 decades of flying flight sims. It's no to hard to do it, but yes, if you could have a sort of input mode toggle button you can switch between modes during flight, and again..., that's not a painful task at all, it's just a thing of wanting to do it or not! Hmm, I don't see needing 3 hands (LOL) in order to toggle it. What would be so hard to reach for a key combo?