What is the state of the FM as of today?

Stop treating the aircraft like a science experiment. As if every exact input must equal an exact output. Stop executing every action because its a checklist item and instead understand why you are doing it. Checklists are there to make sure you don't miss anything. It is not instructions on how to operate the aircraft. Then relax and just fly the plane. Be adaptable and if the A/C behaves differently than expected, assess, analyze, adjust. Be an Aviator, not just a pilot.

Well said. I've always been a little uncomfortable with the constant explicit trim advice given to newbies trying to learn to land. "You gotta do two clicks of trim, then one more after the turn" etc. like no, just learn to fly the plane, forget trim for now. Obsessing over small details like that when you're still learning is counterproductive IMO

Stop treating the aircraft like a science experiment. As if every exact input must equal an exact output. Stop executing every action because its a checklist item and instead understand why you are doing it. Checklists are there to make sure you don't miss anything. It is not instructions on how to operate the aircraft. Then relax and just fly the plane. Be adaptable and if the A/C behaves differently than expected, assess, analyze, adjust. Be an Aviator, not just a pilot.

Would love to, but without the sit and the stick to communicate with and the internal ear to tell me what i'm doing, it's not that easy.

Don't give up. Yes, the fm changes often atm, but the changes only strike as huge on the initial touch. If you keep working through them, she quickly feels familiar again, they are not as huge as they appear. You will also be able to "hear" the feedback from the SMEs much more if you go along, I know sometimes it surprises a bit, but it is not random and aims at various aspects that are still a bit WIP in the very small regimes.

 

Because of this we are not going into too much detail, as Fat Creason will address the entire evolution of the FM once we are close to or at completion. Thank you for hanging in there, atm our main goal is to get the thumbs up from the SMEs also in minor details.

Very sorry about my momentary lapse there, if you don't give up how could I? :thumbup:

Stop treating the aircraft like a science experiment. As if every exact input must equal an exact output. Stop executing every action because its a checklist item and instead understand why you are doing it. Checklists are there to make sure you don't miss anything. It is not instructions on how to operate the aircraft. Then relax and just fly the plane. Be adaptable and if the A/C behaves differently than expected, assess, analyze, adjust. Be an Aviator, not just a pilot.

This is insightful advice. Give it a try.

Probably the best layman's synthesis of "do that pilot shit" that I've seen.

Would love to, but without the sit and the stick to communicate with and the internal ear to tell me what i'm doing, it's not that easy.

I didn't think I needed a disclaimer that this is a computer simulated aircraft and not the real thing. But here its is now.

Hate to tell it to you, but your inner ear isn't going to help one bit. Even in the biggest airliners, the 1 or more G environment is going to be towards your seat. Vertigo and Spatial Disorientation (more specifically the loss of perception which way is up in the absence of external visual cues) happens to the best of pilots. That's why they invented instruments to give you a visual cue when you can't see outside and instead of misleading equilibrium sensory feedback. After you've flown through a thunderstorm in the dark your realize to trust your instruments really quickly. So your Mk.1 eyeball is just as relevant in sim as it is in real life.

And communication with the stick isn't a requirement either. Airbuses have been flying for decades without any feedback, except for a stall stick shaker which is software activated anyway. In-fact the first commercial FBW active-side-stick aircraft wasn't available until last year.

Of note is that these are not major FM overhauls. What you see is the result of intricate tweaking. I think it's a nice way of showing just how big an impact such (relatively) minor adjustments can have.

FM feels great, and her performance is so close to all the graph data available, it's insane. There is so much depth to how she flies, and each of the last 3 patches have been awesome improvements. Really looking forward to the "A".

Of note is that these are not major FM overhauls. What you see is the result of intricate tweaking. I think it's a nice way of showing just how big an impact such (relatively) minor adjustments can have.

