Look at real eurofighter cockpit

Saw some comments on the Dubai air show with the Typhoon boasting full multi-role capability with litening pod (I think) and mentioning storm shadow flight test in 2015.

Think I would love to see the tiffy modelled with the multi role package - I love the precision missiles and bombs of the A-10 and the A2A of the F-15, can imagine rolling in with 12 Brimstone and a battalion of enemy tanks already lased by SF - imagine that as an FPS hit when you push "fire!"

Nice 360 of the cockpit, although I got into a flat spin with the mouse and felt quite sick!

I used to send the MHDDs off for repair, in the early days they were CRT and then TFT or LCD, its been a while, we did lose a few buttons, the Defect Report was frequently "Button 8 not displaying". Take it down to Tony in the Smiths Lab to confirm fault and then workshare kicks in - Unit sent to Smiths to remove Keypanel, kepanel sent to Sirio to repair, Sirio return, Smiths re-assemble the unit and test and hey presto the units working again, but they are pretty robust, the other failures were in the power supply by Diehl, some component put in the wrong way, MHDD test in Final Assy - smoke pouring out of the front panel, class 1 defect.

I remember early development canopy lock stuck, pilot locked in cockpit (luckily in Warton and not saudi)!

Pity about the UAE deal - I thought that was expected to be a definate?

Yes, but only after the P2E upgrade. P1E, which is ongoing at the moment adds basic AG (Enhanced Paveway & Paveway IV) capability to Tranche 2 aircraft.

 

To give an idea of the complexity associated with Typhoon, at Coningsby alone we have 6 different standards of aircraft. All with differing capabilities/functionality. And that is just the major versions (Production Standard Configurations - same thing as "Suites" on the A-10C). There are quite a few other minor modifications and updates on top of that as well. So modelling a Typhoon would be even more complicated that doing an F-16C in terms of working out what to actually model to start with.

 

 

 

Which type? :D

Depends on what we get the data for ;)

Another vid filmed at the recent Dubai airshow. Not the best interviewer, but gives a good look at some of the cockpit displays and avionics functionallity.

Nice, thanks Eddie :)

I think it was all a bit of nonsense, I thought it was germany who didnt want the gun

sorry but that is nonsense, i think you mix that up with the tiger helicopter

Pity about the UAE deal - I thought that was expected to be a definate?

I'll put it this way, they were getting ready to put jigs in the ground at Samlesbury.

I'll put it this way, they were getting ready to put jigs in the ground at Samlesbury.

Indeed. There were quite a few surprised people up north by the sound of it, although it was barely a subject of conversation on base. Aside from the odd passing comment few people even mentioned it and that was only because some were looking to head out there if the company got the support contract side as well.

I heard they may have neglected the Saudis a bit during the UAE comp - never bite the hand that feeds you!

There is still a bigger deal out there though isnt there - UAVs and another Arab state??

I saw a few guys from BAE at the Ashes, just back from Woomera...

AFAIK the softkeys on the MHDDs are not LCDs but matrix of LEDs which, provided the cover doesn't come off, makes them absolutely sturdy...

Just watched that video and was surprised to see that there is no constant display for engine temp/rpm etc instead you have to cycle through the MFCD pages? Doesn't that seem a little strange, adding extra load to the pilot who instead of just glancing and seeing everything is ok now has to manually cycle though the MFCD? Don't like that!

There are permanent engine speed and fuel gauges on the HUD control panel, which are also part of the "get you home" backup instruments.

Just watched that video and was surprised to see that there is no constant display for engine temp/rpm etc instead you have to cycle through the MFCD pages? Doesn't that seem a little strange, adding extra load to the pilot who instead of just glancing and seeing everything is ok now has to manually cycle though the MFCD? Don't like that!

This flighter is smart, you let it tell you when there is a problem, in fact, it is so smart, the cocky female voice gives you directions, warns of threats, counters them and argues with you about your speed...

You can even put her on "ignore".

If you're not hearing "speed low recover" you're not trying hard enough. :D

This flighter is smart, you let it tell you when there is a problem, in fact, it is so smart, the cocky female voice gives you directions, warns of threats, counters them and argues with you about your speed...

 

You can even put her on "ignore".

:lol: bar the ignore aspect, that's spot on in terms of simulation out with this aircraft too. Marvellous attention to detail. haha.

jokes aside she must be a relatively easy jet to fly in terms of practical usage. its the seemingly lack of clutter that fascinates me. I cant wait to experience that. It is a she isn't it ? ive no doubt there is a lot to be learned within those fascinating mfcd`s of hers though. 3 as well. that's evolution!

MHDD's Ali ;)

Multi Head Down Display

And yep a very intelligent jet indeed :)

MHDD's Ali ;)

Multi Head Down Display

And yep a very intelligent jet indeed :)

indeed. ill happily get my head down in that multiple times for that display. Lovely Lady of the sky. haha

Multi-Function Head Down Display - sorry for pedanatics.

See there is a small controll panel in front of the stick where you can cycle them too.

Can t wait to see the resolution from the LDP and FLIR on them - neither were operational when I worked on her.

Hey,

ever since the release of D.I.D.'s EF2000 Sim I am awaiting a modern interpretaion of this awesome Jet with modern GFX and some more attention to detail and immersion.

I wonder how much info has to be guessed since it is top secret and most likely will remain for another decade or two aka Radar capabilities, Jamming,

Automated Target Aquisition and Presentation.

