Flight sim advice

User avatar
chykka
Brigadier
Posts: 3266
Joined: Wed 28 Nov 2012 14:55
Location: Canada, Alberta
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby chykka » Mon 10 Jul 2017 08:09

I use a cheap stick which does the job, however I did get one of the lower End Hotas.
It works fine but I do think it could be a bit better built. Where it extends it's hight it feels a bit wobbely. I think it'd be great with rudder pedals but It has a twist, (you may be able to use Racing pedals as rudders) thereason I picked this one for DCS at the time probably one of the cheaper sticks with a split throttle.

It works great with blackshark it has enough buttons where I don't need to use keyboard much and the mouse only for start up. It has a big dead zone for the twist rudder though, it's fine when you get used to it but will not be as good as pedals. The Twist does it's job but does not feel as accurate as rudder pedals or maybe anouther stick.

It has a nob for turning camera which is nice as I havn't set up a Infared Headtracker which I would really like to set up at some point. I think I can on the cheap, if I just get 3 or 4 infared LEDs.

I am using the Saitek Cyborg , but It's got a decent spring however the stick itself doesn't feel all that durable although it seems to give good inputs and even can use the scroll wheel for flaps. Like a said though the Twist for the rudder has pretty big dead zone.

It looks like ThrustMaster does a good job, and the T- Flight Hotas is probably one of the best budget sticks out there if your only looking to just get started. I dunno though, I like the stick I am using for the two Throttles however as my first stick it was great to start with however It feels like it's one of those that will probably need to be upgraded at some point if it starts giving me trouble.

If your serious about getting into flight sims, I would think of looking into the longer term. I bought a stick with a trottle attatched that would do everything in one package. It works fine for now, so I'm happy with it. However I hear it's been crapping out on some people, I don't know much about Saitek but I know from experience the MadCats always broke for me eventually regardless of what type of controller.
Image

User avatar
Mephistopheles
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2016 00:17
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby Mephistopheles » Tue 11 Jul 2017 10:26

varis wrote:
Mephistopheles wrote:Professional Flight modules include (My favorites):


They really seem to have added TONs of modules since the start of DCS. I guess I could add a few. The pre-DCS Black Shark 2 is good to go I guess?

Is there a list (maybe with reviews?) of what is study and what survey level? Or is the more expensive ones always study/pro level?

AFAIK the campaign/editor part of the franchise is top notch since about the times of the original Black Shark. How well does the combined arms side of things work out?


I am pretty sure that there are some reviews out there but i own all Modules in DCS with exception of the Spitefire And Viggen Modules.
You wont fight top notch/up to date aircrafts in DCS for one reason. DCS wants accurate Aircraft models for that reason they are dependend on information that has been De-classified by the Country of origin/manufacturer. Thate the main reason why currently we have only modules of aircrafts like the ASJ-37 Viggen, F-5E, Gazelle SA342, UH-1 etc. They are all realtively dated aircrafts.
The currently Most modern Fight module is the DCS M2000C. Allthough a modern fighter and in use in various countries the M2000C has been preceided by the updated M2000-5 and Rafale.

upcoming modules also feature aircrafts that are no longer classified like the AV-8B Harrier, F-18C and F-14A
Therefor dont expect anything like an F-22, F35 etc. You wont see those modules.

There development of russian aircraft modules has been limited much more the last years for one main reason:

Eagly Dynamics is a russian based company and have to comply with russian laws. Russia passed an "Anti-Espionage" Law a few years ago that is very general and can be applied to alot of thing. Yes! Gathering information to release a flight sim module can be considered "Espionage" even if ur research and development is based solely on Pilots testinomy and released documentation.

Therefor we can not expect any russian aircraft that is on a same timeframe with the coming or current modules.
I know that even a Mig-27 module has been canceled by Eagle Dynamics. Current Russian aircrafts that are worked on are the Mig 19 and the existing FC3 modules to bring them to a professional flight model level.

I have Prepar 3D....and if u have the ORBX FTX Modules and the right aircraft modules its really a great sim with alot of performance issues. U will have really great graphics with the ORBX FTX Modules but u will end up paying a few hundreds:
I own FTX Global, FTX Global Vector, FTX England, LLCOpen Europe, North Germany, Innsbruck Airport.........Thats just 300$ spent on Terrain Texture modules. Than there are the Aircraft Modules which i spent 200$ on.

Prepar Licence Academic is 60 $ or 200 $ for a professional licence or 2300$ !!!! for a licence!

They also offer a 9,99 $ monthly subscription for the Developer version. I Suggest u subscribe for a month and try it out .

If u Like it i suggest u get some "Payware" aircrafts since Prepar3d comes with unrealsitic aircrafts and no big airliner.
If u are into big aircrafts get ur modules from PMDG, like the PMDG 737 NGX, PMDG 777, PMDG 747....these are the best and most realistic modules.

