Situation Awareness Training

[A_S]

[J37_Spyboy]

You realise you have posted on a WW2 SIM forum?

Interesting though not relevant to our timeframe!

[JG27*Kornezov]

Indeed on falcon bms forums you can get some good feedback. This type of maneuvering is totally irrelevant in ww2. Here you have trust to weight  ratio around 1 and fly by wire. Completely a different story in ww2. Maybe you can buy il 2 bos and come to the real men company.

Edited June 16, 2017 by JG27_Kornezov

[A_S]

come to the real men company.

 

LOL

[ACG_Invictus]

Good video and welcome to BoS, =AS=. As you can see, the community here can be a bit....ahhhh...vocal.

 

I look forward to locking horns with you someday in the unfriendly cartoon Russian skies. Hope you consider giving Cliffs of Dover a spin as well....

 

S!

[A_S]

Ohhhhhhhhh i can´t wait for the TF 5 release ..   The "BMS" of WW2 plane simulations

[ACG_Invictus]

Heh....yes, the similarities between the TF and BMS efforts have always been interresting for me as well. If only I could find more time to get up to speed pickup on BMS, but there are only so many hours in the week. Someday!

Edited June 29, 2017 by ATAG_Invictus

[Lusekofte]

 

 

Maybe you can buy il 2 bos and come to the real men company.

 

 

You wont find more dedicated simmers than Falcon BMS, I am serious that simulator require proper F 16 training and thinking and planning and dedication and time and true love for modern aviation or aviation in general. There is nothing and I mean nothing any simmer can learn these guys. 

 

This video describe pretty well the truth about BMS , if you take away some small inter web politics 

[JG27*Kornezov]

No disrespect here. However the sim fight and flight in fly by wire jet is substantially different experience. The skills are completely different. I completely disagree with your post. My point  is not about DCS versus BMS a debate that has no place on this forum.

 

If they come here they will have a lot of things to learn if we go there the same. If they do not think so, they are completely wrong about il2 and will get their ass kicked by dedicated il2 flyers. The same is true the opposite way. Nothwithstanding the people with tremendous amount of free time able to do everything.

 

Personnally I have never been interested in anything with thrust to weight of 1 and above. And dealing with avionics is not a  funny game for me.

 

My post was a polite comment not to post jet video in ww2 forum. Please buy the game and shows us your videos.

Edited June 29, 2017 by JG27_Kornezov

[Lusekofte]

I know what you meant, just felt it needed a little bit of correction.

I do not join in the BMS vs DCS discussion myself, because it never have been of interest. I like learning sims, but I put a stop with regular pilot training

[ACG_Invictus]

No disrespect here. However the sim fight and flight in fly by wire jet is substantially different experience. The skills are completely different. I completely disagree with your post. My point  is not about DCS versus BMS a debate that has no place on this forum.

 

If they come here they will have a lot of things to learn if we go there the same. If they do not think so, they are completely wrong about il2 and will get their ass kicked by dedicated il2 flyers. The same is true the opposite way. Nothwithstanding the people with tremendous amount of free time able to do everything.

 

Personnally I have never been interested in anything with thrust to weight of 1 and above. And dealing with avionics is not a  funny game for me.

 

My post was a polite comment not to post jet video in ww2 forum. Please buy the game and shows us your videos.

I've been playing online air combat games for nearly two decades. The basic skills and knowledge required to be a good cartoon fighter pilot are the same, no matter the era simulated or the simulator itself: Airmanship (i.e.how to fly the plane and manage it's systems i.e. avionics), ACM (i.e. how to fight in the plane) and SA (i.e. knowing who you are fighting, their and your own E states, and where they are relative to your plane). The era simulated adds variation to these three to some degree due to technological changes for airframe and weapons, which also changes tactics to a degree, but the three basic groups are the same. If you take away guided weapons like missiles and have a guns-only fight and the three basic skills noted above are largely the same regardless if you are in a Yak1 over WW2 Russia or an F16 over Iraq during the Gulf War. The pace of a classic knifefight tends to be slower for modern fighters vs. WW2 due to the speeds involved (i.e. higher speeds usually mean larger turn radius) but that isn't a hard and fast rule either. Just my .02...

 

BTW - if you want to better understand ACM and good air tactics, I recommend also taking a look at the YouTube videos of another BMS pilot in addition to =AS=: KidVicous (KVUSA77 on YouTube) . He does a really good job of breaking out certain ACM themes illustrated in Robert Shaw's Fighter Combat and demonstrating them using BMS engagements. Very entertaining videos and informative, no matter what simulator you fly and fight.

[A_S]

No disrespect here. However the sim fight and flight in fly by wire jet is substantially different experience. The skills are completely different.

 

True, but the BFM / ACM principles and basics are VERY similar.

Personally speaking.. i benefit !! from doing both . .vise versa in both directions.

 

In my expirience, the difference often is:

 

- pilots coming from ww2 sims to jet sims having difficulties with Situational Awarness and Visibility (things are faster and extended spacially)

- pilots coming from jet sims to ww2 sims having difficulties with energy-management and the lack of excessive thrust.