Bit

Not so much as guessed but more what we can release or not.

Not so much as guessed but more what we can release or not.

This sounds like you have more info than you are allowed to know, or do I misunderstand your statement :smartass:

What would the Eurofighter GmbH or Ltd. allow you developers to know without being part of the military industry but not allow "us" to know & use in a sim ? I don't see any difference for as long as you are not part of the military complex and do know such things through your military work. !?

I don`t think it goes like this: "Hey, you know you shouldn't know this but this Radar goes XY km far and wide and we can lock on targets at THIS range, BUT PSSST DONT TELL OTHERS.." kinda gossip while having a whiskey with the Tech Guys at Eurofighter...

Anyway, we are not allowed to use precise data of any of the aircraft and thus I doubt you or anybody else can really make a precise digital copy of this plane. If you still do it, you will be the victim of things like:" I think I should have been able to lock this guy from 180km away, why couldn't I with the AC you programmed" kinda thing... .

Still, I would buy it, regardless if the Radar is 100% accurate or not, just get the AFM somewhere close to the real thing :D

This sounds like you have more info than you are allowed to know, or do I misunderstand your statement :smartass:

 

What would the Eurofighter GmbH or Ltd. allow you developers to know without being part of the military industry but not allow "us" to know & use in a sim ? I don't see any difference for as long as you are not part of the military complex and do know such things through your military work. !?

 

 

I don`t think it goes like this: "Hey, you know you shouldn't know this but this Radar goes XY km far and wide and we can lock on targets at THIS range, BUT PSSST DONT TELL OTHERS.." kinda gossip while having a whiskey with the Tech Guys at Eurofighter...

 

Anyway, we are not allowed to use precise data of any of the aircraft and thus I doubt you or anybody else can really make a precise digital copy of this plane. If you still do it, you will be the victim of things like:" I think I should have been able to lock this guy from 180km away, why couldn't I with the AC you programmed" kinda thing... .

 

Still, I would buy it, regardless if the Radar is 100% accurate or not, just get the AFM somewhere close to the real thing :D

What if VEAO had a contract to deiver a mil spec simulator to a customer of the partners, with a non disclosure agreement which prevented them from releasing any of the data they received from the partners to enable them deliver this contract?

This sounds like you have more info than you are allowed to know, or do I misunderstand your statement :smartass:

 

What would the Eurofighter GmbH or Ltd. allow you developers to know without being part of the military industry but not allow "us" to know & use in a sim ? I don't see any difference for as long as you are not part of the military complex and do know such things through your military work. !?

 

 

I don`t think it goes like this: "Hey, you know you shouldn't know this but this Radar goes XY km far and wide and we can lock on targets at THIS range, BUT PSSST DONT TELL OTHERS.." kinda gossip while having a whiskey with the Tech Guys at Eurofighter...

 

Anyway, we are not allowed to use precise data of any of the aircraft and thus I doubt you or anybody else can really make a precise digital copy of this plane. If you still do it, you will be the victim of things like:" I think I should have been able to lock this guy from 180km away, why couldn't I with the AC you programmed" kinda thing... .

 

Still, I would buy it, regardless if the Radar is 100% accurate or not, just get the AFM somewhere close to the real thing :D

Because I have a certain level of security clearance and I assume you don't.

Knowing what she can do in real life and programming what we're allowed to do in the sim are two totally different things.

Are you going to be able to learn in the sim and then go sit in a Tiffy and start her up and fly her away, of course not. The military version we'll build, yes of course, but the consumer version, not a chance.

We will "replicate" systems in sim as best as we can and are allowed to.

Will be the same with any modern fighter for DCS and the reality of sim life.

Older aircraft, such as the Hawk, not so much of an issue.

Oh and the tech prefers beer :thumbup:

Because I have a certain level of security clearance and I assume you don't.

 

Knowing what she can do in real life and programming what we're allowed to do in the sim are two totally different things.

 

Are you going to be able to learn in the sim and then go sit in a Tiffy and start her up and fly her away, of course not. The military version we'll build, yes of course, but the consumer version, not a chance.

 

We will "replicate" systems in sim as best as we can and are allowed to.

Will be the same with any modern fighter for DCS and the reality of sim life.

 

Older aircraft, such as the Hawk, not so much of an issue.

 

Oh and the tech prefers beer :thumbup:

I could imagine that this is a difficult situation to be in. I mean, if you would not know anything and would have just to guess, nobody could say something against it that anything confidential were made public - even if the sim would match the real thing 100 %.

So, how will "replicating" actually look like then? For distinctive features ... hrm, like "the nav system also contains every gas station on the ground so the aircraft can use them for emergency refulling", something like that could just be omitted and nobody would ever know (or complain). But for essential features, how will you decide where to draw the line? Like, hrm again, "the sensors allow you to read a newspaper from further than 25 nm away". Could you just "replicate" that by altering the actual parameters - like "newspaper readable from 10 nm" or maybe even "readable from 50 nm"? I mean, just omitting that whole sensor would not be an option, wouldn't it? (we would end up in a plane that is capable of ... something like of WWII, right? :o)

 

Are you going to be able to learn in the sim and then go sit in a Tiffy and start her up and fly her away, of course not. The military version we'll build, yes of course, but the consumer version, not a chance.

 

You are busting my plans here!

So how may the mil. version accidently leak to an unworthy civil customer? :D