Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2389 Excellent

About ZachariasX

Recent Profile Visitors

2352 profile views
  1. Did some more flying in Japan. Down from Hokkaido via Sendai and Tokio to Kobe. Weather was really nice. I was mainly enoing the view while working the Garmin. It is really awful that there is no way to open a sort of a map that details the airports along with their respective info like runways and frequencies. As the do not always match he real frequencies, skyvector is not always a help. Arriving over Honshu from Hokkaido. I absolutely love how the ice is added. Maybe this year, they will add seasons to the sim world. This together with the way snow and ice is added will be just awesome. Approaching Ishinomaki, I leave the snow behind. The ugly weather is to the west over the ountain range. I figure I stay clear of that, given the choice. ILS approach on Sendai Airport. From there, I take off again to Kobe, Takamatsu Airport (RJOT). Ah Tokio. One of the most iconic parliament buildings, bottom right. I know its distinct silouette ever since I am a kid. But there's more to see, and there is no visit to Japan without visiting this one: And then to Kobe. The world update is absolutely spectacular. Onward to Beijing via the Koreas.
  2. It means that the game recognized a controller it hasn't seen before and assumes you connected that one for the first time. It then thinks that this new input device is used for the same control inputs, like if you had Saitek rudder pedals and now connect a MFG Crosswind. It then offers you to make life easy and just map all the functions you had on the "old" device on the new one, of which the game assumes you replace the old one with. If you press "ACCEPT", the game will then map all corresponding functions on the new device. In case of the former example, it makes it posible to use the MFG pedals as you did your Saitek oes by just clicking ACCEPT. Easy. Now, if the game thought wrong and this is a new device that you intend to map differently with functions, then press "Cancel" and the game does nothing. You then are required to enter the Key mapping and assign all functions manually yourself.
  3. You can become an ace being a PR pilot...
  4. There should be a „buy everything (you don‘t already own)“ in the store, listing what you don‘t have. You could also introduce a rebate if you buy the whole thing. (Get everything, you save ...“) It might be a stupid function but it would make shopping easier, just in case if you want to sell more.
  5. I think we are just kicking the enveloppe of the sim, the region where "c'mon, good enough for release" is. And I think too, so the following is more an excercise in curiosity than asking for things. TL;DR: We have a correct propeller on the sim that perform near perfect efficiency, very much in line of what can reasonably be expected. However, as a windmill it performs excessively well and should maybe be toned down in that regard. It would mend a lot if all aircraft would get a second look in that department. Anyway, as you guys know I am obsessed with propellers regarding the performance of fixed pitch aircraft. I know that the Clerget 130 Camel should have a 2.65 meter pitch prop, so I though i'd look what the sim does with that info. This means, that in theory i get: RPM / 60 * pitch[m] * 3.6 = TAS This as an approximation, a best case for level flight. If I plot RPM vs. theoretical TAS I get this: Now, when I start the game and read IAS vs RPM on Mosow 1941, autumn @1300 meters and correct for TAS using a calculator I get: Almost the same, In the game the performance is consistent, underperforming about 5-10%. It is of note that the proportional speed increase is more consistent than the absolute error. Going up altitude a bit: And I see basically the same picture. Maybe the prop is a tad less efficient, but this probably within the measuring error. MAIN POINT: we absolutely do have a Clerget 130 with the standard 2.65 m pitch prop modelled in our game. That is verified and such can other aircraft be verified (talking to you, SE5a!). Now, how does that look when diving under windmilling conditions? For this I went up to 5000 m on the same map, acellerated to max speed at 100% throttle and optimal mixture (50% up there) and then cut throttle to idle while initiating a dive, reading IAS and altitude on the HUD and rpm on the gauge. Then I used the TAS calculator to get TAS from IAS at the respective altitude. What I got is this: How nice, the windmilling prop really has a different efficiency than the pulling prop. At idle, speed went up and rpm along with it until 1600 rpm where the engine is at once destroyed such that it doesn't turn anymore. Personally, from what I know I think it it is reasonable that at 1600 rpm there is little left of the Clerget that can rotate. It is of note that during the dive, the propeller has an easier time speeding up as it doesn't bleed energy from pulling the aircraft. And it is still much less efficient. Conclusion: I like how propellers are modelled in this sim, especially the differences in efficiency. The fact that you CAN dive a Camel at idle up to ~350 km/h (TAS) without the engine over revving just shows that one should tune the windmilling prop efficiency of the FC aircraft. that way, most diving issues would go away. The slightly lower permissible dive speeds I do not consider making the difference between successful and unsuccessful attacks.
