[NO BUG] Flaps out in close in BFM

Hey guys,

the flaps are, according to our knowledge, very close to how it would have been in real life. The data that leads us to this conclusion unfortunately does consist of anecdotes, SME input and Grumman tests, which ofc makes it hard for you to verify. But as you know, we have no interest in concocting up something, which isn't as close to reality as possible (despite a small group of ppl claiming just that). If the opposite were true, that the Tomcat explodes when you only as much as look at the flap lever, we would have modeled that instead.. But she didn't, it is a very sturdy airframe and breaking off the flaps would have been nigh impossible without getting into a ton of other trouble first.

As for the question of randomness: it is already there. You cannot model such a thing and have it jam/break at exactly 251 kts each time and claim that's realistic. Like you mention wear and tear and different stress will have the same material break in different ways. This is something we tried to reflect ofc. Unfortunately DCS does not let us count life hours for your jets, which would be really cool, with maintenance getting a meaning as well, etc... Maybe one day. But in general we have such things implemented across the jet: your engine power will vary ever so slightly, you almost won't notice, the wings break with added stress and so on and so forth. But ofc, as with everything, there are limits in DCS to what one can do or cannot do.

As for SATAL, I would like to just say as firmly and kindly at the same time as possible: we do not care the least bit what would win or lose in SATAL. And we never will. It is a great event, and I hope you all have fun in it, hence we support it every year and since day one, but please understand: we cannot pay attention to such situations, only to what seems plausible (= realistic) for us to create in the jet and what not. If it wins or loses in events is none of our concern. I am saying this, because ppl keep bringing it up time and time again. DCS isn't a game that is created with balance in mind. It is created with realism, with simulation, in mind. There is a many things one can exploit in SATAL in other jets as well, and players will always do that. It is up to the event organizers to set rules in place that set a frame and limits for what is allowed and what not - we do not mix in that, we never have, and never will. That's just on a sidenote. On another sidenote: Tomcats have faired - to my knowledge - pretty badly in SATAL so far, whether because of how they got used or the restrictions in the rules, I wouldnt want to analyze on the fly, but while they bring a fear factor, other jets made a far greater impact in winning or losing. When the 104th lost last year to a certain bird flying at angels 50 with nigh mach 2 and dogding missiles like an SR-71 - after a completely spotless winstreak in every match before - no one complained: because that's how DCS can be sometimes in the competitive environment. I can tell you that out of experience of winning every single event for more than 8 years in a row: it was the 104th's fault to not deal with the mentioned jet accordingly. If you fly competitive DCS, whenever you lose, it is your fault, and not "dcs missiles" or "dcs this" or "dcs that". That's the wrong mind set: everyone knows the limitations and also unfair advantages the game can bring. Everyone is subjected to them in the same way, too. Falling victim to them is thus preventable in every single case. It's just a mind set I would like to pass along, that I engrained in the 104th cadets for more than a decade and that always lead to more success. Always, always ask yourself: why did I let that happen instead of why did that happen to me. That's just a word of advice on the side.

Heh, flying and winning events... - it almost seems like a life time ago... :)

Thanks for clarifying about the randomness point, really interesting!

And fully agree with you on the SATAL part by the way.

P.S. what was that plane flying at mach 2 a 50k feet? I have a feeling it was a Mirage, lol.

Thanks for clarifying about the randomness point, really interesting!

And fully agree with you on the SATAL part by the way.

 

P.S. what was that plane flying at mach 2 a 50k feet? I have a feeling it was a Mirage, lol.

I will just add that the numbers were close indeed but made up for the purpose of the example by me, means I did not look them up. But the scenario was in that kind of regime. As for your feelings: I shall neither deny nor confirm, simply as we don't want to pass judgment on any module but ours. :)

Cheers IM. For me, I'm happy to trust that you guys know a heck of a lot more about FMs, flaps and computer modelling than I do, regardless of the number of YT videos I watch and wiki pages I read.

As for FFH, I've made my donation and withdrawn - I'll be watching and I'm sure it'll be a great success. Any 14s in the comp ... best of luck!

Mach 2?...50k feet... last year...I'm has it a guess it was an F-15C then. Yeah...them PlayStation 3 jets will get ya ;) but least it looked like good fun.