 

Other than that, IF you love flying.. you should give both categories a try. Better regret having done something, than never having done it

Edited July 3, 2017 by SpiritOFlight

[MasterBaiter]

People saying ACM/BFM are different between ww2 and modern times..

[JG27*Kornezov]

Yes they are! The different trust to weight ratio completely changes the fight. I am not talking about the general principles, I am talking about the details. The same, a fifth generation fighter with J-turn capabilities changes completely the acm possibilities.

Edited July 3, 2017 by JG27_Kornezov

[MasterBaiter]

It doesn't change anything. Trust to weight ratio is not relevant when it comes to BFM.

[JG27*Kornezov]

WTF Available ACM completely do change even within the game BOS, try in 109 to use the same BFM against the La 5 and against experienced i16 or yak 1b.
ACM is a broad framework ( that looks super simple at the first glance), within there are many variations and those variations and combination of variations are the real deal. They do change a lot.

Some people get their knowledge from Wikipedia, or better from books. However it is the practical application that matters in the game. Quite of few of the "theoretical experts" really can do shit in the game. The more they know the less teachable they are. It is hard to explain stuff to guys who think they know everything.
As for me I had to reconsider 80% of my flying technique (everything I know) transitioning from il 2 1946. But hey the planes on paper are not that different. But they fly differently. The joy of playing BOS has no alternative for the moment.

 

As an example is it the same thing flying low with Su 27 in DCS with EOS activated hugging mountains and making rocket evading  to flying 109, 190, yak  whatever in BOS.

Completely different skills are involved.
The best climbing profile is completely different in a prop  plane and supersonic jet

The corner speeds are different

Even playing a yo-yo can be a fatal mistake in a jet arena.

People who do not pay attention to details can be medium level at best.

Edited July 3, 2017 by JG27_Kornezov

[A_S]

dobŭr vecher komshu

 

What you are saying is DACT (Disimilar Air Combat Training). Diffferent airframes means basically.. one plane performs in certain regimes better than the other - and vise versa.

Goal is to drive the fight in the regime in which your aircraft performs better while trying to stay out of the regime the bandit performs better - in a short explanation. And also a bit the "exploitation" of air-frame characteristics in specific maneuvers.

 

BFM and ACM basics REMAIN the same ! with fine, but cruicial difference ofc.

 

You can break the rules (and sometimes you should), but you can not break the laws (physics).

 

 

It is hard to explain stuff to guys who think they know everything.

 

It is even HARDER to learn something, if one believes the same. Theory and practical execution .. both are important and must unify in a pilots ability. To to give more weight to one than the other is not wise.

 

PS: DCS for dogfighting is a bad example - at least in-house made air-frames. It has its own "matrix" and "physics", which creates a totally different dogfighting dynamics - and not very close to reality either imo. For me DCS is "Ace Combat on Steroids". BMS and BOS(M) is where the "DF quality" is.

Edited July 3, 2017 by SpiritOFlight

[A_S]

 

The joy of playing BOS has no alternative for the moment

 

Try fighting the really good pilots in BMS. I promise you, you will discover new adventures and motivation to expand your own skills.

 

We use Discord (free and like teamspeak). Channel (IP) is:  https://discord.gg/btuF7g

Edited July 3, 2017 by SpiritOFlight

[MasterBaiter]

 

BFM and ACM basics REMAIN the same ! with fine, but cruicial difference ofc.

This. You fight the same way in a warbird or a jet when it comes to guns only.

Speed & turn-radius are different but the maneuvers are the same.

 

[A_S]

My personal notes ...

 

Key variables and considerations in BFM. Applicaple for different scenarios and situations - SACT and DACT (simiilar and dissimilar air combat training) understandably:


Turnrate and Turnradius:

- When to choose what option and how to recognize the right choice?
- When and how to transition from one to the other and why?

Turningroom:

- What does required turningroom mean for the fight when and how and does it change?
- When and how to take it away from the bandit and why?
- When and how to create it geometrically for yourself depending on the situation and your intentions?
- The importance of turningroom in offensive and defensive geometry?
- The importance of the creation and using of "escape windows".

Energy-Conversion (altitude, speed and angles):

- When and how to gain energy properly in a commited situation?
- When and how to convert (timing in reference to bandit) energy into angles and vise-versa - WHY?
- When and HOW to check (TRACKING) the bandits energy-state and how to confirm it?
- How to stay unpredictable in your own energy-state and intentions?

 

Commitment:

- What situations are "commited" and restrictive?
- When to commit and when not?
- How to commit with advantage without ending up in a neutral or even disadvantaged position/situaiton?
- How to involve the bandit into brief non-offensive situations in order to create a time-window for yourself?

Lateral Displacement:

- When and how to use displacements as safety-zones (nose prioritiy state of bandit)?
- When and how to use displacements as geometrical constraint for the bandit?
- How to convert displacements into advantages?

