Air refueling and carrier landing so frustrating - please add "Easy option" or cheat

[jetsimace]

Hi all,

I know that mastering those challenges can really be rewarding, but if not (let's say because I don't have the significant amount of time required for training) it can be just as frustrating. :cry:

 

For an accasional player like me both are just way too complicated to accomplish (and it's not a matter of videos and explanation which are available a lot, it's just about the fact that I don't have the huge amount of time required for training), so an "easy option" for me is a must have.

I am a loyal customer since the very beginning (e.g. with LOMAC and Black Shark 1) but frankly speaking I have ceased buying any more modules as I think DCS goes in the wrong direction. For me it once was the same issue with FSX which became more and more complex (more focusing on huge number of complex planes and not the sim itself), but while learning numerous complex procedures became more and more important, the "fun factor" just got got lost on the way.

 

Being a long time flight simmer starting in the early 90's with Falcon 3.0, I do still remember that companies like Microprose and Jane's had just found the right balance between "study sim" while there still was a game that provided a lot of fun (e.g. there is nothing else that provides as much long term motivation as a dynamic campaign...).

I can accept that this easy option will come later, but for me this definitely has to be on the backlog (at least with medium priority). And if so, I'll be back :thumbup:

Please don't get me wrong, I still love what has is is being done for DCS but again, I need more accessibility (while DCS should still stay a study sim).

Thanks

[Mr_sukebe]

With the list of requests/fixes and other planned improvements, can’t say I’d wish for this to be a high priority.

[SacredRaziel]

...

I think this topic has been discussed and mentioned in the wish list extensively. Afaik the only thing missing was a statement of ed if its gonna happen or not.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G960F mit Tapatalk

[Svsmokey]

Have you considered VR ? The increased SA , and 3D vision help with traps and refueling , and the increased immersion will bring back the "fun factor" .

[Shimmergloom667]

Username / post combo don't compute :D

 

That said: while I don't have problems AARing, I wouldn't mind an easy option for those who struggle. I too think, that the prio is rather low, though.

[Arkangel]

I recommend that you set curves on your stick, for roll and pitch. Start with a value of twenty.

[viper2097]

...but frankly speaking I have ceased buying any more modules as I think DCS goes in the wrong direction.

...

companies like Microprose and Jane's had just found the right balance between "study sim" while there still was a game that provided a lot of fun.

DCS is not intentend to make fun.

DCS is a simulation and not a game. There is no kind of "balance" needed. So, according to that topic, DCS is for sure not going into the wrong direction.

The opposite is true. It is going in the right direction as more and more systems are becoming more and more realistic.

 

I can accept that this easy option will come later, but for me this definitely has to be on the backlog (at least with medium priority). And if so, I'll be back :thumbup:

Please don't get me wrong, I still love what has is is being done for DCS but again, I need more accessibility (while DCS should still stay a study sim).

Thanks

 

AAR and carrrier recoveries are not as hard as you may think. If it is so undoable for you, you probably doing something wrong.

Easy thing: If you want to do it, you will be able to do it. Even without 100 of hours time.

If you don't want to, its still fine, because its up to you.

 

I can understand you for asking for such a helpful function and I would be fine with that.

However, DCS has a lot of construction sides, and I would hope that they will focus on them first, then on such things.

[dawgie79]

Turn on unlimited fuel so you don't have to do AAR. And then at the end of the mission land at an airbase in stead of the carrier.

 

Problem solved.

[Ahmed]

If you can't land in the boat maybe its better to ask for ACLS to be implemented than for an 'easy' option that I don't really know what it means

[toutenglisse]

Just a though about OP's concerns : it could be easily done I think.

 

Activate game mode in settings ("price" to pay :) ), and when in a zone behind the tanker or the carrier, you hit a button and AI takes control and do the task : refuel, or land on carrier.

 

When done you take back the control. That would just be a "script" that activates something that already exists (AI procedure) ?

[Gierasimov]

True and valid

 

Just a though about OP's concerns : it could be easily done I think.

 

Easier than that.

 

If AAR and traps are too difficult to master due to the lack of time, then simply don't do these.

