Jump to content

is the sabre going to ever be fixed???


jonatron5

Recommended Posts

I got involved with a group of guys that do PVE missions with sabres amd migs, and I was really dissapointed by what ive learned with them. In the current state of the game the stock sabre gets thrashed by the Mig-15. This is regaudless off whether your flying agaisnt an AI or a real player so its not the simple flight model being an issue.

 

I assume DCS being as realistic as they are, first concern is historical accuracy, but as of right now thats out the window. In real life the Sabre and the Mig-15 where extremely similarly performing aircraft, the only way weve managed to get fun missions with equal performance out of the sabre is to edit the lua files for the migs, set the sabres in mission to have 10% fuel (turn on unlimited fuel), edit the lua file of the sabre to get rid of that assanine gun overheat mechanic (the way its moddled now the sabre guns turn into shotguns after one burst) with this setup, the sabre handles like a sports car, and can keep up with the mig beautifully, and dogfights agaisnt the A.I. are actually enjoyable and challanging. However this Really destroys some of the fun of the game, Becuase also wing pylons are broken. they add an unholy ammount of drag to the aircraft, so we cant field bombs ,rockets, drop tanks, or missiles. Now obviously I understand that wing pylons will natrually add drag to any aircraft as opposed to the (clean) setup, but I really think its currently bugged becuase it goes from flying like a sports car, to flying like a dumptruck.

 

also the radar gunsight does not work, and this in my mind is the most unforgiveable. One of the coolest things about these semi modern jets is having a computer reading the radar returns off your target aircraft and automatically adjust the pipper to compensate for lead on the target. As of right now the automatic lead angle indicator will make you miss 100% of the time so its not just bugged its litterally completely broken. So ontop of everything else, here we are flying a 1950s fighter jet and we have to mechanically cage our gun sights and work with deflection shooting.(wich to be fair is fun too, but i paid for a working gunsight damnit)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you any hard data to proof your claims? Because you sound like you're complaining about unbalanced gameplay, which is not the purpose of DCS. Those aircraft are modeled after real life flight data and if you have nothing in that regard to proof what you say, then there probably will be no changes.


Edited by QuiGon

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is your problem

 

ai don't obey the same physics as player aircraft, it's not the sabre being broken, it's the ai/sfm that's "broken."

The thing with the AI is true, but he said:

This is regaudless off whether your flying agaisnt an AI or a real player so its not the simple flight model being an issue.

I understand this as that he is experiencing the same problem even when flying against players.

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldnt call it broken, as I for myself was able to achieve several A2A- victories against both AI-Migs and player controlled ones and never felt that my aircraft was significantly worse than the Mig.

 

Maybe you dont employ the aircraft correctly. If you look at the EM-diagrams of both aircraft, you see that the Mig enjoys a significantly better sustained turn at lower Speeds. Involving in a flat turning duel will, because of this, always end bad for you.

Make use of your better Rollrate (espicially at higher speeds), better instantaneous turn at nearly all speeds, your better controllability at high speeds (also better crit. Mach number) and your higher weight (thus higher inertia whilst comparable drag => good performance in zoom climbs and dives). All of this makes the Sabre competitive.

However, I havent spend much time on the Sabre, so just take this as hints. Some more experienced pilots can help you better.

 

I also have the feeling that the lead is incorrect (you have to manually lead a bit), maybe you can play with the Relative velocity switch.

I shoot with fixed pipper most often, because I cant really adapt to a lead computing sight (need more training).

Cant comment on wing pylons though, have to do some testing first.

 

Reading your post, your claims lack any backing sources, you just say "the aircraft were of similar performance". So, unless you come up with data (flight test documents, computersimulations with CAD-models, aerodynamic calculations whatever) to prove something, Id rather trust Belsimtek who have surely done lots of research. DCS is not balanced, it tries to get as close to real aircraft performance as possible. If you want a game that gets balanced, play WT or similar games.


