Start-up procedures

[MineFewer]

"Simple" or "Complex", which do you like better?

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

Can we have some middle ground?

[ATAG_Slipstream]

Both, depending on my mood.

[LoneRanger]

A little biased, your vote.

 

Something between a and b would be it for me.

[AdlerAngriff]

I like it as complex as it can get. As close to real life

I just love a start up in the KA-50 Black Shark. All those switches, click click. apu sound, lights, fuel cork, gauges flickering one by one.

 

A special feeling

[=IRFC=Jorri]

Something in between, for me.

[Revvin]

Voted for both

[Cunctator]

I would also vote for some compromise. Without a clickable cockpit I see no real purpose in having detailed start up procedures.

[J2_Trupobaw]

->Settings->Difficulty.

Automatic Propeller Control On() Off()
Automatic Mixture Control On() Off()
Warmed Up Engines On() Off()
And so on...

I'd prefer to switch elements of startup procedures /  CEM at my convenience, adding new elements I'm ready to try while learning new planes, tired or drunk.

Edited December 16, 2012 by Trupobaw

[Mac_Messer]

Start up procedures are one thing I can do without. The tricky part is that this aspect is directly linked to the CEM, which imo must be at least as much as in CloD. Anyone that flew IL2 1946 for some hours knows that the CEM was in most ways just pressing buttons, that had no real effect, besides the prop pitch maybe. If we go back to 1946 in this regard, we might aswell resign from the CEM at all.

[Bearcat]

It should be scalable as a server side setting from a one button start to full procedures.

[EAF602_Puff]

In case anyone is worried that it will be a simple engine management system { unfortunately I have to use RoF as an example, due to that being 777's baby and more than likely what BoS will contain along the same lines } When the option to have warmed engines is turned off, you will have to sit and wait till the engine reaches the proper temps..or you will suffer damage depending on mixture and throttle settings, add to this the outside air temp  and you can be sitting during the winter, trying to start the engine and all she does is to turn over. It wont catch and certainly wont run, unless you lean the mixture far back and then you run the risk of engine damage.

 

When listening to the engine run, you can hear the tappets and also the engine will sound different when damage starts to occur over time. Starting the engine requires mixture to be full, then reduced as the engine catches, and radiators { if the aircraft has them } to be set to allow the proper engine/mixture temp. Engines can be damaged by over revving and also by overcooling in the dive etc requiring the virtual pilot to continually change settings to maintain max power and reduce engine damage/wear.

 

Please remember that this is for WWI aircraft and I do know that there are a LOT more complex settings required to start and run a WW2 aircraft. This is just a small heads up to allow those who do not fly the 777 game, a chance to see that engine management etc will be complex enough without going into too much smaller { unessecary?? } details........HOPEFULLY!!!

Edited December 16, 2012 by EAF602_Puff

[Krupi]

In case anyone is worried that it will be a simple engine management system { unfortunately I have to use RoF as an example, due to that being 777's baby and more than likely what BoS will contain along the same lines } When the option to have warmed engines is turned off, you will have to sit and wait till the engine reaches the proper temps..or you will suffer damage depending on mixture and throttle settings, add to this the outside air temp  and you can be sitting during the winter, trying to start the engine and all she does is to turn over. It wont catch and certainly wont run, unless you lean the mixture far back and then you run the risk of engine damage.

 

When listening to the engine run, you can hear the tappets and also the engine will sound different when damage starts to occur over time. Starting the engine requires mixture to be full, then reduced as the engine catches, and radiators { if the aircraft has them } to be set to allow the proper engine/mixture temp. Engines can be damaged by over revving and also by overcooling in the dive etc requiring the virtual pilot to continually change settings to maintain max power and reduce engine damage/wear.

 

Please remember that this is for WWI aircraft and I do know that there are a LOT more complex settings required to start and run a WW2 aircraft. This is just a small heads up to allow those who do not fly the 777 game, a chance to see that engine management etc will be complex enough without going into too much smaller { unessecary?? } details........HOPEFULLY!!!

