Degraded Su-27 aerodynamic lift - Page 25 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-01-2018, 06:02 PM   #241
Vitormouraa
Veteran
 
Vitormouraa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SC, Brazil
Posts: 3,311
Default

I think we can move on now. What's next?
__________________


SplashOneGaming is a community of viewers, players, and content creators built on combat flight simulation. Flowing through our veins is years of flight simulation experience in a multitude of different platforms. We welcome and encourage all of you to join us, whether you are seasoned or green, looking to learn, teach, or just trying to find someone to fly with.
Discord
Website
Vitormouraa is offline  
Old 03-01-2018, 06:04 PM   #242
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,579
Default

Well, I may be too harsh. He knows his aero.

But the point is that all of this word salad is not worth much - 'but the f-16 ... ' no one cares.
'But the NASA data is fake' ... no it isn't.

NASA conducted their tests on a couple of F-15 test-beds. It is possible that these airframes are less representative of an F-15C as configured in-game, but that's something that we'd have to dig into. The fact is that a lot of this research was in fact used to improve the eagle's handling characteristics.

What needs to be done is simple: The chart's available, show it, plot the problem on it. Like the signature says, 'let the math speak for you', not the rest of this blah-blah.

After this, we can dig in and see if the data is simply not representative enough (what if you have a 30000lbs F-15A in this test? Highly unlikely, but you never know - the papers usually describe any such parameters and modification where necessary).

But NASA's eagle's, while modified, were no prototypes - aside from very obvious changes like the STOL demonstrator together with TVC nozzles, they were pretty much F-15's. Not-so-obvious changes relate to increasing engine thrust and changing the flight control programming/mechanization for their experiments. But those aside, it's still an F-15 with an F-15 fuselage, wings, and control surfaces.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline  
Old 03-01-2018, 08:16 PM   #243
Vitormouraa
Veteran
 
Vitormouraa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SC, Brazil
Posts: 3,311
Default

Close this thread, please. Nothing else can be added to this thread. Otherwise, the discussions here will be endless.
__________________


SplashOneGaming is a community of viewers, players, and content creators built on combat flight simulation. Flowing through our veins is years of flight simulation experience in a multitude of different platforms. We welcome and encourage all of you to join us, whether you are seasoned or green, looking to learn, teach, or just trying to find someone to fly with.
Discord
Website
Vitormouraa is offline  
Old 03-02-2018, 01:37 AM   #244
jackmckay
Member
 
jackmckay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Croatia
Posts: 393
Default

This is science guys. Maverick talks with better flight dynamics understanding than most guys here. But talking who's daddy is stronger(f15&su27) is way below descent conversation. Anyway its constructors achievement and not the one who are flying it. Airshow performance is competition, tough one, bigger balls kind alike so that means pushing performance margins. If plane sucks there, it will suck anywhere. DCS problem is still in equlity of laws of physics not applied to all becouse of different FMs and there story ends. Why modules dont have tryouts in a first place? @tharos my double chipped 2xgtx760 SLI 4GB is not fully supported aside from 6cored i7, 32GB, SSD and I get 20fps, only all low gets 40fps.. Ugly game then. Off topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
jackmckay is offline  
Old 03-02-2018, 01:51 AM   #245
jackmckay
Member
 
jackmckay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Croatia
Posts: 393
Default

@esac Early Su27 had pilot as sensory instrument for G stress overload. Too bad that all gamers sticks are not FFed or maybe home g-suit would do that kind of immersity level.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
jackmckay is offline  
Old 07-10-2018, 05:33 PM   #246
Maverick Su-35S
Member
 
Maverick Su-35S's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmckay View Post
... got a complete mess, planes with lower T/W ratio accelerated better than other with higher.. Egg. Viggen had linear acceleration up to vmax without ease out on peak as fastest plane there.. Mig21 was behind many even it has better T/W ratio than mirage that was second befind viggen... The problem is unreal drag calculation in basic linear acc test. Also IAS is only relevant speed wind tunnel testing. Cd vs AaA is a must chart for flight model correction.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Spot on Jackmay, it seems that there are very few people around here to really and seriously understand flight dynamics and aerodynamics correctly and what is wrong with these simulations in DCS because very many misinterpreted this science and no one can easily better teach them now. They rather ban you and me and anyone else who contradicts them (ED devs) because you become a threat by trying to bring up what's true, but sooner or later people will realize the absurdities that develop right in the heart of a correct simulation.