Edited by qqQ

OS: Win10 | Hardware: Z97 Mainboard, i7 4790k @4Ghz, GTX980, 4x4GB DDR3-1600 Dual Channel Ram, TM Warthog (w/ Extension) + Throttle, CH Pro Pedals, TIR5 with Custom Clip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with the last post. It is all very well to say the two aircraft had similar performance, but did they? Can you substantiate your claims in this respect?

 

This isn't a challenge, but just a question. A lot of assumptions, and historical "truths" can cloud the reality.

 

While it may have some merit that the Sabre is to some extent handicapped by it's current flight model, and there may always be small niggles that can get blown out of all proportion during the heat and frustration of battle.

 

All I can assume is that Belsimtek came into the project with the very best of intentions, and I am also sure they won't rest until they are completely satisfied with every aspect of the module.

 

However, is broken really a suitable phrase? I can accept that it may need some honing, some polish. What I can't see however is where you come by your assertion that the Sabre and Mig-15 were evenly matched. Also, take into consideration the marks of aircraft that are facing each other. Were these the marks that were involved in the historical encounters? Could the mismatch have been masked by the differing abilities and tactics of the pilots? Things like G suits have been suggested as being a factor.

 

It is all very easy to cast doubt on the achievements of the developers, but unless there is irrefutable evidence to support these assertions, I have a feeling the argument is lost before it begins. The way to ensure changes are made is to show the facts support your case, otherwise it is just an opinion, and unlikely to get results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, before i recieve any more negative comments on the matter, i understand that the mig was actually more manuverable than the sabre, But not to the degree dipcted in game becuase as i recal it was pretty darned close. Also, i have no idea if it is dipcted in game or not, but in Korea the North korean mig pilots where not outfitted with G-suits,were as there american counterparts where, (http://stephenesherman.com/discussions/mig_vs_sabre.html) wich in my mind is a realy important thing. this would mean the migs historical performace in sustained high G- manuvers would be substantially limited ,perhaps even even worse than the sabre with his suit

less tha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, before i recieve any more negative comments on the matter, i understand that the mig was actually more manuverable than the sabre, But not to the degree dipcted in game becuase as i recal it was pretty darned close. Also, i have no idea if it is dipcted in game or not, but in Korea the North korean mig pilots where not outfitted with G-suits,were as there american counterparts where, (http://stephenesherman.com/discussions/mig_vs_sabre.html) wich in my mind is a realy important thing. this would mean the migs historical performace in sustained high G- manuvers would be substantially limited ,perhaps even even worse than the sabre with his suit

less tha

 

The suit thing has been discussed in-depth in this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=154556&highlight=suit

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, I win 9 times out of 10 vs AI Mig-15. But it's a very, very long fight. I can only start to get close enough when my fuel is less than 40%.

The pipper for me works pretty well, make sure it's in the "spring loaded position". If you move the range manually it will stay there and not give you correct lead. You have to right click the throttle or assign a button on your hotas. Then it'll work as intended, provided you set the correct wingspan.

Windows 10 - Intel i7 7700K 4.2 Ghz (no OC) - Asus Strix GTX 1080 8Gb - 16GB DDR4 (3000 MHz) - SSD 500GB + WD Black FZEX 1TB 6Gb/s

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@bkthunder: I am employing the gunsight correctly and I think the OP does too. However, the displayed lead is not perfect, but a little bit too little. I think this has been discussed in another thread already, but I have to search that one.

 

@jonatron5: How do you define maneuverability? I mean, as long as you have some kinetic energy left, the Sabre can pull tighter turns than the Mig. I also rolls faster. Just saying. However, the Mig retains its energy better, so if you turn with it for extended times at speeds below 400 kn (dont know exact value) he will slowly gain an advantage, as you will bleed your energy and become a sitting duck. It doesnt help that the Mig has a slightly better TW-ratio, as this allows it to recover energy faster if he has bled his.

 

Just try to keep the fight fast, think about your actions and dont just blindly pull into him (conserve your energy as good as you can until the opportunity to get an advantage with your tighter instantaneous turn presents itself). This might work if you are flying a 109 against a P51 that does the same, but the Sabre requires a deeper understanding of BFM (which i basically do not have => I cant help you there), atleast against a human opponent. The AI however is pretty doable if you get a hang of it, they always make the same mistakes. Espicially if you have a wingman.