My favorite module is the Carenado PC-12 Pilatus and the Carenado TBM850 Module. Both my favorite aircrafts.

If u have money stay away from FSX.

If you dont have money stay away from P3D since without Payware Add-ons it just looks as crappy as FSX. I will try to post some screenshots toonight when at home of Prepar
Image

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11816
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby Xeno426 » Wed 12 Jul 2017 15:39

Mephistopheles wrote:Mirage 2000C (my Favorite! Really awesome and very realistic and so far the only modern Interceptor with a completely clickable cockpit and realistic flight modell. Especially the avionics are Awesome.)

Well, that aircraft is a mixed bag.


The wonderful thing about Falcon 4.0-based games is the amazing ADN. Long-range search radars will pop on and off in the distance, and then an S-125 site will become active 20km away from you and almost instantly lock and fire off a missile because they got info on your location from those long-range search sites.

You can't really do that in DCS. I've tried. It's really easy to sit at a SAM site's max range and make them waste easily-defeatable missiles at you, and trying to set it up so that the SAM site won't launch missiles until a target is closer also prevents it from tracking the target, so when it is allowed to fire it has to find and acquire the target first.

But there's currently a team making a Tu-22M3 module which they hope they can get into official module status (it's still considered a mod). I hope this one gets finished (it's at least a year out anyway) because I'd like some more study-level late Cold War Soviet aircraft, something we've been particularly lacking. Personally, I'd like to see a MiG-27K or Su-24M module over something like the MIG-29 or Su-27S.

Mephistopheles wrote:There development of russian aircraft modules has been limited much more the last years for one main reason:

Eagly Dynamics is a russian based company and have to comply with russian laws. Russia passed an "Anti-Espionage" Law a few years ago that is very general and can be applied to alot of thing. Yes! Gathering information to release a flight sim module can be considered "Espionage" even if ur research and development is based solely on Pilots testinomy and released documentation.

Therefor we can not expect any russian aircraft that is on a same timeframe with the coming or current modules.
I know that even a Mig-27 module has been canceled by Eagle Dynamics. Current Russian aircrafts that are worked on are the Mig 19 and the existing FC3 modules to bring them to a professional flight model level.

Yeah, but I think third-parties are safe so long as they are not in Russia. Unfortunately, the number of devs that have several members fluent in Russian is very few, so there's obviously a limited number of them around.
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
Mephistopheles
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 134
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2016 00:17
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby Mephistopheles » Thu 13 Jul 2017 16:44

Xeno426 wrote:
Mephistopheles wrote:Mirage 2000C (my Favorite! Really awesome and very realistic and so far the only modern Interceptor with a completely clickable cockpit and realistic flight modell. Especially the avionics are Awesome.)

Well, that aircraft is a mixed bag.


The wonderful thing about Falcon 4.0-based games is the amazing ADN. Long-range search radars will pop on and off in the distance, and then an S-125 site will become active 20km away from you and almost instantly lock and fire off a missile because they got info on your location from those long-range search sites.

You can't really do that in DCS. I've tried. It's really easy to sit at a SAM site's max range and make them waste easily-defeatable missiles at you, and trying to set it up so that the SAM site won't launch missiles until a target is closer also prevents it from tracking the target, so when it is allowed to fire it has to find and acquire the target first.

But there's currently a team making a Tu-22M3 module which they hope they can get into official module status (it's still considered a mod). I hope this one gets finished (it's at least a year out anyway) because I'd like some more study-level late Cold War Soviet aircraft, something we've been particularly lacking. Personally, I'd like to see a MiG-27K or Su-24M module over something like the MIG-29 or Su-27S.


I Have seen that video of Ralphidude. He had a follow up video where he explained that it was a more jokingly video and that he need to practice it more. Ralphidude is mostly flying the FC3 module with very limited realism while the M2000C module employs more realism. The M2000C is no F-15C. It lacks its radar, its thrust, and max. payload and armarment. The M2000C radar has been modeled that way that it realisticly looses a radar contact if there is groundclutter in the background. Also in that video Ralphidude forgot to slew the Magic missile on target since on the mirage its not enough to just radar lock the target. you need to slew the Magic IR seeker on that contact too. Ralphidude did not know this in his video. He knew later in his follow up video. The Mirage since being a deltaflyer is a bit tough too land which has been realistically modelled. Try to land an Flaming cliffs 3 Aircraft and any other aircraft and you will see the diffrence. FC3 aircrafts are very forgiving, maybe too forgiving. An Exception is the SU-27 which is the only FC3 aircraft with a PFM (Professional Flight model)