 

Wow that's very cool!  :o

[CrazySchmidt]

Personally I'm not interested in complex engine management all, never have been and never will be.

 

Just start the engine and take off is perfect for me.

 

When I'm playing any game my main objective is pure simple fun. I don't want to pretend to be a real pilot when playing a combat flight sim, I just want to shoot stuff then watch it crash and burn.

 

CS.

[DD_bongodriver]

Personally I'm not interested in complex engine management all, never have been and never will be.

 

Just start the engine and take off is perfect for me.

 

When I'm playing any game my main objective is pure simple fun. I don't want to pretend to be a real pilot when playing a combat flight sim, I just want to shoot stuff then watch it crash and burn.

 

CS.

 

I have a feeling you won't be dissapointed.

[CrazySchmidt]

I have a feeling you won't be dissapointed.

Sweet! I love these guys. :D

[migmadmarine]

Not quite the same subject, but I do love the dieseling that occurs when you've run the engine over temp for to long and shut it down. I remember a flight where I returned home in an Alby D.II after having my radiator shot out, it took the engine a good 30 seconds to splutter to a halt after I landed and turned the magnetos off. 

[[KWN]T-oddball]

Personally I'm not interested in complex engine management all, never have been and never will be.

 

Just start the engine and take off is perfect for me.

 

When I'm playing any game my main objective is pure simple fun. I don't want to pretend to be a real pilot when playing a combat flight sim, I just want to shoot stuff then watch it crash and burn.

 

CS.

even with the most advanced combat sim your still pretending

[vl6]

Something between

[LukeFF]

I'm fine with assuming, at mission start, that I've done my pre-flight checks, have powered up all necessary systems and am ready to have the prop swung over and the magnetos switched on. If I wanted to really learn how to start up an aircraft, I'd go to pilot school. 

[Jetlagg]

I think there needs to be more than two options if those are the two you choose to use in the poll.  I don't want an arcade game where all you have to do is press one button and never worry about the engine for the rest of the flight, but I really don't always feel like messing around with half a dozen switches and then wait for the engine to warm up et cetera.  I think we need control over general/basic things like throttle (of course), mixture, radiator, prop pitch, but fiddling with magnetos and primer pumps would get down right tiresome and irritating for me (after the tenth sortie of waiting for the engine(s) to warm up).  I support 1CGS in their decision to allow for some engine management, but not the level of detail of an actual aircraft, because let's face it, for a sim to survive you do have to balance realism with a decent learning curve.  I never got into jet sims like A-10 because of the complex system management and, frankly, all the godd@mn buttons. 

[MineFewer]

The question is about starting teh engine, in the parking spot, not about "the rest of the flight".  Nothing about simple "one-button-start" precludes user control over basic things like mixture, radiator, prop pitch in flight.

 

"never worry about the engine for the rest of the flight"  -- who said any such thing??

[Logan]

 I never got into jet sims like A-10 because of the complex system management and, frankly, all the godd@mn buttons.  

Exactly..I own it, Lock on and Flaming cliffs. I just can't do all the apu switch,cdu this mpu that..Its way too much. The CEM in Clod is ok, ROF... Just watch your temp and rpms! I voted for CEM because I only had two choices but somewhere in the middle is more like it.

[PeterZvan]

Something in between.

RoF also is not a simple press of a button and off you go (it is still simple however).

The important thing here is to describe any procedures needed so that people dont have a hard time of investigating and trial and error searching all over the place.

There should be a manual for each plane which one should be able to see before the mission/sortie start on its procedures - start procedure, landing, CEM...

I for one dont want to read trough pages and pages of pdf manuals just to go fly a sortie. Also I dont want to be confined to one plane due to not knowing the procedures of the other plane.

RoF lacks this (a manual on how to fly that plane in the GUI) - although CEM is simple in RoF one can still seriously pork his engine during the flight or dont get close to the best performance out of the plane. Especially rotaries are quite sensitive.