 

Ah and like NeilWillis said, we probably arent exactly flying the variants that fought in the skies over korea, we arent employing them in the same way, the same altitude, engagement types etc.

 

PS: I read somewhere that gun overheat may be buggy, also for the P51. So maybe this will be adressed.


Edited by qqQ

OS: Win10 | Hardware: Z97 Mainboard, i7 4790k @4Ghz, GTX980, 4x4GB DDR3-1600 Dual Channel Ram, TM Warthog (w/ Extension) + Throttle, CH Pro Pedals, TIR5 with Custom Clip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not certain about the guns overheating, however I suspect that the main issue is actually the M3 muzzle velocity.

 

The gun sight may be tracking correctly, however I believe that around the time that Belsimtek correctly changed the guns from the M2 of the P-51 to the more modern M3 that the Sabre was actually equipped with the tragectory of the rounds seemed to have flattened out. The M3 were mounted with an elevation of 0° IRL and prior to the change rounds seemed to arc up from the muzzle then drop to the target hitting the point of aim. After that change the rounds seem to be leaving the muzzle at 0° and dropping, however they seem to drop too fast indicating the muzzle velocity may be too slow.

 

You can test this hypothesis by parking on a runway and firing the guns, measuring where the rounds land and do the math.

 

As for handling, I believe that it handles correctly or at least within a reasonable margin of error clean. The real issue for me is the drag with missile pylons seems excessive, bombed pylons less so. To be clear, the drag from the pylons only, once missiles have been fired is what I am talking about. I have the drag figure for the pylons and all the external stores that the F86-F -35 could be configured with and if I get time, will set up a few tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldnt call it broken, as I for myself was able to achieve several A2A- victories against both AI-Migs and player controlled ones and never felt that my aircraft was significantly worse than the Mig.

 

Maybe you dont employ the aircraft correctly. If you look at the EM-diagrams of both aircraft, you see that the Mig enjoys a significantly better sustained turn at lower Speeds. Involving in a flat turning duel will, because of this, always end bad for you.

Make use of your better Rollrate (espicially at higher speeds), better instantaneous turn at nearly all speeds, your better controllability at high speeds (also better crit. Mach number) and your higher weight (thus higher inertia whilst comparable drag => good performance in zoom climbs and dives). All of this makes the Sabre competitive.

However, I havent spend much time on the Sabre, so just take this as hints. Some more experienced pilots can help you better.

 

I also have the feeling that the lead is incorrect (you have to manually lead a bit), maybe you can play with the Relative velocity switch.

I shoot with fixed pipper most often, because I cant really adapt to a lead computing sight (need more training).

Cant comment on wing pylons though, have to do some testing first.

 

Reading your post, your claims lack any backing sources, you just say "the aircraft were of similar performance". So, unless you come up with data (flight test documents, computersimulations with CAD-models, aerodynamic calculations whatever) to prove something, Id rather trust Belsimtek who have surely done lots of research. DCS is not balanced, it tries to get as close to real aircraft performance as possible. If you want a game that gets balanced, play WT or similar games.

 

 

funny enough wt idea for balance in jets is mig17 vs the f86. so I guess you should feel lucky Belsimtek only made the mig15bis as a opponent to the f86f :megalol:

 

kidding aside I think the sabre is indeed competitive against the mig15. it just requires different playstyle to beat the Mig.

 

sabre may not have as good raw acceleration , climb, or sustained turn rates at lower Speeds but it does boast superior top speed better instantaneous turn rate ( especially at higher speeds) better roll , and you've got a radar ranging gunsight to help as sit with aiming solution. these traits make the sabre very much competitive against the mig15.

 

 

AI fm is simpler and the can pull of things that real players can't. I too have trouble agianst AI. but I have had successes in the f86 in a2a against players.