Flight-Geometry:

- When and how to execute flexibility in your goemetry while complicating same for the bandit?
- How to dominate the goemetry and force the bandit to respond adapting without reveling own intentions? ** for more exprienced pilots.
- How to understand the consequences and the meaning of bandits previous maneuver-geometry for the follow-up (mathematical continuation) ?

Attitude:

- How and when to "read" and understand the bandits attitude and its meaning for the following?
- How to understand the bandtits "intention" early based on the attitude (nose-position) and previous maneuver geometry?

Timing:

- How to time events and variables above in a predictive manner according to the bandits geometrical history (past and consequential future)?
- When to sacrifice energy and position for an attack and what continuation IF MISS?

Mistakes:

- What are the mistakes and how can i memorize them never again to repeat?
- How can i force the bandit to make mistakes generally?
- Considering different reasons for mistakes (coms, misjudgement, emotions..etc)
- Neutralizing mistakes?

Decissions:

- How can i early understand the previous and following events and make correct decissions?
- How can i force the bandit to make more decission and increase his probablity to make mistakes.

Edited July 4, 2017 by SpiritOFlight

[ACG_Invictus]

 

- pilots coming from ww2 sims to jet sims having difficulties with Situational Awarness and Visibility (things are faster and extended spacially)

- pilots coming from jet sims to ww2 sims having difficulties with energy-management and the lack of excessive thrust. 

 

^ This. I should point out the planes are faster, but to me the (gun)fights feel slower.

 

Totally agree with SA comment....even flying the dumbed-down Flanker in DCS (for all it's faults, I enjoy doing so), I've found it's much harder to maintain SA than in CLoD, BoS or Rise of Flight because of the additional workload (looking at and manipulating radar, threats, etc). I only have a few hours of experience with BMS, but in my view the challenge maintaining SA is even greater there (partly because I don't know the systems very well yet....hehehe).

[DerNeueMensch]

 

 

even flying the dumbed-down Flanker in DCS (for all it's faults, I enjoy doing so)

some aspects of DCSs simulation, like the missing rudder limiter or the need to press a button to override the G-limiter on the SU-27 make it even more 'complicated' than it should be. Even though it has not a fully clickable cockpit, it's not really dumbed down; it has not a bigger workload than the M2000/Mig-21 or F-16 in A-A employment. Workload is the same in all those ACs, if not your HOTAS is not properly set up. The bigger the AAM ranges the harder it is to maintain SA. Where the FC3 ACs are really lacking is the systems modeling resulting in a dead or alive type of damage model most of the times.

[A_S]

Visibility is horrible in WVR fights in DCS.

 

Missiles are completly wrong in BVR (underpowered, intercepting targets from the rails and bleeding all energy too early - arcadian navigation of missiles), and WVR you have graphical artifacts (disapearing bandits) making visibility horrible. Thus, combat overall is porked. They will make other terrains and planes, but the most fundamental things they dont care about. Did you know, that the replay-tracks bug exists since 2012? No joke. And you can not even disable auto-record tracks.

Edited July 5, 2017 by SpiritOFlight

[ACG_Invictus]

some aspects of DCSs simulation, like the missing rudder limiter or the need to press a button to override the G-limiter on the SU-27 make it even more 'complicated' than it should be. Even though it has not a fully clickable cockpit, it's not really dumbed down; it has not a bigger workload than the M2000/Mig-21 or F-16 in A-A employment. Workload is the same in all those ACs, if not your HOTAS is not properly set up. The bigger the AAM ranges the harder it is to maintain SA. Where the FC3 ACs are really lacking is the systems modeling resulting in a dead or alive type of damage model most of the times.

My comment about increased workload was in relation to that experienced in a WW2 sim like BoS.

 

Visibility is horrible in WVR fights in DCS.

 

Missiles are completly wrong in BVR (underpowered, intercepting targets from the rails and bleeding all energy too early - arcadian navigation of missiles), and WVR you have graphical artifacts (disapearing bandits) making visibility horrible. Thus, combat overall is porked. They will make other terrains and planes, but the most fundamental things they dont care about. Did you know, that the replay-tracks bug exists since 2012? No joke. And you can not even disable auto-record tracks.

Yes, I'm aware of all these things....but it's still fun for me, warts and all.

[JG27*Kornezov]

Maybe I should post my il 2 videos on Falkon BMS forums too?

[[CPT]CptJackSparrow]

That would go over oh so well. They'd just love that.

[A_S]

[[CPT]CptJackSparrow]

How would you deal with, in bms terms, the following:

 

I16 meets F4 alone. Co alt. 6k feet agl.

 

Mig3 at 3k feet, F4 at 5k feet agl.

 

Explain in bms terms how you'd make the I16 and Mig3 win. Elanski and Sherriff are in the F4s.

Edited August 10, 2017 by [CPT]CptJackSparrow

[A_S]

there are no BMS terms.. just DACT terms... tempting to reply in full examples and elaboration, but that would take alot writing now

 

i suppose looking back in history where often totally disimilar plattforms have fought helps...

Edited August 11, 2017 by SpiritOFlight