Because they (ED first of all, being the masters) don't understand what's wrong and believe that what they did is correctly simulated, won't listen to someone like you or me or anyone else who comes with detailed and correct analysis due to many subconscious reasons such as ruining their image...!

But ED, may I ask you... who's fault is it because the simulation is wrong? Your customer's fault for finding and pointing out the mistakes in the simulation? You should be grateful that at least you can make it better, but no, you don't wanna listen because you think you already done it correctly, you put the hand before your eyes and no longer want to look into problems and just focus on new projects and leave the unfixed problems behind, some problems even staying in for good because for years they have been addressed and no one even budged to fix anything (ex: the A-10C's CCRP and LASTE problems that I addressed many years ago).

If I were to develop my own simulator and someone would point out at something he considers wrong, I would assess the problem and re-evaluate my knowledge, because who knows, maybe I need to learn some more, maybe there's something that I missed or didn't completely understand throughout my years of knowledge (we're all humans) and If I conclude that there might be some truth in what my customer says, although I may indeed feel a bit embarrassed, I WILL DO AGREE with him and try to solve the problem together, because in the essence what matters most to me is the accuracy of the simulation because this will affect my reputation on the long term, not by trying to protect my image and by denying the truth which only may help me on a short term! But from what I experienced so far regarding the F-15's aerodynamic performance (which is definitely way off track simulated in comparison to the real jet's aero performances), I no longer believe that this will be corrected, because I can see the replies I get towards my efforts to prove what's true from what's false. I have my answers and I feel very hopeless to think that ED will ever get accurate aerodynamic models and data estimations (because they use equations from what I heard and not necessarily real charts) which will correctly simulate the CP (center of pressure) travel with AoA and CL/CD polars (CL&CD vs AoA vs Mach).


Cheers!
__________________
DCS modules owned: all, regardless of the fact that some are still a WIP and don't deserve 10 bucks!

When you're out of words when discussing something, let the maths talk for you.
I have an insatiable passion for helping simulated aircraft fly as real as possible.
Sincerely, your flight model fanatic!

Last edited by Maverick Su-35S; 07-11-2018 at 05:05 PM. Reason: missed prepositions
Maverick Su-35S is offline  
Old 07-10-2018, 06:09 PM   #247
Vitormouraa
Veteran
 
Vitormouraa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SC, Brazil
Posts: 3,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maverick Su-35S View Post

But ED, may I ask you... who's fault is it because the simulation is wrong? Your customer's fault for finding and pointing out the mistakes in the simulation? You should be grateful that at least you can make it better, but no, you don't wanna listen because you think you already done it correctly, you put the hand before your eyes and no longer want to look into problems and just focus on new projects and leave the unfixed problems behind, some problems even staying in for good because for years they have been addressed and no one even budged to fix anything (ex: the A-10C's CCRP and LASTE problems that I addressed many years ago).

If I were to develop my own simulator and someone would point out at something he considers wrong, I would assess the problem and re-evaluate my knowledge, because who knows, maybe I need to learn some more, maybe there's something that I missed or didn't completely understand throughout my years of knowledge (we're all humans) and If I conclude that there might be some truth in what my customer says, although I may indeed feel a bit embarrassed, I WILL DO AGREE with him and try to solve the problem together, because in the essence what matters most to me is the accuracy of the simulation because this will affect my reputation on the long term, not by trying to protect my image and by denying the truth which only may help me on a short term! But from what I experienced so far regarding the F-15's aerodynamic performance (which is definitely way off track simulated in comparison to the real jet's aero performances), I no longer believe that this will be corrected, because I can see the replies I get towards my efforts to prove what's true from what's false. I have my answers and I feel very hopeless to think that ED will ever get accurate aerodynamic models and data estimations (because they use equations from what I heard and not necessarily real charts) which will correctly simulate the CP (center of pressure) travel with AoA and CL/CD polars (CL&CD vs AoA vs Mach).