Yeah, I'd say 90% of the FM changes since EA release have been focused on "subjective" handling qualities tweaks can that only be adjusted according to SME feedback. Much of this behavior is not captured in the data sources we have. These changes have been minor and are mostly adjustments to the pitch moments and damping, trying to get the feel right. A couple of these changes have had unintended consequences that either I or the testing team did not detect before the build was sent to ED. Many times we have only had 1-2 days between myself making changes and the build going to ED. We try to test as much as we can, but we cannot always hand fly everything to check every aspect of the FM in the patch cadence.

I'm almost done with a new FM testing system to try and finalize the performance numbers and automate away much of the testing we now have to do by hand. I'm hoping to wrap this up in the next month or so.

... That's why they invented instruments to give you a visual cue when you can't see outside and instead of misleading equilibrium sensory feedback....

BFM-ing on instruments......that's a first :glare:

And communication with the stick isn't a requirement either. Airbuses have been flying for decades without any feedback, except for a stall stick shaker which is software activated anyway. In-fact the first commercial FBW active-side-stick aircraft wasn't available until last year.

BMF-ing in Airbus......another first...... though i would give my left kidney for a stick shaker right now. :thumbup:

Of note is that these are not major FM overhauls. What you see is the result of intricate tweaking. I think it's a nice way of showing just how big an impact such (relatively) minor adjustments can have.

Never had any issues with the FM, even when most people complained about lack of power. It's the feedback (or lack of it rather) that's giving me issues lately. :thumbup:

Never had any issues with the FM, even when most people complained about lack of power. It's the feedback (or lack of it rather) that's giving me issues lately. :thumbup:

If your curves are exceeding 10, try reducing them below 5 at least, if not to or towards nil. With more pitch stability comes a more direct stick input that requires less curves. If you want to see the effect more clearly you can even start with a negative curve of around -5 and work upwards from there. (note setting the curves to negative is rather for illustration than a proposal how to fly, my personal curves are set to +3 on the x55 and 0 on virpil and warthog.)

Hi Folks.

I've been flying the Tomcat (because I LOVE it!) exclusively since EA. With limited time for this sim, I've clocked up around 40hrs and lately have been spending my time in knife fights with the F5 and after the last update I have found myself in more flat spins than I have ever experienced!!!

Has anyone else experienced a similar spike in departures?

By the way this conversation started with METEOP having trouble in a landing pattern. Something all planes are required to do eventually. Nice attempt at subverting my response but regardless your ability to perform BFM has nothing to do with the original or follow-up statement I made or the excuses you remarked. I'm all for people having constructive discussions but if you insist on snide-sarcastic-fallacious counter-arguments:

... That's why they invented instruments to give you a visual cue when you can't see outside and instead of misleading equilibrium sensory feedback....

Your first was you cannot sense feedback from your stick to fly an aircraft. Thousands of pilots do it every day. But since you insist on a military example, I will refer you to the General Dynamics F-16. Arguably one of the best ACM fighters that has no feedback what-so-ever. You also don't need a STALL stick shaker in the HB F-14 since you exceptionally well modeled visual and audio cues to make up for hardware limitations.

If your curves are exceeding 10, try reducing them below 5 at least, if not to or towards nil. With more pitch stability comes a more direct stick input that requires less curves.

No curves on my stick (yeah, i'm one of those guys without extensions that might be in need of some medication :lol: ), i flew her this way from the very start when she came out, and it might be where my issues arise. There was a very clear progression from light-medium-heavy buffet (or rather the clanking cockpit sound) and linear stick input. Now i kinda lost it.

If you want to see the effect more clearly you can even start with a negative curve of around -5 and work upwards from there. (note setting the curves to negative is rather for illustration than a proposal how to fly, my personal curves are set to +3 on the x55 and 0 on virpil and warthog.)

This crossed my mind as well, but i feared it might have a negative impact on my already abysmal precision flying, not so much behind the boat, but rather behind the tanker. I'm awful at formation flying. But i will give it a go and see how it acts. I'm using a CH stick BTW, pretty nice give, so i never bothered with curves so far. BTW, is there a way to setup curve modes for DCS? Like One set of curves for tanking and another (no curves) for regular flight and BFM?