 

as a bonus the f86 greater ordinance options and automated bombing modes makes for a better fighter bomber than the mig


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As soon as the damage modeling gets the promised overhaul, the .50s will fare way better than they do now. This will help against the AI that can fly the plane like if it was new until it loses the last hitpoint.

Windows 10 64bit, Intel i9-9900@5Ghz, 32 Gig RAM, MSI RTX 3080 TI, 2 TB SSD, 43" 2160p@1440p monitor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been flying the sabre a long time now and i like it.

When it first came out it was horrible (for me) virtually no rudder, stalled very easily, hard to maintain energy, wrong guns (M2 instead of M3) lots of bugs and inaccuracies. But now its a delight to fly, great visability, good cockpit lay out and systems, fast, stable, long range, good (if not complete) range of bombs rockets etc.

But the guns and sight really loose it down as 71st Rob says the projectiles are always below the sight line and dropping, the projectiles should intersect the sight line at the computed range, but they are always below. Gun over heat is crazy completely over done.

 

So for me the saber is great to fly but not so good for fighting because of the sight/guns (and limited damage model) But the good news is its easily changed for offline and online too on servers not running the integrity check.

 

For anyone interested in trying :-

Back up your F86.lua original and keep safe.

Now modify a version of the f86.lua with the following.

 

open f86.lua and scroll down to shot_heat = 7.823 and change to shot_heat = 5.823

 

barrel_k = 0.462 * 2.7 and change to barrel_k = 0.462 * 5.7

 

scroll down to the guns section and find elevation_initial = 0.0 and change to elevation_initial = 0.5 (play about with this figure 0.5 0.6 and 0.7 all work well just test and find what works best for you) Remember to change all 6 guns.

save and test.

 

The above works perfectly for me from 600ft all the way out to 2000ft, low to high angle off, just exercise good pipper control and allow the settling time of the sight.

Migs (ai) still take a lot of hits to down but at least you can hit them (simple damage model)

I ignore my tracers (or remove them by modding the mixes in this file 1 is AP--- 2 is APIT) and just trust the sight, but you need to just concentrate on the target and sight reticule so a good wingman is very useful.

 

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

As far as I know, the Mig-15 was a better aircraft than the F-86 in dogfights.

 

What made the difference was the teamwork between F-86 anf proper BFM.

i7-10700K 3.8-5.1Ghz, 32GB RAM, RTX 4070 12GB, 1 x 1 TB SSD, 2 x 2TB SSD2 TB,  1 x 2 TBHDD 7200 RPM, Win10 Home 64bit, Meta Quest 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of the above is well and good. But, will the F-86 ever be fixed?

TWC_SLAG

 

Win 10 64 bit, 2T Hard Drive, 1T SSD, 500GB SSD, ASUS Prime Z390 MB, Intel i9 9900 Coffee Lake 3.1mhz CPU, ASUS 2070 Super GPU, 32gb DDR4 Ram, Track IR5, 32” Gigabyte curved monitor, TM Warthog HOTAS, CH Pedals, Voice Attack, hp Reverb G2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I recall correctly, the smoke was practically the only means of distinguishing between the two aircraft from afar in real dogfights because it was so dark! Can't remember where i got the info from though (prob a YouTube video somewhere)

MSI M5 z270 | Intel i5 7600k (OC) 4.8GHz | MSI GTX1080ti Gaming X 11Gb | 500gb Samsung 970 Evo NVME M.2 (DCS World) | 500gb Samsung 850 Evo SSD (OS and Apps) | 32Gb 2400MHz DDR4 - Crucial Ballistix | Be Quiet Silent Loop 240mm | NZXT H440 case |

 

Thrustmaster Warthog - 47608 with Virpil Mongoose joystick base | MFG Crosswinds - 1241 | Westland Lynx collective with Bodnar X board | Pilot's seat from ZH832 Merlin | JetSeat | Oculus Rift S | Windows 10 | VA |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably OT, but it's mostly due to the fuel injector and combustor can design in the J47. Apparently the RR Nene (which the Klimov VK-1 was derived from) was able to produce a comparable(-ish; approximately 16% less) thrust with a less sooty combustor design than the J47.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...