 

Enjoy whatever free time you have got doing other things in DCS.

[=475FG= Dawger]

While I thoroughly enjoy all other aspects of DCS, I find aerial refueling rather silly. You can't feel the airplane so it is all very artificial.

 

In the real world, you feel changes long before you see them. In a visual simulation you end up chasing the corrections because of the "lag" induced by the lack of other physical cues.

 

Some of the same dynamic is at work in carrier traps, especially close in over the deck but overall CV ops are still good fun.

 

Aerial refueling is not remotely interesting or fun.

 

An automation of AAR requiring that you find the tanker, close to pre-contact and stay there for X seconds per thousand pounds would be acceptable for me.

[Ahmed]

Following that reasoning then automatize dogfighting too, as flying a Hornet at 7g while drinking a beer with the other hand sitting in front of the screen is quite 'artificial' too :smilewink:

 

Not that I have anything against those who ask for these features. I am the first to agree that lacking the seat-of-the-pants feeling and real FOV/eye acuity make a PC sim very different than RL in many aspects.

 

But requesting on one hand the most realistic systems, weaponery, flight models, and on the other hand simplifications for the things that don't suit each one of us, is quite an opposing view. Especially when carrier recovery and AAR are totally optional with the current theater sizes.

 

Developer time is, IMO, much better invested in other areas.

[Shimmergloom667]

Aerial refueling is not remotely interesting or fun.

 

And there we disagree, I highly enjoy that. I still wouldn't mind an easy option for all who struggle, like I said, but I see that as low priority. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[CBStu]

Isn't there a 'game' mode already? I keep seeing it brought up as a possible fix to a problem where controller settings are done in sim mode but maybe the person inadvertently switched to 'game' mode.

[Yeti42]

DCS is not intended to make fun.

 

I agree with almost everything else you say but not this... DCS is a fun simulation and is intended to be. Some would also argue that it's a "simulation game" in that you can achieve goals, score points etc. and is not used as purely a training tool. (In the version we have) I wouldn't play DCS if I didn't get any enjoyment out of it., that's the point, isn't it...

 

On a more agreeable note :) Making the sim simpler rather defeats the point, I too am a casual player, I have a life and a demanding job which requires most of my attention, I still find time to read the manuals and practice in order to achieve a goal, that could be refuelling or it could be doing a non-precision approach in crappy weather.

[Tippis]

Isn't there a 'game' mode already?

There is. It changes the UI a bit, and offers some very unhelpful control aids (that invariably just makes the controls unreliable instead).

 

I agree with almost everything else you say but not this... DCS is a fun simulation and is intended to be. Some would also argue that it's a "simulation game" in that you can achieve goals, score points etc. and is not used as purely a training tool.

It's also worth pointing out that actual simulations will generally have exactly the kind of skips the OP is asking for, simply because that's not part of the training for this session but some surrounding piece of procedure is. To some extent, this falls back on the mission design and in some sense to what others have said earlier: if you don't want to do X, don't include it, but that rather relies on being familiar (to say nothing of patient) enough to fiddle with the mission editor, and doing that for yourself also takes out some of the fun in actually exploring the mission flow — you can't really be surprised by some triggered turn of events if you've spent 3 hours tuning triggers yourself. :D

 

One should also not overlook an absolutely critical component of training: instruction. There are lots of things that a simulator could provide that would, on the one hand, serve as “game aids” for those who play a game (because you're quite right: DCS is without a doubt a game on top of being a simulator — one does not preclude the other), and on the other hand serve as an instructive and illustrating device for those who play the training tool. The bonus outcome is that the former will let people seamlessly transition from one to the other at their own pace and according to taste, and it would be pretty silly and narrowminded to demand that only one activity must be The One True Thing That Can Be Done©®™ — other companies have tried to include it in their EULAs and are ridiculed for it for a reason.

 

On a more agreeable note :) Making the sim simpler rather defeats the point.

Weeeeeeell… that kind of statement requires a truckfull of qualifiers to begin with, but overall, no, it really doesn't.