 

One good thing in RoF is that you can see on the exhaust fumes collor and burst just what is going on - if mixture is off or engine is slightly damaged...

Also there is steam coming out of water cooled engines if they get overheated so another thing to watch for.

Especially flying together in flights you can often see if someone has wrong settings and often we warn each other of what is going on. Especially on slightly damaged engines on longer sorties.

[JG4_Sputnik]

We won't get something that sophisticated as in the DCS series. Look how long it took them to finish the P-51 and look at its price tag. I'd gladly pay that price for a model with a proper start up but I know not everybody wants this.

But of course I vote for complex, it doesn't hurt that the devs see that at least some people want the full complexity

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

Personally I can do without spending a long time fiddling with magnetos and whatnot. Being able to start in the hangar or dispersal area and taxi to the runway would be nice though. The 777 option to start with a pre-heated engone sounds good, it is historical for numerous theaters and a good compromise between complex and simple start-up procedure.

[vl6]

Would be nice if the temperature affect the engines, in the winter Rudel said in his book (wich I really recommend) that the german motors had big difficulties to start up and run.

[=IRFC=Huetz]

I'm with the middle ground folks. Of course, the more the merrier but honestly after the inital excitement wears down having to do 15 things to get the engine started becomes tedious at best. Especially when the systems have no actual effect in flight, like nursing a damaged engine home, etc.

 

The contrary however is true for CEM. Temperature, Superchargers, RPM, etc should all be modelled as close to real life as possible. Flying is not just yanking a stick back and forth, at least imo.

[Sokol1]

In case anyone is worried that it will be a simple engine management system { unfortunately I have to use RoF as an example, due to that being 777's baby and more than likely what BoS will contain along the same lines } When the option to have warmed engines is turned off, you will have to sit and wait till the engine reaches the proper temps..or you will suffer damage depending on mixture and throttle settings, add to this the outside air temp  and you can be sitting during the winter, trying to start the engine and all she does is to turn over. It wont catch and certainly wont run, unless you lean the mixture far back and then you run the risk of engine damage.

 

When listening to the engine run, you can hear the tappets and also the engine will sound different when damage starts to occur over time. Starting the engine requires mixture to be full, then reduced as the engine catches, and radiators { if the aircraft has them } to be set to allow the proper engine/mixture temp. Engines can be damaged by over revving and also by overcooling in the dive etc requiring the virtual pilot to continually change settings to maintain max power and reduce engine damage/wear.

 

Please remember that this is for WWI aircraft and I do know that there are a LOT more complex settings required to start and run a WW2 aircraft. This is just a small heads up to allow those who do not fly the 777 game, a chance to see that engine management etc will be complex enough without going into too much smaller { unessecary?? } details........HOPEFULLY!!!

 

 

Note bad, compared with CloD Spit starter procedure:

 

1- Turn on fuel switch

2- Advance throttle ~10%

3- Hit "I" key

 

Turn on magneto switchs previously is not necessary, worth only for Freycinet nice videos.

 

The (well done) RoF manual - page 25 - describe how do this - is not IL-2 1946 hit "I" key.

 

Sokol1

[Ribbs]

Guy's realize some of you aren't wanting to pretend your a real life fighter pilot and that is fine..but I think your a little misinformed or are not quite sure how long it takes to do these. Granted you can take as long as you want by using the mouse and looking around the cockpit flipping switches sliding levers and so forth. But in reality all of this can be accomplished in a short time. It doesn't take that long to do the startup procedure described in the second option. Not regarding the chocks in.. but the startup procedure in CLOD is only 4-5 key strokes and your idling... waiting for warm up. Warm up time has been reduced somewhat, so the whole process takes about 2-3 min Max from mags on to wheels up. That's not bad at all IMO.. give u a min to grab something to drink or stretch your legs..heh

Now granted I have built a box with toggle switches and buttons...( cause I'm a sim geek) to make the startup process more immersing ..but even if i didn't have it i would just map them 1-5 then hit I.