Mach 2?...50k feet... last year...I'm has it a guess it was an F-15C then. Yeah...them PlayStation 3 jets will get ya ;) but least it looked like good fun.

It wasn't an F-15, but let us please not continue to speculate what it was or wasn't, who really wants to know can go and review the streams, etc... And whether it was mach 2 or 1.5 - like I said I didnt look it up. It is completely besides the point anyway. (the point being that SATAL or any other event cannot and should not be part of such discussions.)

Also, what you say is ultimately true: in the end what matters is that we have fun in any such events, and while winning is a tad more fun, there will always only be one winner. So it cannot be just about that.

Cheers IM. For me, I'm happy to trust that you guys know a heck of a lot more about FMs, flaps and computer modelling than I do, regardless of the number of YT videos I watch and wiki pages I read.

 

As for FFH, I've made my donation and withdrawn - I'll be watching and I'm sure it'll be a great success. Any 14s in the comp ... best of luck!

It is still important that you guys keep questioning us, though. It often makes us look up things twice and sometimes we do miss something or discover a new angle, etc etc... It is a very important feedback process and we appreciate it a lot. So never start trusting us just blindly, please, being vigilant both from our side and from the side of the customer assures the quality we aim at. Thank you for all the feedback you give, guys. It's invaluable. :)

That's for the info IM.

FWIW, I have definitely had the F-14, F-15, and F-16 at M2 @ 50,000ft. Okay, 1.97M for the F-16. I like doing "speed runs" from Batumi to Anapa. Discovered the F-15 engines begin to flame out at 53,250ft at 2.3M.

Discovered the F-15 engines begin to flame out at 53,250ft at 2.3M.

What? Why would they?

What? Why would they?

I have no idea. I started hearing a popping and started loosing speed, engine needles started bouncing. I put the nose down and once under 53,000 it righted itself. I was about done with my Batumi to Anapa run so I didn't investigate any further.

Guys, there is nothing wrong with being m2 at a certain altitude hehe... It was just an example of what could be interpreted either as an exploit or unrealistic or just dealth with appropriately in a MP scenario, if one pays attention to it. Let's get off the topic again please and back to flaps, in hindsight I should not have mentioned it haha.

As for flaps: we are reviewing the point at which they could break (as in get stuck, etc) again. atm they will jam depending on airspeed, G amount deployed and whether they are moving or not. We're discussing with our SMEs which point would be their "absolute demise", if you like. I will get back to you on that once we know more. Thank you for your kind patience in the meantime.

As for flaps: we are reviewing the point at which they could break (as in get stuck, etc) again. atm they will jam depending on airspeed, G amount deployed and whether they are moving or not. We're discussing with our SMEs which point would be their "absolute demise", if you like. I will get back to you on that once we know more. Thank you for your kind patience in the meantime.

Thanks, Iron Mike. A review the current implementation was all I was asking for. :thumbup:

see that :

Ah, Snort. Best Tomcat stick of them all.

edited

see that :

 

 

Exactly, he pulled the F14 in the vertical at 325 knots IAS with full flaps and full afterburner without any damage and this was for real and he was not the only one. So i think full flaps can be an option also in the simulation.

As for flaps: we are reviewing the point at which they could break (as in get stuck, etc) again. atm they will jam depending on airspeed, G amount deployed and whether they are moving or not. We're discussing with our SMEs which point would be their "absolute demise", if you like. I will get back to you on that once we know more. Thank you for your kind patience in the meantime.

I think the best solution could be search for info about what happened in real life, please see also this:

I realize I'm pouring gasoline on a fire here, but it's worth discussing since it is related to the rules: Starting at 35:51, Jell-O asks SYPH and Cosmo about G limits on the F-14 A/B:

 

They say that the A/B was designed for 7.5 g, but the crew was ordered limited to 6.5. But there was no limiter and the pilot says that "Trust me, there was many times that we went down there and tapped that little guy" "The gauge" "Yeah so we wouldn't get in trouble."

 

Here's my 2 cents. I think exceeding the g-limit on the F-14 was more common than the pilots in this thread are willing to accept/admit, but it had a far more negative consequence to the fleet than the sim gamers are willing to accept/admit.

