Jump to content

Degraded Su-27 aerodynamic lift


Maverick Su-35S

Recommended Posts

ED is developing DCS for 30 years? How come they cant fix bugs so fast then if coders know source code as own pocket? How come that in 30yrs ED didnt manage to complete core engine stablility and modular system based on unified physics and DM, one ring to rule them all? Instead they deal with 'beauty' of dx11 api utilization and gpu subroutines thanx to Microsoft. Terrain aquired from nasa radar elevation points, beutified by 3d max outsourced plugins.. The only thru simulation task was to setup physics engine and ED neglected it. That was the only real task in 30years that shoul be progresively updated and set up as golden rule of simulation. Instead of modyfing super flexible template ed gives modules to ousourcing companys that do what, 3dmax model and animations for years. All charts found online in actual declassified flight manuals as valid sources. We, the customers dont believe that simulation is right, as can be easily seen if one compares simple missile range data from dcs one. Missiles never reach even 30% of their nominal range. Either air has super low Reynolds numbers or all models are actually enlarged by factor of two. Making two versions of game instead of implementing localization charts brings suspition that what is indestructible in EN version could be not on RU version and vice versa. Its up to ED to proove that DCS is real simulator by giving us comparison tests simulated vs real charts and deviations in any region if they want to shut up the customers. Even simultanious tests of all modules side by side that are validated by actual geometry and propulsion data. Either that or stop calling this rigged game an 'simulator'. Why so much trouble, well DCS made people spend tremendious amount of money on hardware aside from modules, to get what? Unoptimized 25fps game that is so obviously rigged in favour of specific on demand modules and uses single core aside from second for sound. Thats no game developement as it is manipulation of customers. We the customers value our time as much as ED does but we dont get the product we support. Even less, we dont even get minimum respect. Thats BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I brought my Hotas Cougar in 2004 cause of flight sims, played all versions of lock on, up to dcs version now. Changed 3pcs since, every one cost around 3-5k bucks. Tracking every change ever since and I dont like the mess now. Im old enough to claim what is wrong from my perspecive as long time user and player. I know how FM and DM behaved before, and I'm sure many other witneses are here too to say some things are teribly wrong with physics. Is that a sin? Instead, I got banned for demanding some explanations as customer. I'm at that point to fire up vulcan api, dotnet, 3dsmax, setup team, kick crowdfunding and build and compile core engine that actually works. Later modifiyn prime template to morph it into any possible plane or craft in the world in matter of months not years, inteligent netcode that just cant be misinterpreted as teleportation. In that case I would just refund allmost complete DCS and go coding up to 3AM .. Somehow I'm still here, not becouse what DCS is now, bu because what DCS used to br once before... So we expect new DM? Tell me when it will be applied?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm at that point to fire up vulcan api, dotnet, 3dsmax, setup team, kick crowdfunding and build and compile core engine that actually works. Later modifiyn prime template to morph it into any possible plane or craft in the world in matter of months not years, inteligent netcode that just cant be misinterpreted as teleportation. In that case I would just refund allmost complete DCS and go coding up to 3AM ..

 

Do it, you won't :lol:

 

Are you even a software developer to say it would only take months ?

Helljumper - M2000C Guru

 

Helljumper's Youtube

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK3rTjezLUxPbWHvJJ3W2fA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

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.

 

Sorry, I'm not teaching ED or anyone how to receive one's feedback, but only to look once again into the problem. Yes, a re-evaluation of the simulation, nothing else. It is indeed probably painstaking, but necessary to confirm beliefs and just equation estimations from facts.

 

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.

 

Ok, I agree with you that they may have experience, but what if the simulation still isn't right and there is place for better? Would it be wrong for them to re-work on the code? I personally do re-work what I've done over and over again UNTIL IT's GOOD. And I will make a new thread talking just about something that has been left un-simulated at all since LOCK ON FC1 with Su-25T. It's surprising that at their experience they've missed a very important aerodynamic simulation clue. It's about the leading edge and trailing edge devices and I'll start a new topic of this one later, because it's very important and right now NO PLANE in DCS has the right complete effects simulated for the slats/droops & flaps.

 

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.

 

Good then, bring them in here and let's discuss...:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3562596#post3562596

 

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.

 

Let's hope so, cause I've seen a poor guy say a mix of incorrect and correct stuff regarding simulation (he was both right and wrong) and he was also talking about the Su-27 and got banned just for saying that he doesn't trust the FM. This is what changed my mind and made me say that!

 

 

Regards!


Edited by Maverick Su-35S

When you can't prove something with words, let the maths do the talking.

I have an insatiable passion for helping simulated aircraft fly realistically!