Now you say.... well I'm really not familiar with what it takes to get this bird fired up and in the air. I think a checklist feature (complete with check boxes and default/custom keystrokes would work well. Just hit a button to bring it up and there you go. In no time the player will become familiar with the procedure and wont need the checklist as much. S!

 

By the way boxes are pretty easily made, or you can by them from www.leobodnar.com I believe. ( spelling?) Only way to go for flight sims or racing games.. right behind the joystick and trackir..IMO S!

Edited December 17, 2012 by 352ndRibbs

[GOAT-ACEOFACES]

complex startup procedures (CSP) are cool

 

But do we need it in a Combat Flight Simulator (CFS)?

 

Better yet is it worth the time and money to implement it in a CFS?

 

Before you answer a little flight sim history is necessary..

 

There are basically two types of PC flight simulators.. Or at least there were two types

 

Type one is the Combat Flight Simulator.
Type two is the old Microsoft type of Flight Simulator.

 

With type one the focus is training/teaching you about AIR COMBAT, stuff like:

• ACM
• Situational Awareness
• Tactics
• Team Work
• E management
• etc..

And if your lucky you will learn a little bit about history of it all and the men who actully did it!

 

With type two the focus is on training/teaching you how to obtain a CIVILIAN pilots license, stuff like:

• Talking to the tower to get permission to taxi to the runway
• Talking to the tower to get permission to take off
• Talking to the tower to get permission to land
• Navigating to the next waypoing
• Calculating fuel usage
• Performing the startup procedure of a specific plane
• etc..

Over the past 20 or so years the lines between these two types has been blurred

 

In essence at some point someone thought it would be a good idea to incorporate stuff from the type two flight simulator into the type one flight simulator.

 

It was most likely justified in doing so under the guise of it would be more REALISTIC to do so.

 

But unless someone is planing on buying and or restoring a WWII fighter, knowing the exact sequence of the start up procedure is not REQUIRED in a COMBAT flight simulator where the focus is very Very VERY different.

 

In summary

 

I am not against the idea of being able to obtain a pilots license and be rated to taxi, take off, and land a WWII fighter!

 

It is just such a small Small SMALL part of what I do in a COMBAT flight simulator that I would not miss it either!

 

Therefore the real question here is it worth doing?

 

Well in light of CoD biting off more than it could chew..

 

I think we can all agree that it is not worth doing if it means there is a chance of the sim developer running out of time and money trying to BE ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE..

 

I think 777 has the right idea here..

 

Put the focus back on the type one flight simulator where the focus is on COMBAT!

 

In that is what most of us are here for!

Edited December 17, 2012 by ACEOFACES

[BlitzPig_EL]

I pretty much agree with AceofAces on this one.

 

No I don't want to start and just slam the throttle and go, but, in real life the engine would have been initially started and pre warmed by the ground crew before the pilot even had his breakfast.

 

So, get in aircraft, select proper fuel tank, set prop pitch, mixture to auto rich, open throttle a bit, set rads to open, adjust trim, hit starter and taxi out and take off.

[Krupi]

Guy's realize some of you aren't wanting to pretend your a real life fighter pilot and that is fine..but I think your a little misinformed or are not quite sure how long it takes to do these. Granted you can take as long as you want by using the mouse and looking around the cockpit flipping switches sliding levers and so forth. But in reality all of this can be accomplished in a short time. It doesn't take that long to do the startup procedure described in the second option. Not regarding the chocks in.. but the startup procedure in CLOD is only 4-5 key strokes and your idling... waiting for warm up. Warm up time has been reduced somewhat, so the whole process takes about 2-3 min Max from mags on to wheels up. That's not bad at all IMO.. give u a min to grab something to drink or stretch your legs..heh

Now granted I have built a box with toggle switches and buttons...( cause I'm a sim geek) to make the startup process more immersing ..but even if i didn't have it i would just map them 1-5 then hit I.