I have played Falcon BMS 4.33 too. I Like it and the Avionics are modelled very accurately. But the problem is the flightmodel. As with DCS FC3 that flight model is also too forgiving. Its not possible to fatally overstress the airframe as this is the case with DCS. The F16 in BMS 4.33 Flies like its on rails. BMS also offers other flyable aircraft models. But besides the various F-16 version those flyable aircrafts are very questionable. First of all they all deploy the same F-16 avionics, Maybe its a limitation of the engine of the base game but still. Second the other aircraft types Flight model is even much more questionable. Since BMS is a MOD i doubt the developers had access to real life pilots for all the various aircrafts. Most DCS thrid party devs employ at least one pilot that has flown the modelled aircraft or helicopter.
As for samsites it is true that the SAM AI in DCS will fire its missiles at maximum range. But also in DCS Sam effectivity is limited by the rugged terrain. Also Some systems are more accurate than others. Patriot SAM is relatively accurate.
I Play very often on the OpenConflict server in DCS. And enemy short range AA score the most kills on me. Mostly OSAs.



Xeno426 wrote:
Mephistopheles wrote:There development of russian aircraft modules has been limited much more the last years for one main reason:

Eagly Dynamics is a russian based company and have to comply with russian laws. Russia passed an "Anti-Espionage" Law a few years ago that is very general and can be applied to alot of thing. Yes! Gathering information to release a flight sim module can be considered "Espionage" even if ur research and development is based solely on Pilots testinomy and released documentation.

Therefor we can not expect any russian aircraft that is on a same timeframe with the coming or current modules.
I know that even a Mig-27 module has been canceled by Eagle Dynamics. Current Russian aircrafts that are worked on are the Mig 19 and the existing FC3 modules to bring them to a professional flight model level.

Yeah, but I think third-parties are safe so long as they are not in Russia. Unfortunately, the number of devs that have several members fluent in Russian is very few, so there's obviously a limited number of them around.

Possibly. But from my Understanding those thridparties have to apply at Eagle dynamics for every aircraft/Helicopter they want to model. And certain 3rd party developers have been denied to model certain russian aircrafts by Eagly dynamics

A Big advantage of DCS is that they keep working on the sim very regularly. You get updates every week in an attempt to make it more realistic and erase errors and bugs unlike in BMS where you need to wait months for updates and where they still dont finish pervious cases. I understand that BMS is a free-MOD and that the DEVs have also real-life jobs to do other than working 8h a day on a MOD. But i would prefer to pay 30-60 bucks for a finished product than for a Mod that feels like early access with all the unfinished parts (e.g. many of the newly added aircrafts have no geniuine cockpit textures or are really badly textured). Than there is also the sluggish User Interface in BMS. I am sure that we can both agree on that the UI it is a horrible experience.
Access to Multiplayer is also not as convienent as in DCS since DCS lists all availble servers and in BMS you have to know the server adress u want to join therefor need to browse the internet prior to starting BMS for some servers to join.
Image

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11816
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby Xeno426 » Thu 13 Jul 2017 17:59

Mephistopheles wrote:Ralphidude is mostly flying the FC3 module

No, he mostly flies the A-10C. Then F-15C, and then other study-level sims.

Mephistopheles wrote:Try to land an Flaming cliffs 3 Aircraft and any other aircraft and you will see the diffrence. FC3 aircrafts are very forgiving, maybe too forgiving. An Exception is the SU-27 which is the only FC3 aircraft with a PFM (Professional Flight model)

All the FC3 aircraft have PFMs except for the Su-33. The F-15C was the first to get one, actually.
The F-15C is so forgiving because of its flight control system.

Mephistopheles wrote:As for samsites it is true that the SAM AI in DCS will fire its missiles at maximum range. But also in DCS Sam effectivity is limited by the rugged terrain. Also Some systems are more accurate than others. Patriot SAM is relatively accurate.
I Play very often on the OpenConflict server in DCS. And enemy short range AA score the most kills on me. Mostly OSAs.

SAM sites in Falcon 4.0 are also limited by terrain, but terrain doesn't play a big part when you're over 5000 meters ASL.

Mephistopheles wrote:Possibly. But from my Understanding those thridparties have to apply at Eagle dynamics for every aircraft/Helicopter they want to model. And certain 3rd party developers have been denied to model certain russian aircrafts by Eagly dynamics

They have to apply if they want their stuff to be sold as a module for DCS and put on their website.

BTW, why are you capitalizing words like "mod" and "understanding"?
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
StalkerDellaNote
Lieutenant
Posts: 1395
Joined: Tue 12 Nov 2013 12:23
Location: Southern California, USA
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby StalkerDellaNote » Thu 13 Jul 2017 18:09

Question about DCS, is it pretty much limited to combat missions? I'm one of the few who loves to do ferry missions in helos on like, ArmA.. I suppose it's boring, but I like it, especially when the LZ is a particularly difficult one

Back before I settled into staying a civilIan and was going to school to get my BA & eventually be a Marine Corps aviator, I was always told by recruiters and what have you that I'd likely end up strictly limited to aircraft without ejection systems, such as rotary aircraft and the C-130 as I was far too tall to fly the "cool" aircraft, like my love, the AV-8B which is the whole reason I wanted to be an aviator in the first place..