Sincerely, your correct flight model simulation advisor!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have seen much rabble rousing but the only people I've seen get banned were being obnoxious dicks. Kinda like certain peopke in this thread effectively insulting ED's competence and crying conspiracies as to why they aren't getting their way. I'm going to repeat some more COMMON KNOWLEDGE points that certain righteous crusaders continue to ignore

 

 

 

Missile physics are not right, that was acknowledged long ago and it is already been said it's in the pipeline for an overhaul. Stop being obnoxious and pretending you're some sort of sleuth or customer rights activist.

 

Damage model is twenty years old, and the rework started quite a while back, it ain't gonna haplen overnight. Stop cryibg conspiracy theories and making a fool of yourselves.

 

 

 

''IMA GONNA MAKE MY OWN GAME HURR DURR'' That's beyond ridiculous. You don't know how, and you wouldn't even if you did. Your ability to operate a word processor does not make you a master coder. Your degree in home plumbing engineering does not make you an aeronautical expert, neither do the articles you read online about airplanes.

 

 

 

 

 

''I'm going to make the best flight sim you've ever seen. It will be tremendous. I know flight sims, believe me. I've never made a flight sim, but I am so much smarter than everybody else. I'm so smart. People tell me all the time how smart I am. Especially me, I tell myself I'm smart every day. My playerbase is so large, they say it's the largest playerbase they've ever seen. It's so much bigger than ED's. It's tremendous. I'm going to make the biggest most beautiful flight sim you've ever seen, way better than failing ED's flight sim. It will be amazing, believe me. Buhlieve me. Who's that? An ED supporter? Get him outta here! Just get him outta here! Go back to failing ED, we're going to make the best flight sim in the world here and you can't stop us. My playerbase is so large, the best, way better than ED's. #MFSGA Make Flight Sims Great Again''

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

''I'm going to make the best flight sim you've ever seen. It will be tremendous. I know flight sims, believe me. I've never made a flight sim, but I am so much smarter than everybody else. I'm so smart. People tell me all the time how smart I am. Especially me, I tell myself I'm smart every day. My playerbase is so large, they say it's the largest playerbase they've ever seen. It's so much bigger than ED's. It's tremendous. I'm going to make the biggest most beautiful flight sim you've ever seen, way better than failing ED's flight sim. It will be amazing, believe me. Buhlieve me. Who's that? An ED supporter? Get him outta here! Just get him outta here! Go back to failing ED, we're going to make the best flight sim in the world here and you can't stop us. My playerbase is so large, the best, way better than ED's. #MFSGA Make Flight Sims Great Again''

 

 

Huh...!=)) Look man, don't embarrass yourself! I'm nowhere near the way you think of me. Don't be ridiculous, yet you may remain jealous and press enter too much after each paragraph! Love you too!


Edited by Maverick Su-35S

When you can't prove something with words, let the maths do the talking.

I have an insatiable passion for helping simulated aircraft fly realistically!

Sincerely, your correct flight model simulation advisor!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coming back to the Flanker subject, our Su-27 in the sim can't reach the same angle of attack as the real jet when pulling full aft stick under similar conditions of compared to an airshow Su-27. The Flanker at airshows is able to pull more than 100 AoA with ease and without having to jerk the stick fore then aft in order to gain as much pitch momentum as possible to get an AoA as higher as possible. From level flight, our Su-27 can't seem to get the pitch attitude greater than 95 (+85 upside down more correct) or the AoA greater than 85..90. My guess is that either the elevator's lift isn't high enough (aside from the fact that the lift beyond stall becomes exaggeratedly low) or the CP doesn't move enough forward at positive AoAs. If one of these 2 aren't the concern why we can't get similar results to the real thing, then I let the "experts" here tell what's wrong, cause they can't deny what I'm saying as it's plain clear what happens.

 

 

 

Regards!

When you can't prove something with words, let the maths do the talking.

I have an insatiable passion for helping simulated aircraft fly realistically!

Sincerely, your correct flight model simulation advisor!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...!

 

Cheers!

 

If you are an expert and not going off feelings where is the detail proof?

 

Here is an example of how you do things and not even get banned.

 

[WIP] Powered Approach Mode

 

Curly has many posts in that thread with pictures or links to every document.

 

Here is another example for you...

 

.

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again...

 

 

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

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello! I'm from Russia. The maximum angular velocity of the Su-27 can reach 36 degrees per second. But, according to test pilot Roman Taskaev, this is the maximum strength of the aircraft. About the developers of ED I will say this - Yo-govorit, that they have the right, others have different. They just ignore the problems. I stopped using the simulator.

  • Like 1

Лучше быть на земле, и жалеть, что не в воздухе, чем быть в воздухе и жалеть, что не на земле.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You posted a video about a MiG-AT that I've seen before, and then a very jerky guncam video... what do either have to do with any of this? The first one is irrelevant, and the second, I don't speak Russian well enough to tell, but it seems unrelate also.