Thanks for the input mate! :thumbup:

If your curves are exceeding 10, try reducing them below 5 at least, if not to or towards nil. With more pitch stability comes a more direct stick input that requires less curves. If you want to see the effect more clearly you can even start with a negative curve of around -5 and work upwards from there. (note setting the curves to negative is rather for illustration than a proposal how to fly, my personal curves are set to +3 on the x55 and 0 on virpil and warthog.)

thanks for sharing I will be trying this out!

By the way this conversation started with METEOP having trouble in a landing pattern. Something all planes are required to do eventually. Nice attempt at subverting my response but regardless your ability to perform BFM has nothing to do with the original or follow-up statement I made or the excuses you remarked. I'm all for people having constructive discussions but if you insist on snide-sarcastic-fallacious counter-arguments:

 

Already answered. Additionally I would pay to see you ACM in 0-0 conditions.

Hey man, if your experience with the F-14 is bound to free flights, basic navigation and landings, i don't judge. Do with it as you will. My primary goal for buying it (and joining DCS actually) was to actually dogfight in it. So this will always be my primary prism through which i will eval the module :thumbup:

Besides that, AGAIN, in BFM your inner won't help you because BMF include a positive vertical (to the Aircraft) G aspect, that will exceed other force vectors by multiple factors, eliminating your ability to accurately use any other equilibrium sensing for any benefit, which was your original 2nd excuse.

 

I must disagree. I admit, my time in an aerobatic airplane is rather limited and on top of that, it was usually another guy at the stick, but in real life lack of perception is a perception. If my senses go out, that is already a sign of what is probably going on. If i get sick, that is also a sign. If my vertebrae start compressing, another sign. Lack of oxygen in my brain, another sign. Vibrations through my body, or lack of any, a clear sign. My guts floating in my abdomen, oh boy is that a sign!

Which leads me to:

 

Your first was you cannot sense feedback from your stick to fly an aircraft. Thousands of pilots do it every day. But since you insist on a military example, I will refer you to the General Dynamics F-16. Arguably one of the best ACM fighters that has no feedback what-so-ever.

A very good example and i don't think i could come up with a better one myself. The Airbus and the Viper both could not be further removed from a Tomcat. They are electric jets. I have no idea as to how far you can push the Airbus before you break something, but the Viper is just not going to let you do anything that will compromise yours or you aircraft safety. With the F-14 however it's quite different. Unless you can feel where you are at (especially during hard edge of the envelope maneuvers) there are quite a few things you can do that can go wrong. This goes double for the F-14A when it comes out. I would like for by engines to start surging before i figure out i was going rough on her.

 

You also don't need a STALL stick shaker in the HB F-14 since you exceptionally well modeled visual and audio cues to make up for hardware limitations.

Until the latest patch yeah, i fully agree. I have never EVER entered a spin, or any kind of departure in her without deliberate intent (like when practicing departure recovery i.e.). I could also very "soundly" tell the difference between a 0 air speed stall and a maneuvering stall. She was just more clear on what she wanted no matter where you were on the excess power scale. Things i can tell in a glider or in a light prop just by being inside one, i could tell in this jet by the intensity and the "flavor" of the rattle. Now, not so much. All the input is kinda muffled. Now, do i want the shake back? Man, if so many people are against it and the SME's insist it has no business being there, fine. But i would appreciate some kind of other feedback. Maybe just one of an audio nature. Not by nature a "realistic" one, but then again, i'm not in the cockpit of an actual F-14 either. I'm stuck with a wooden chair, 21 inch flat screen, and no FFB devices of any sort. Back in my old IL-2 day, at least i had a force shaker stick, but that won't work in Win10 right now. Nor would i return to it, as it lacks enough keys and hats for modern jets.

The only issue I can (still) see is that the cat isn't going anywhere near as fast as it's real counterpart. M 2.15 isn't what I expect to be the top speed, but I never managed to get any faster than that. I've read some accounts stating they reached up to 2.5 in DCS, but none of those with a proof though...