Now you say.... well I'm really not familiar with what it takes to get this bird fired up and in the air. I think a checklist feature (complete with check boxes and default/custom keystrokes would work well. Just hit a button to bring it up and there you go. In no time the player will become familiar with the procedure and wont need the checklist as much. S!

By the way boxes are pretty easily made, or you can by them from www.leobodnar.com I believe. ( spelling?) Only way to go for flight sims or racing games.. right behind the joystick and trackir..IMO S!

 

+1

 

I ordered some of Leo's stuff for my latest project... I can't wait to show it off :D

[Mac_Messer]

Would be nice if the temperature affect the engines, in the winter Rudel said in his book (wich I really recommend) that the german motors had big difficulties to start up and run.

Sure! That is if we get Soviet aircraft that in 1/3 fall apart while flying.

[Jetlagg]

"never worry about the engine for the rest of the flight"  -- who said any such thing??

 

No one did.  I am just stating my preferences.

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

Stuff

 

Well said!

[Binky]

I love DCS P51's start up proceedures.  Its generally satisfying knowing that I could likely pre-flight a real one if I could ever afford the opportunity to get behind a stick of one.  My flight instructor told me he became a pilot because he likes playing with switches and levers.   I get the same warm and fuzzy firing up the Cessna's I fly.

 

ROF I fly full realism with only warmed up engine checked off.   Learning to keep the engines from popping in flight really keeps me from feeling like I'm abusing the aircraft.. i.e., it shows me the limitations of it. 

 

I drive nothing but standard transmission vehicles for the same reason.

 

I also suck at dog fighting, lol.  I just enjoy the challenge of learning to manage machinary.   Different strokes for different folks.  If a game is more accessible to the masses because it offeres simplified engine management, then I can't see the wrong in it.

Edited December 17, 2012 by Binky

[SKG51_robtek]

The start-up is part of the cem, the cem has to be as complex as possible, especially in a cfs, where it directly affects the sa!

The high-end machines in wwii had to be pampered to get the most out of them and still get you home.

A dumbed down cem gives all advantages to the planes with a known high pilot-workload to be superb.

[Pudfark]

No more than this...or in the middle like furbs said.

 

ElAurens said: "So, get in aircraft, select proper fuel tank, set prop pitch, mixture to auto rich, open throttle a bit, set rads to open, adjust trim, hit starter and taxi out and take off."   

[Uda]

Hi.

 

I think this poll is a bit missleading. According to developers statement I read somewhere (maybe on this forum) there will be non-interactive cockpit. With "passive" cockpit there should be a shortcut key mapped for every single action of start up. I'm not sure if this is comfortable in any way. Of course there could be the shortcut define for automatic start up procedures (aka DCS). That according to my experience with Ka-50 and A-10 would means that 99% of player would use it (as do most of DCS players whos are way more hardcore oeriented in general than WWII sims players) and skip the need of do every step by themself. So from developers point of view is nice to have such feature like step-by-step start but in fact it waste on money and time (how much is a question).

 

Don't get me wrong I have absolutelly nothing against simulation of any tinnest feature. But if I look at the playerbase of WWII sims I'm not sure the complex start up procedures is good idea. I fear even the need of warm up engine would be unacceptable for many players. Actually I've seen this probably three times: once during the one special mission in Rise of flight and two times during the special missions in old Il-2 (where it was simulated by the time between spaning the plane on AF and taking off). I can say that in all other cases on MP servers there is/was warmed engine start.

 

So my answer (I will not be voting in this poll) depends on this: If the step-by-step start up procedures with optional skip shortcut key are not more expensive by huge margin (less than 10%) than simplified procedures (RoF style with prop pitch setting, mix, throttle, cooler and optional skip of warmin up) I'd vote for. But if it would be way more expensive (both time and money) then I don't need such feature.

 

JG1Pragr_J6