Anyways, with story time over with, I got used to playing around with that kind of role and ended up thoroughly enjoying it, is there any hope to get say an MV-22 or CH-53 in DCS? I only ask when considering their highly accurate flight models.. If not, which is totally understandable, what can you guys suggest? Should I just stick with ArmA multiplayer for that sort of experience?
Image
"Re: Winter maps?" wrote:Maybe if they ever set Wargame in Scandinavia.

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11816
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby Xeno426 » Thu 13 Jul 2017 18:18

StalkerDellaNote wrote:Question about DCS, is it pretty much limited to combat missions? I'm one of the few who loves to do ferry missions in helos on like, ArmA

Well, the Mil Mi-8MTV and UH-1H are transport helicopters, and they have missions where you are transporting troops or slingling payloads from one place to another. There are no flyable transport fixed-wing aircraft, though.

StalkerDellaNote wrote:Anyways, with story time over with, I got used to playing around with that kind of role and ended up thoroughly enjoying it, is there any hope to get say an MV-22 or CH-53 in DCS? I only ask when considering their highly accurate flight models.. If not, which is totally understandable, what can you guys suggest? Should I just stick with ArmA multiplayer for that sort of experience?

MV-22? Unlikely; aircraft without any kind of weapon stores are unlikely to get made anytime soon, and the MV-22 isn't even in the game as an AI unit. There is some push for a few purely transport aircraft, like the C-130, but I haven't seen any real push for that beyond a mod. As for the CH-53, we do have the Mi-8MTV in the game, which has a similar job.

There are some missions that have been made that focus on transporting stuff, and you can always make some yourself. You won't be transporting actual players, though, so the "reward" feeling of helping some people is unlikely to be the same. I've play a multiplayer missions, though, where UH-1H and Mi-8MTV players could help the battle in a few areas of the map by transporting troops that would move into the combat zone and start attacking. Still, that's all AI units you're lifting.
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
StalkerDellaNote
Lieutenant
Posts: 1395
Joined: Tue 12 Nov 2013 12:23
Location: Southern California, USA
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby StalkerDellaNote » Thu 13 Jul 2017 18:26

Oh I see, I've seen the Mil and the Huey, can't say they excite me all the much, with that said the accurate models and controls might be lovely and all but the "I'm helping" satisfaction would definitely be missed.. Like I said before, since it's strictly an air combat game, maybe they'll implement more air friendly support roles like aerial refueling or AWACS for the boring folks like me haha..

If they did aerial refueling they'd have not only further excuse for C-130's (since AV-8B & F/A-18C are on deck) but also reason for the CH-53, since they fulfill a Refueling role for Corps rotary aircraft and the Harrier
Image
"Re: Winter maps?" wrote:Maybe if they ever set Wargame in Scandinavia.

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11816
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby Xeno426 » Thu 13 Jul 2017 18:34

StalkerDellaNote wrote:maybe they'll implement more air friendly support roles like aerial refueling or AWACS for the boring folks like me haha...

Actually, with Combined Arms, you can act as AWACS and JTAC for a team, especially with a program like DCS SimpleRadio.

StalkerDellaNote wrote:If they did aerial refueling they'd have not only further excuse for C-130's (since AV-8B & F/A-18C are on deck) but also reason for the CH-53, since they fulfill a Refueling role for Corps rotary aircraft and the Harrier

There's aerial refueling, but not player-controlled (well, except for the player in the aircraft getting refueled).
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
StalkerDellaNote
Lieutenant
Posts: 1395
Joined: Tue 12 Nov 2013 12:23
Location: Southern California, USA
Contact:

Re: Flight sim advice

Postby StalkerDellaNote » Thu 13 Jul 2017 18:38

Anyways, I think I'ma stick to ArmA for my support aircraft fix..

As for commercial flying I'm still kind of f**k all lost, I kinda sorta have the money to throw at Prepar3d and I'd like a nice 737 sim to do, but IDK how 'worth' it can really be

Xeno426 wrote:Actually, with Combined Arms, you can act as AWACS and JTAC for a team, especially with a program like DCS SimpleRadio.

Oh no shit? That's pretty damn neato, I'll have to check that bit out then

There's aerial refueling, but not player-controlled (well, except for the player in the aircraft getting refueled).

Yeah, I meant it as being the mama bird though ;)
Either way glad that's part of the game legitimately, IFR work's like shit in ArmA
Image
"Re: Winter maps?" wrote:Maybe if they ever set Wargame in Scandinavia.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Fade2Gray and 13 guests