The only issue I can (still) see is that the cat isn't going anywhere near as fast as it's real counterpart. M 2.15 isn't what I expect to be the top speed, but I never managed to get any faster than that. I've read some accounts stating they reached up to 2.5 in DCS, but none of those with a proof though...

Don't you have trouble readjusting to the fm changes in a case I pattern? I must be a total noob then when there is an fm change I have a hard time readjusting. My Tacview files are a testament to my incompetence...

Atm I can't really put a finger on anything that doesn't operate as it should in terms of the FM, and importantly it matches the EM performance charts and thus performs accurately compared with the other aircraft in the sim during ACM.

The primary stuff missing now are some electronic features, such as for example TWS auto which it has to be said is an important one.

Atm I can't really put a finger on anything that doesn't operate as it should in terms of the FM, and importantly it matches the EM performance charts and thus performs accurately compared with the other aircraft in the sim during ACM.

 

The primary stuff missing now are some electronic features, such as for example TWS auto which it has to be said is an important one.

Is that last bit a troll post? TWS auto is the primary way to launch the Phoenix, my RIO and I are constantly in TWS auto and TWS man. We get and track targets and have successfully engaged as many as 3 at once!

TWS Auto isn't automatically adjusting azimuth and elevation relative to ownship and target maneuver to maintain tracks like it should. You can have it set in TWS Auto and have it guide, but full and proper functionality isn't in place yet.

Is that last bit a troll post? TWS auto is the primary way to launch the Phoenix, my RIO and I are constantly in TWS auto and TWS man. We get and track targets and have successfully engaged as many as 3 at once!

Nope, TWS auto is not functioning as it should atm.

What is the state of the FM as of today?

Right.

Edited. I already asked this question on another thread already.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

If your curves are exceeding 10, try reducing them below 5 at least, if not to or towards nil. With more pitch stability comes a more direct stick input that requires less curves. If you want to see the effect more clearly you can even start with a negative curve of around -5 and work upwards from there. (note setting the curves to negative is rather for illustration than a proposal how to fly, my personal curves are set to +3 on the x55 and 0 on virpil and warthog.)

No curves on my stick (yeah, i'm one of those guys without extensions that might be in need of some medication :lol: ), i flew her this way from the very start when she came out, and it might be where my issues arise. There was a very clear progression from light-medium-heavy buffet (or rather the clanking cockpit sound) and linear stick input. Now i kinda lost it.

Finally got some time to experiment last night, stayed up from 0000 to 0300, don't ask me how i got up for work in the morning :megalol:

Anyways, tired curves, positive and negative, different loads, fought anything i could muster in the mission editor, even reverted to a previous beta. I think i finally located my issue, i actually wasn't the lack of shaking, rather the lack for rattle. Even experimented different bleed profiles with eyes closed just to make sure, turns out i got addicted to the sound of the cockpit and conditioned my muscle memory accordingly. So played around a bit with my sound system, tried doubling the bass and the treble to increase the sensitivity of my ear to the current sound feedback. I did notice some success, i can now mop up any AI, no matter the platform, but it's still not the perfect solution as other sounds (like clicking of switches and the afterburner) do get amplified as well, and after a while it becomes a burden on my ear drums. So from my perspective, the best workaround would to add some kind of audio cues, like the airframe squicking when under high g i.e. to the different states the plane is in? Or maybe bring back the rattle? What do you guys think?

Thanks again for the response and (hopefully) see ya up there :pilotfly:

... but it's still not the perfect solution as other sounds (like clicking of switches and the afterburner) do get amplified as well, and after a while it becomes a burden on my ear drums.

Could you locate the sound files and individual boost or quieten them? Perhaps copy them as a mod and work on the copy?

So from my perspective, the best workaround would to add some kind of audio cues, like the airframe squicking when under high g i.e. to the different states the plane is in? Or maybe bring back the rattle? What do you guys think?

This gets an upvote from me.