Jump to content

Hummingbird

Members
  • Content Count

    3861
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Hummingbird

  • Rank
    Veteran
  • Birthday 08/22/1987

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Yes, the problem is when using buttons for it. Something that has been bug reported quite a few times by now. Should also be noted that this wasn't always the case, infact it started out working fine on release, but then a few patches later it was botched and using buttons for radar elevation control became completely broken due to serious oversensitivity; one quick tap on the button resulting in large changes in elevation, making it very difficult to control the radar.
  2. With the axis binding I've heard it works, but with buttons it certainly doesn't. It used to work with buttons though, back at the beginning, which is why it's so infuriating that they broke it and haven't fixed for over a year DESPITE several threads about it, some by yours truly.
  3. I use buttons for positive and negative radar elevation, and it's extremely sensitive. Even a quick tap of the button moves the elevation a large amount.
  4. 2024 might very well be more realistic. I misremembered when HB first showed pics of their F14, wich was 4 years, and not 2 as I incorrectly recalled (time flies!), before EA. But let's see.
  5. 2023 or late 2022, that's my hopeful prediction. But it could be 2024 for all we know.
  6. A question that popped up in my mind recently: Does the EF use a fixed (F-16 style) or dynamic (F/A-18 style) G limiter? By that I mean, does the G limiter have fixed presets chosen by the pilots depending on load out & weight (ala F-16), or does the FLCS automatically govern the G limit based on registered stores & weight ala the F/A-18? Something you know anything about @Spectre11?
  7. Been trying to find a source for the AoA limit for the EF, only thing I've been able to find so far is 24 deg and 25 deg, the latter apparently coming from an EF test pilot. Anyone got anything?
  8. Nothing, it's just semantics really, as the F-15C FM was, like all the other aircraft, tested using the infobar "TAS" reading, which displays the actual movement speed of the aircraft within the simulation (i.e. it doesn't get more accurate than that), which in zero wind, the condition for which all the performance charts apply, is identical to actual TAS. In short the discussion about the infobar changes nothing, and all performance testing should still be done using the infobar TAS reading for accurate results. Thus once the performance patch hits I'll once again be t
  9. The important take aways from this are that for performance testing, which always takes place in std. atmosphere (which means zero wind), the infobar TAS reading is what to use, as it precisely displays the actual movement speed of the aircraft within the sim, which in zero wind is identical to TAS. Meanwhile the infobar's IAS reading appears to infact be EAS, and is therefore misleading, but no'one here ever tested using the IAS reading, and thus its irrelevant to this debate really. In short the infobar discussion was a sidetrack and doesn't have an influence on our FM discussion
  10. Yes, with wind it's a misleading figure as it's not actually True Air Speed, but rather true "inertial speed" as you pointed out, and thus is only accurate in zero wind conditions.
  11. Alright, but I hope you can see how that could be misinterpreted, something I clearly did as can be read in my follow up post You're very correct, I misspoke on that one. You got the point though, that it didn't affect my testing because I was flying in zero wind.
  12. Well it was the impression I got here: As for the infobar, the TAS reading might very well be showing ground speed, I would not have caught that as I always test in zero wind, and thus it wouldn't affect my testing. What I was told was that it recorded the actual true movement speed of the aircraft in the simulation, which ground speed infact also is. As for the infobar IAS reading, never used it, so never noticed anything wrong with it. When I needed IAS, i.e. outside of testing and during actual competitive flying, I would use cockpit instruments just like an
  13. Wait whaaat... I thought you said you didn't have such a script? Ofcourse a script that automatically turns the aircraft at a specific G, altitude & speed is much much better than any hand flying, hence why I didn't bother to video record my testing of the F-14 back when I flew them, because I was sure you had a scripted program which would do it much faster and more accurately than any human could, and thus could rather quickly confirm the results I got. But IIRC you specifically said you didn't have such a tool?? Now don't get me wrong, if what you say is true th
  14. Still it seems it was important we had this debate, as it appears HB weren't using the infobar's TAS reading to calibrate performance, which is needed as the infobar reading shows precisely how fast the aircraft is moving within the simulation. So they will probably/hopefully use this moving forward. That said, if we look at Cpt. Dalan's picture the F-14's mach meter interestingly seems to be corresponding exactly with the infobar's TAS reading and thus seems to show TMN. Not sure if the F-14's mach meter was capable of this IRL, usually mach meters show IMN which just like IAS has
  15. If you have admin/moderator privileges, then edits don't show.
×
×
  • Create New...