 

Edit:

And here at 41:25ish they begin talking about the maintenance nightmare of the F-14 and how they had to bend their own metal to replace parts, tons of panels to remove. If you listen further, they discuss how the airframe was extremely durable and there was a time on the Kennedy when a hornet got blown into a tomcat, and the hornet was heavily damaged but the tomcat flew the next day. Anecdotal but interesting. It still seems to me that the guys who flew the tomcat were willing to exceed g-limits and keep it hush hush, but I also feel as though this heavily contributed to the maintenance issues of the jet.

 

A few minutes later in the 46 minute section the pilot talks about that his squadron was allowed to manually control the flaps in combat, and because of their corner speed they really weren't at risk of exceeding g-limit of the airframe (supporting what the fighter pilots here have been saying), but they had OTHER maintenance issues from breaking the mechanisms relating to the flaps.

 

Again, the F-14 was used and abused.

I would really like to fly F14 to his real limits like in real life and i'll be very very sorry if full flaps or really g tolerance will be limited in a not realistic way.

@IronMike

Is there the possibility you contact Captain Dale Snodgrass? He knows for sure the real life limits of the Tomcat and would be great to have his opinion.

Here is a link to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, you could contact them to ask how contact Captain Snodgrass. https://fightson.net/304/capt-dale-snort-snodgrass-lectures-at-the-smithsonian-national-air-and-space-museum/

It would be really really great :)

@IronMike

 

 

Is there the possibility you contact Captain Dale Snodgrass? He knows for sure the real life limits of the Tomcat and would be great to have his opinion.

Here is a link to the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum, you could contact them to ask how contact Captain Snodgrass. https://fightson.net/304/capt-dale-snort-snodgrass-lectures-at-the-smithsonian-national-air-and-space-museum/

It would be really really great :)

We'd have the contact, but he would not know any better than our SMEs do. We also asked Okie, who has nearly as many hours as Snodgrass (Okie taught BFM in the F-14). The limit was the same for all, the real structural breaking point however was likely known only to Grumman.

I would really like to fly F14 to his real limits like in real life and i'll be very very sorry if full flaps or really g tolerance will be limited in a not realistic way.

You can already fly the F14 to its limits like in real life (and actually "beyond" - that is it's operational limits - on your own discretion). If you fly it to its breaking point it will break ofc. No need to be afraid of us nerfing anything. But the flaps need an ultimate breaking point, which, if exceeded, punishes you, just like the wings can break off, if you pull past 13G, etc..

We'd have the contact, but he would not know any better than our SMEs do. We also asked Okie, who has nearly as many hours as Snodgrass (Okie taught BFM in the F-14). The limit was the same for all, the real structural breaking point however was likely known only to Grumman.

 

 

 

You can already fly the F14 to its limits like in real life (and actually "beyond" - that is it's operational limits - on your own discretion). If you fly it to its breaking point it will break ofc. No need to be afraid of us nerfing anything. But the flaps need an ultimate breaking point, which, if exceeded, punishes you, just like the wings can break off, if you pull past 13G, etc..

Thank you for your kind answer :)

When will you simulate the maintenance shop holding you down in your bunk and beating you with bars of soap in a sock for over-G'ing their jet and breaking the torque tubes for the 3rd time this week? Maybe as a bonus Supercarrier feature?

When will you simulate the maintenance shop holding you down in your bunk and beating you with bars of soap in a sock for over-G'ing their jet and breaking the torque tubes for the 3rd time this week? Maybe as a bonus Supercarrier feature?

LOL!

The Supercarrier is from ED ask them

Exactly, he pulled the F14 in the vertical at 325 knots IAS with full flaps and full afterburner without any damage and this was for real and he was not the only one. So i think full flaps can be an option also in the simulation.

He doesn't actually say whether he broke the plane or not? Do you think he would? Might spoil his story ;)

We will start sending Ironmike to anyone's address who over Gs the jet....we know where you live. :)

He doesn't actually say whether he broke the plane or not? Do you think he would? Might spoil his story ;)

He didn't breaks the flaps: in his short story he say I have in the Tomcat that was prohibited manoeuvre of using full flaps, but I turned it into art science