 

Documents. Do you have them? If not, YouTube videos aren't good enough.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You posted a video about a MiG-AT that I've seen before, and then a very jerky guncam video... what do either have to do with any of this? The first one is irrelevant, and the second, I don't speak Russian well enough to tell, but it seems unrelate also.

 

Documents. Do you have them? If not, YouTube videos aren't good enough.

 

 

 

Due to its maneuverability, the Su-27 is superior to the MiG-29. That's what the gancam shows.

И ты вроде бы русскоговорящий, мог бы и на родной "мове" написать.

Лучше быть на земле, и жалеть, что не в воздухе, чем быть в воздухе и жалеть, что не на земле.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Нет, нет, мой русский ужасно :P Я просто тупой Американец ) И спасибо за отвечет. Я всегда постараюсь.... но русский, это сложно )

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coming back to the Flanker subject, our Su-27 in the sim can't reach the same angle of attack as the real jet when pulling full aft stick under similar conditions of compared to an airshow Su-27. [...]

Isn't it vector thrusted Su-35 at the moment showed?

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so, pretty sure those are old videos. Description indicates older mldels, too. He does also appear to be yanking it around pretty hard, despite chuckles here claiming it's unnecessary

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zhukov, what if I tell you that my first pc programming encounter was in 93' on c64 basic, next on 386 (installed in k50) on win3.1 run on dos6.22, coding win clone os-es and vesa driver games on borland pascal, c and c++ in mid 90', entered mechanical engineering colledge in 2001, second colledge in 2004 was IT engineering, cappet in top 10% of students, designing and analysing ship systems and hull for croatian and norweigan shiyards for last 7 years, mastered on CFD fluid-structure interaction analysys and design of smart parts and systems aside from NC programming for big and robotized stuff. Please tell me that I'm not competent in fields we're talking about? Tell me that I can't code on msStudio or Xcode in c++ or c# or any other object oriented language up to assembler level and machine code or even macros for production lines. Tell me that I cant use API calls from Vulcan or DX SDKs. Tell me I cant model 3d animated model in 3dsmax when starting from version 2.5 as now I do model and render terrain and architectural structures as freelancer aside from my actual job. What ever I dont know I will learn. But will you or moderators on forum learn that not everybody here is just player or user, but even professionaly something more serious? How many more people here are even better in things mentioned up nor you or I cant know for sure. So dont pull your cards too soon. ED needs to setup things right in core engine and be ultimately objective about FM and DM models to stop reputation spiralling down by claiming that DCS is thoroughbred simulator. Well it aint by what I can observe backed by my own experience and from reactions of others online. If ED was my company (allready own one), I would say this: '****it guys you're right, we know the issue and we're working on solution. Thank you for your feedback. Appreciate it.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say that I have never had argument with someone on the Internet who did not claim to be an expert whose superior knowledge I should bow before. For all you know, I could have a similar background, but I avoid self qualifying as much as possible because it erodes, rather than enhances, your arguments in 90% of cases, at least on the internet where it can't be verified.

 

I was also present for the epic 'planes in grass' thread, where people proved both that Russian planes can get stuck running off the runway in-RL and that it is possible to taxi, takeoff, and land in random fields in DCS provided you aren't too heavy and avoid coming to a stop especially, both points you vigorously contested for weeks despite video evidence of both. I fully expect you will continue to do so now.

 

The only thing I really know about you, Jack, is that your stubborness is the thing of legends and that, at least on occasion, you're full of shit lol But the same can be said of me, and I find you highly amusing, so I give you a pass lol

 

-edit

I hit space too much and he does it not at all. We should meet in the middle and have proper formatting lol


Edited by zhukov032186

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you may be expert in your fields but when you go out and say that none here is competent for DCS topics thats what you get back - someones brief CV to get you back on the ground, considering it as personal credit or discredit i dont care, im pretty honest here. Famous 'stuck on grass' thread also prooves that soil hardness in dry or soaked state is not simulated at all thus many planes used to fail on basic taxing there where they actually shouldn't comparing to tyre roll drag and thrust available, but that what you said now is just another attempt of discredit me by pulling some other offtopic issues over this thread. Yes, Internet is full of various 'experts' but considering my stuborness, don't you really think that by using that feature my team and me could actually make a little more realistic simulator than DCS? If compared to Trump talk style isn't that rhetoric closer to ED maybee by claiming: we will make best flight simulator out there, its gonna be beautifull (thrue, but physics will be manipulated and certain modules favored on behalf of objectiveness and actual data charts). Nevertheless, I'm expecting progress on fields of FM and DM soon and if there will be no progress at all, my remaining time will be used better somewhere else on better causes. Simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually no, you'd just get stuck in the typical endless cycle of something not being quite right and your community accusing you of manipulating things to suit your tastes.

 

Yes, Internet is full of various 'experts' but considering my stuborness, don't you really think that by using that feature my team and me could actually make a little more realistic simulator than DCS?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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