Cheers!
Yo-Yo himself already said he is not going to change anything until you prove it's wrong, not based on common knowledge, youtube videos or friends (may or may not be the case here), but based on actual documentation, especially about the aircraft in the discussion.

From my understanding, you are trying to teach Eagle Dynamics on how to receive feedback from their customers and possibly fix what (supposedly) is wrong. But see, you are talking to a company that is developing flight simulators for almost 30 years, you are NOT talking to amateur people here on this forum.

The developers do know what they are doing, especially the FM engineers. They have a TON of experience. It wouldn't be fair for them to change their code or whatever they programmed because of a random person (not in the offensive way - just a random person on a forum) considers a specific item to be wrong.

So please stop using common knowledge and try to use real documentation and if possible make comparisons between X and X and not X and XZY. They don't want to know if slats give you X% of lift or drag so therefore this Y aircraft is supposed to turn better than X. That's not going to help anything since they are interested in seeing a solid proof of what's wrong with the FM (if there is something wrong - which is not the case here since what you were trying to say before was not correct).

Conclusion, ED devs do know what they are doing, and most of the time they are open to discussion about their work as long as you can provide enough documentation and/or images to prove your point. Seriously ED has been doing this for longer than you may imagine.

Also, let's try to not say things like "They rather ban you and me and anyone else who contradicts them (ED devs)" because that's far from being true. And THAT can get you banned.

Just my 2 cents.
__________________


SplashOneGaming is a community of viewers, players, and content creators built on combat flight simulation. Flowing through our veins is years of flight simulation experience in a multitude of different platforms. We welcome and encourage all of you to join us, whether you are seasoned or green, looking to learn, teach, or just trying to find someone to fly with.
Discord
Website

Last edited by Vitormouraa; 07-10-2018 at 06:12 PM.
Vitormouraa is offline  
Old 07-10-2018, 10:02 PM   #248
zhukov032186
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Posts: 1,356
Default

There are exactly two sources that are acceptable:

#1 Official documentation and performance charts
#2 Verifiable experience with the aircraft in question



Non-comprehensive list of unacceptable sourcea

#1 Feelings
#2 Napkin math
#3 Wikipedia or other random websites
#4 TV / YouTube documentaries
#5 Your friend
#6 Your buddy
#7 Your uncle
#8 Your friend's cousin's uncle
#9 ''Everybody knows''
#10 Other games
#11 The online degree you have in ''engineering''
#11 Etc
__________________
I do solemnly swear to strafe every pilot I shoot down, destructible or not, circumstances permitting, because reasonz. Opponents are advised to assume the position upon landing, or preferably, while still in the air.
zhukov032186 is offline  
Old 07-10-2018, 10:13 PM   #249
Esac_mirmidon
Veteran
 
Esac_mirmidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ferrol, Spain
Posts: 5,454
Send a message via MSN to Esac_mirmidon
Default

You miss the mother of all unacceptables.

" I THINK..."
__________________
" You must think in russian.."


Windows 7 64 bits Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6 - GTX 1060 EXOC KFA2 - 16 Gigas RAM 1.600 - 1920x1080

Hotas Rhino X-55 - MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals - Track IR 4
Esac_mirmidon is offline  
Old 07-10-2018, 10:32 PM   #250
zhukov032186
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Posts: 1,356
Default

Eh, you could lump that one into 'feelings' really. ''I feel this or that'' and ''I think this or that'' are pretty much the same thing, but yeah, I could have phrased it differently =)
__________________
I do solemnly swear to strafe every pilot I shoot down, destructible or not, circumstances permitting, because reasonz. Opponents are advised to assume the position upon landing, or preferably, while still in the air.
zhukov032186 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:42 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.