 

A lot of things — refuelling among them — would be much simpler if they were better simulated. There is zero correlation between “simulation” and “difficulty”. Some tasks are easy in real life, but bad simulation makes them harder. Some tasks are hard in real life but bad simulation makes them easy. Some tasks are hard to begin with and made harder still with bad simulation… or easier. The common theme is that bad simulation will (shock!) be bad, and that “badness” can swing either way. Some tasks are just inherently difficult to simulate properly because the “reality” you want to replicate is inherently subjective, so what looks realistic to one person does not at all jive with someone else things… and both people are absolutely right.

 

A lot of what might superficially look like “making something simpler” is actually more akin to making QoL improvements, and wouldn't affect the simulation accuracy at all — it would just make it more quick, pleasant, and approachable to take part in (the much-requested ability to save mid-session comes under this heading, for instance).

 

“Simple”, as a whole, is a word that needs to be used very carefully around sims because it is such a loaded word for being so apparently… well… simple. :D

Edited August 28, 2019 by Tippis

[GazAce]

DCS IS the most fun one can have!

 

I respectfully and totally disagree with the person who said DCS wasn't meant to be fun. I think it's the most fun someone can have in a combat flight sim and there are loads of examples of how much fun one can have in this game/sim, from building and successfully completing your own missions or someone else's or finally nailing that mission that DCS has made for you or even just learning a new weapon delivery system and watching it work perfectly, too many examples to list in fact. And I feel your pain and frustration Jetsimace in regards to Carrier landings and Air to Air refueling. It's tuff man, yep no doubt but if you keep practicing you will accomplish the task. Took me ages and I nearly gave up and was thinking hey I'll just be a land based Bug and that's that but I thought naaa I want that new Carrier that's coming and so I kept falling off the end of the boat, smashing my landing gear to pieces, killing deck crew lol and not to mention dying a thousand times but one day I nailed it! And the same goes for my Air to Air, I just kept practicing you know. Keep trying man because there's loads of fun to be had, especially when you achieve those little goals that you chase.

Peace out, G :pilotfly:

[jetsimace]

Hi guys, thanks a lot for your hints and comments.

Regarding carrier landing: I just had a couple of successful landings and can again confirm that it's all down to skill and knowledge, which requires practicing and learning which (did I mention this already ?) requires time...

Joystick curves (TM warthog with extension) I had already adjusted/tweaked (yes, that helps a lot) and no, I'm not yet on VR as I'm quite happy with TrackIR together with a 3440x1440 monitor which already provides a lot of immersion and good peripheral view (I might consider getting a Valve index, but that's more of a budget issue...).

 

A couple of learnings I had for myself:

- starting way back behind the carrier with a direct approach has been quite manageable for me as I have more time available

- achieving and maintaining proper ON SPEED AOA does require some time, esp. when starting from a different altitude and/or speed as required

- I'm still struggling a lot with CASE I recovery as there is not enough time for corrections when entering the approach turn / base leg directly from abeam the carrier (e.g. as described in Chuck's - another excellent - guide). Also I still have issues properly aligning with the runway on final approach - again, not much time to react in this scenario. Therefore I changed the procedure to already enter ON SPEED AOA while still on the upwind leg.

- Sometimes I am experiencing a huge pitch up e.g. when gear down or when levelling off out of a turn (still in ON SPEED AOA) which feels unnatural to me, but of course I don't have any real world experience. I was able to compensate that by cutting off the throttle short before levelling out and smoothly increasing throttle after level out.

- In total to me in transition flight at low speeds the Hornet can feel like a rodeo horse esp. with flaps fully down, very delicate to handle. Minor input change can make a huge difference, I easily entered low frequency oscillations in pitch. I do recall other similar posts...

Btw: have the devs mentioned that the FM will get some tweaking in the future?

- Using TACAN and setting up proper course helped me a lot properly aligning with the runway (carrier course minus 12 degrees?). But that only helps if you're quite far away from the carrier, not so helpful when turning in to final from abeam the ship. The course line on the HSI didn't show up before I hit the course switch at least once. Is that supposed to work that way or is it a bug?

