Jump to content

Decided to buy the F5


CybrSlydr

Recommended Posts

actually the astronauts routinely still this airframe even today as I live in the houston area and see them coming into NASA here quite regularly...........

 

Those are T-38s, which are very closely related to the F-5 but are considered different aircraft. Their cockpits have received rather significant upgrades, as well.

T-38N.thumb.jpg.3a0f82dacb1de83d3c55f732d7647bb0.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just hopped back in tonight for the first time since going VR.

What a roomy little office the F-5 has! The pilot is practically manspreading in the seat. Coming from the F-18, the F-5's engines are incredibly responsive (maybe unrealistically so?), yet they're also anemic, wheezy little things. I was doing a climbing turn from takeoff at full mil, 1500fpm, 180kts...and losing speed! I've flown real life GA airplanes with better climb performance!

I'd forgotten you can't see how much fuel is in the external bags, and as soon as the "Ext Tanks Empty" caution light illuminates extreme range anxiety sets in. Range anxiety sets in immediately after wheels-up if you're flying without bags.

Maneuvering she bleeds energy like a stuck pig and it's hell gaining it back unless you're in a controls-neutral dive. You can't just power your way out of trouble. I also decided to play around doing some low altitude, high AOA work. Mistake.

And I honestly believe it's harder to set up a good, stable, textbook approach and landing in the F-5 than it is to do a carrier trap in the F-18.

In short, I missed this old bird! Time to go get in some fights!!

Enjoy your purchase, CybrSlydr!

 

Regarding your terrible performance after takeoff.. Hate to mention something obvious but did you forget to retract the airbrakes after start? I've taken off with the airbrakes out a few times in the F-5 lol :doh:

Proud owner of:

PointCTRL VR : Finger Trackers for VR -- Real Simulator : FSSB R3L Force Sensing Stick. -- Deltasim : Force Sensor WH Slew Upgrade -- Mach3Ti Ring : Real Flown Mach 3 SR-71 Titanium, made into an amazing ring.

 

My Fathers Aviation Memoirs: 50 Years of Flying Fun - From Hunter to Spitfire and back again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

CybrSlydr: I just got the F-5, too (and i'm a total noob to DCS). I bought it because of it's simplicity, it's IRL Top Gun creds, and it's multi-role capability.

So far, I really like it and even tho it's "simple", it's plenty challenging enough for now and I can see putting a LOT of time into it. And the cool thing is that because of it's simplicity, the challenge of operating it effectively will continue to keep me coming back to it. :)

 

Kev2go: lighten up, man: you're way, Way, WAAAY too serious on the carrier landing thing. The dude isn't advocating it, he's just saying it's one more cool thing you can do with the module. y'know - in THE GAME.

 

And FWIW, it does take effort and skill to figure out what actually puts a plane down precisely.

 

And really, what better test of a landing than catching a wire on a heaving deck in a plane that was never designed for it?

 

Hell, I'm super impressed that DCS & the F-5 are modeled so realistically that it's even possible - I CAN'T WAIT TO TRY IT! :D

 

The whole point of trainers is to have a student pilots fly under the backseat instructor, and not waste a multi million dollar front line fighter if they do crash. Here the exact is opposite for the f5. Even if there was a version for carrier ops that could take the landing it would be worse for student pilots. Carrier training would be done with an fa18d.

 

 

In a virtual environment this isnt the case. You can screw up as much as you want. And if you are $$ conscious might as well just buy the aircraft you a actually want like the hornet.

 

I flew the f5 long before the hornet. I never practiced carrier landings And idid not struggle learning that aspect in the hornet. Even if I did not much would be applicable because of how the aircraft handles. And because there is no official manual written for carrier approaches.

 

The way the f5 handles is in no way comparative to how a f18 does. For a carrier approach.

 

You have to land it much faster and much lower desert rate than you do in a hornet. Again unlike the f18 you cant use official manual for specific case approaches. This is basically something that can be quantifiable taught via textbook

 

Since non exist for the f5 you learn by trail and error, and not by any quantifiable documentation. There is no book written on the f5 carrier landings. Because it's not a carrier plane.

 

So if you want to proclaim skill with unrealistic antics that would otherwise break the aircraft landing gear irl so be it. Dont tru try misguided people into buying an f5 for carrier operations.

 

A far better trainer for carrier ops is the su33. You can get an entire fc3 pack in the process in terms of pricing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CybrSlydr: I just got the F-5, too (and i'm a total noob to DCS). I bought it because of it's simplicity, it's IRL Top Gun creds, and it's multi-role capability.

So far, I really like it and even tho it's "simple", it's plenty challenging enough for now and I can see putting a LOT of time into it. And the cool thing is that because of it's simplicity, the challenge of operating it effectively will continue to keep me coming back to it. :)

 

Kev2go: lighten up, man: you're way, Way, WAAAY too serious on the carrier landing thing. The dude isn't advocating it, he's just saying it's one more cool thing you can do with the module. y'know - in THE GAME.

 

And FWIW, it does take effort and skill to figure out what actually puts a plane down precisely.

 

And really, what better test of a landing than catching a wire on a heaving deck in a plane that was never designed for it?

 

Hell, I'm super impressed that DCS & the F-5 are modeled so realistically that it's even possible - I CAN'T WAIT TO TRY IT! :D

 

yea... right.....

 

this aspect on the F5 its about as " realistically modeled: as lobbing Gbu12's to glide all the way to target as if were a mini JSOW.......

 

 

 

 

 

because you know gravity goes out the window when LGB's sensor is tracking a laser. right?........

 

but whatever man, you can delude yourself into believing what you want.


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

because you know gravity goes out the window when LGB's sensor is tracking a laser. right?........

 

but whatever man, you can delude yourself into believing what you want.

:huh: has somebody actually made the maths for that so we know for sure it's incorrect or at least to what extent it is incorrect? I mean, GBUs do have lift with those fins and I think I see them decelerating all the way to target since launch, may be they should decelerate even more or the built in control for the bomb shouldn't be so accurate in calculating that path. If it's the bomb maybe it happens or should happen in every module launching that bomb and it's not an F-5 issue.

 

 

The guy in the video says it was the third try, so not that accurate.

 

 

 

S!


Edited by Ala13_ManOWar

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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