  6. I think there are several issues to the mixture trick as we have it in FC. It is of note that blipping/cut-out-leaning/100%rich only works if the initial rpm is below a certain threshold. Above that, the prop windmills such that is always overrevs. This shows two thing to me, either a strange prop efficiency (in windmilling configuration, but maybe this behavious also applies during traction) and/or a strange setting for internal friction of the engine. It is my impression that the slip of the propeller in windmilling is not that different from normal flight (just in the other direction). As these blades are cambered, they show little slip in normal horizontal flight. But if you invert the profile, it is far less efficient, hence I would not expect the prop speeding up almost linearly vs rpm once it transitions into windmilling.
  7. Ich denke, die wollen damit auch anderes üben als Luftkampf per se. Es ist wohl eher der „Multiplayer Aspekt“ dass sich verschiedene Teilnehmer in einer Mission koordinieren, bzw. echte Missionen für ein Briefing/Debriefing nachzustellen. Das ist jedenfalls was ich aus der Grundfunktionalität lese, die zwar Waffen und Sensoren bietet, aber kein Wort über ein DM verliert, aber dafür Multiplayer/Multiscreen besingt.
  8. Ehm... Da Militär niemals eigenes Geld ausgibt, funktioniert wohl der Preisrahmen. Zur Vernunft kann ich keine Aussage machen. Aber nein, ich besitze diese (Pro) Version nicht. Es macht auch kaum Sinn aus Mangel an frei vefügbaren Modulen. Mir scheint, die Zielgruppe des Produkts lässt sich einfach programmieren was sie braucht. Kurz, das Produkt gibt es, aber nicht für unsereins. Das war mein Punkt. DCS hat ja auch seine Version für den „Profi Sektor“. Ich gehe davon aus, das auch dort content geboten wird, der nicht in „unserem“ Store ist. Soweit ich weiss, gibts die Yak auch nur, weil ein „Profikunde“ die wollte und auch gleich bezahlt hat. Aber bis auf weiteres muss die Ballerfraktion wohl damit leben, dass sie es nicht wert ist, eine runde Welt serviert zu bekommen.
  9. eih bennek, eih blavek Signature worthy for any MP game.
  10. Ich habe Version 2.x - 4.x. Die aktuelle, 5. Version habe ich nicht gekauft, da FS2020 rausgekommen ist. Auch habe ich mir abgewöhnt mit einer X.0 version von P3D zu beginnen. Da ist zu viel im Argen, als dass ich mir den Kampf antun würde den Sim gut auf meinem PC einzustellen. Auch hat es gedauert, bis die Module von 4.x auf 5.x portiert worden sind, da der Sim ja auf DX12 migriert ist. Mittlerweile hat es aber eigentlich alles was man braucht. Allerdings ist FS2020 von der Szenerie her einfach in ne andere Sphäre abgehoben, da hatte ich keine Lust mehr altbackene Wolken mehr zu sehen, auch wenn V5 dramatisch viel besser läuft (was ich so höre) als alle vorhergehenden Versionen. Wären die bisherigen Module gleich von Angang an gegengen in V.5, ich hätte die wohl gekauft. Trotzdem, es ist dann wieder die gleiche ORBX Welt, wie ich sie schon kenne. Dafür reicht mir die "gut gefüllte" version 4.5. Da geht alles wie es soll von den Modulen her mit wenig Überraschungen. insofern hat die aktuelle Version wenig zu bieten, da ich kein VR betreibe. Grundsätzlich muss ich sagen, dass P3D v5.x wohl die beste Wahl ist, wenn Du VR mit erprobten study level Modulen machen willst. Ich mein' was da bei FS2020 dabei ist das ist hübsch aber nirgendwo dort wo PMDG oder A2A liefern. Das ist einfach noch ne andere Sportart.
  11. Doch. Aber für einen anderen Markt. Prepar3D Professional Plus: Professional Plus offers advanced users a platform to: Experience combat scenarios involving a complement of weapons and sensors Program artificially intelligent (AI) behaviors in scenarios Utilize the Multichannel capability to increase performance on multi-screen and dome setups by running concurrently on multiple systems Connect to a Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) network session and integrate with other simulators Support for the most popular Common Image Generator Interface (CIGI) packets Control multiplayer scenarios and modify role-players in real-time using SimOperator Experience a mission before it happens to increase effectiveness and reduce response time Learn and test their knowledge in the same environment in which they will operate Re-create scenarios with operational data and experiment with different variables Train for scenarios in aviation, air traffic control, ground vehicle operation and disaster response The license is available to those that are training, instructing, simulating, or learning. Wichtg zu sagen, das ist kein Spiel. Es ist eine Übungsumgebung um bestimmte Prozeduren zu lernen. Wie gesagt, anderer Markt. Im militärischen Bereich fehlen viele Aspekte die im Gaming Markt für "Realismus" wichtig sind. Der Stinger Simulator hatte auch kein DM für die Sprites, auf die man im Simulator schiessen konnte. Es kannte nur "Anweisungen richtig befolgt -> Erfolg *Bumm!*" oder "Fehler/daneben". Scott von A2A hat das auch an einer Stelle bemerkt, als sie sich fragten, ob die module, die sie für die Air Force machen ev. als Sim Module portiert werden sollten. Der Vorteil wäre entsprechende Qualität, wo's im Militär drauf ankommt, aber der Nachteil ist, das vieles, das sonst geboten ist, nicht vorhanden ist.
  12. So much this. Doing all those "questionable weather flights", this is always what stikes me most in this sim. Finally, for the first time in flight simulation, the clouds are not a mere obstruction, they are a landscape. The only thing still outwardly wrong is the limitation of visibility inside a cloud. When entering a cloud, then you usually can see the wing maybe for the distance of an arms length, but in the sim you always see the whole aircraft. If you can see father then that it is more a kind of fog than a cloud.
  13. Beautiful!! I won't tackle that scale until I get a good feel controlling the brushes again. But then maybe. One gets twice the collection in the same shelf. 😄
  • Create New...