 

But on top of all that, yes I had fun :thumbup:

[Gierasimov]

- Using TACAN and setting up proper course helped me a lot properly aligning with the runway (carrier course minus 12 degrees?). But that only helps if you're quite far away from the carrier, not so helpful when turning in to final from abeam the ship. The course line on the HSI didn't show up before I hit the course switch at least once. Is that supposed to work that way or is it a bug?

 

But on top of all that, yes I had fun :thumbup:

 

The angled deck is BRC (ship's heading) minus 9 degrees.

Yes, you will need to set the course to appropriate value in order for it to appear on HSI and HUD.

[Gierasimov]

Sometimes I am experiencing a huge pitch up e.g. when gear down or when levelling off out of a turn (still in ON SPEED AOA) which feels unnatural to me, but of course I don't have any real world experience. I was able to compensate that by cutting off the throttle short before levelling out and smoothly increasing throttle after level out.

 

Most likely you are too fast, hence huge pitch up on dirty up. Gear down under 240 KIAS, flaps half at 200, flaps to full at 180, AND good throttle management I am not pitching up at all.

[Shimmergloom667]

- Sometimes I am experiencing a huge pitch up e.g. when gear down or when levelling off out of a turn (still in ON SPEED AOA) which feels unnatural to me, but of course I don't have any real world experience. I was able to compensate that by cutting off the throttle short before levelling out and smoothly increasing throttle after level out.

 

Like Gierasimov said, your speed might be off. Also drop flaps and gear while still in the brake and let the pitch-up moment from flap deployment carry you through the turn.

[Yeti42]

A couple of learnings I had for myself:

- starting way back behind the carrier with a direct approach has been quite manageable for me as I have more time available

That was my initial thought, but... It just gives you more time to screw up, it also means you start higher, have to spend a long time managing your glide slope and can't see the deck properly from a long way out if your on speed and on glideslope. It would also "annoy" anybody else trying to land... ;)

I changed the procedure to already enter ON SPEED AOA while still on the upwind leg...

That doesn't make any sense, gear and flaps will affect your trim and AOA, you'd have to trim for AOA again after you got dirty

In total to me in transition flight at low speeds the Hornet can feel like a rodeo horse

You just need to get "ahead of the jet" and be proactive in anticipating the effects of profile changes. If you're expecting a nose up moment after levelling off or flaps, then hold the stick forward until you've had time to trim it out.

Basically the pattern puts you in a place where you should be on speed at the correct height, on roughly the correct course where a 3.5 degree glide slope puts you on the deck. The hornet is simple to get on AOA compared to the Tomcat, in both though practice makes perfect and being ahead with anticipated throttle settings and trim eventually becomes second nature. The same principles apply to GA aircraft.

[ac5]

Hi all,

I know that mastering those challenges can really be rewarding, but if not (let's say because I don't have the significant amount of time required for training) it can be just as frustrating. :cry:

 

For an accasional player like me both are just way too complicated to accomplish (and it's not a matter of videos and explanation which are available a lot, it's just about the fact that I don't have the huge amount of time required for training), so an "easy option" for me is a must have.

I am a loyal customer since the very beginning (e.g. with LOMAC and Black Shark 1) but frankly speaking I have ceased buying any more modules as I think DCS goes in the wrong direction. For me it once was the same issue with FSX which became more and more complex (more focusing on huge number of complex planes and not the sim itself), but while learning numerous complex procedures became more and more important, the "fun factor" just got got lost on the way.

 

Being a long time flight simmer starting in the early 90's with Falcon 3.0, I do still remember that companies like Microprose and Jane's had just found the right balance between "study sim" while there still was a game that provided a lot of fun (e.g. there is nothing else that provides as much long term motivation as a dynamic campaign...).

I can accept that this easy option will come later, but for me this definitely has to be on the backlog (at least with medium priority). And if so, I'll be back :thumbup:

Please don't get me wrong, I still love what has is is being done for DCS but again, I need more accessibility (while DCS should still stay a study sim).

Thanks

 

Your request makes no sense. DCS is a proper flight simulator, There are plenty of arcade sims out there, stick with one of those....

[Ewertsp]

Spend some time refining your axis curves and you'll be refueling like a champ in no time. The same works mastering the Huey, good axis curves are a requirement to fly properly.