Flying formation with AI

[Zippy-do-dar]

I'm using P40 with full engine controls in campaign

The problem I'm having apart from the AI taking off quicker and climbing better once i catch the formation

i can not seem to keep station with them i either creep ahead  or drop back a bit like a yo-yo just can not find

the sweet spot.

 

[Semor76]

Forget it. The AI is completely broken in this Game. AI formation flying is part of it.  Try to stick to the flight leader and dont care about the rest of your flight.

[[DBS]TH0R]

3 hours ago, Semor76 said:

Forget it. The AI is completely broken in this Game. AI formation flying is part of it.  Try to stick to the flight leader and dont care about the rest of your flight.

 

Any info whether will it be fixed? I tried several campaigns, especially from a bomber pilot perspective this kills the immersion (more so if you do know how to fly formation).

[Hoss]

Evidently they don't have a coder who knows how to do it, or they are so busy getting other content finished they can't devote any time to it.  Which is a shame because I love playing the single player campaigns people have built, but the AI behavior is just the worst ever.   Legacy IL2 in the beginning was very good flying formations, terrible at running into mountains though.  I just beta tested a campaign for someone and I had to quit flying where the mission was designed for me to fly and just pass everyone up and get on the leaders wing and stay there.  I do this in the games generated career mode too.  It's one thing they really need to fix, even if they need to find the guy from the legacy IL2 that wrote the code and have him fix it.  I'm sure there a mulitude of people that have IL2 that only play the single player mode and would love to see this fixed, along with the mission builders who pull their hair out trying to get their formations to act right. 

Fingers crossed........

 

Cheers

 

Hoss

[NETSCAPE]

It is really unfortunate for people who like single player content. If AI flight characteristics (formation, speed, climb rates and attacks) were improved I really wouldn't have too much to complain about at all. I would say singleplayer content isn't a priority and maybe multiplayer is... but they did put in all the hard work to create the career mode. The game is SO CLOSE to be super duper awesome... it just needs to go that liiiiiiittle extra bit more. 

[Zippy-do-dar]

Thanks all for the replies, I thought it was me.

[Lusekofte]

No it is not you, but for the record , try to fly formation in a chopper in DCS . It almost in every occasion end up with a mid air collision. They got coders for AI , but I think it is different people for each year and it seems like it never will change. AI is in my head the most difficult thing to get right. 

My reason for liking Single player is the fact that AI behave disciplined and stick to the objective, almost every time doing so to a degree that it border (and some times go over ) to stupid. 

Formation flying is the first obvious frustrating feature, then the knowledge that your wingman will not be there and cover your back. The one and only AI you can trust us  your accurate gunner. And it really destroy SP gameplay. This is why I always think it is better to improve what we got, than getting new stuff. A improved AI would improve this game 100% , a new aircraft will be funny for a couple of hours

[JonRedcorn]

2 hours ago, LuseKofte said:

No it is not you, but for the record , try to fly formation in a chopper in DCS . It almost in every occasion end up with a mid air collision. They got coders for AI , but I think it is different people for each year and it seems like it never will change. AI is in my head the most difficult thing to get right. 

My reason for liking Single player is the fact that AI behave disciplined and stick to the objective, almost every time doing so to a degree that it border (and some times go over ) to stupid. 

Formation flying is the first obvious frustrating feature, then the knowledge that your wingman will not be there and cover your back. The one and only AI you can trust us  your accurate gunner. And it really destroy SP gameplay. This is why I always think it is better to improve what we got, than getting new stuff. A improved AI would improve this game 100% , a new aircraft will be funny for a couple of hours

DCS ruined their formation flying with 2.5.x I remember playing 1.5 and being able to run tight awesome formations with the F-15. They released 2.5 and now formations are spread like a mile across the sky, it seems nobody in the flight sim community can get their AI in some type of workable form. It's a real shame that games released over 10 years ago have much better AI. It's one of the reasons I liked flying CLOD the AI was pretty decent.

[sniperton]

On 8/18/2018 at 2:26 PM, Zippy-do-dar said:

the AI taking off quicker and climbing better

Practice will teach you how to take-off together with the AI. As to climbing, the trick is to set pitch trim to 50+ as soon as you get airborne. I don't say it's easy, you have to be fast and co-ordinated in your actions, but it's doable.

On 8/18/2018 at 2:26 PM, Zippy-do-dar said:

once i catch the formation i can not seem to keep station with them

Never mind. You can fly with them, adjusting both trim and throttle simultaneously, but it's not worth the effort and constant attention. Just let them go, and shadow them as if you were covering them.

[Zippy-do-dar]

15 hours ago, sniperton said:

Practice will teach you how to take-off together with the AI. As to climbing, the trick is to set pitch trim to 50+ as soon as you get airborne. I don't say it's easy, you have to be fast and co-ordinated in your actions, but it's doable.

Never mind. You can fly with them, adjusting both trim and throttle simultaneously, but it's not worth the effort and constant attention. Just let them go, and shadow them as if you were covering them.

Thanks I'll try this when i next fly

[Sgt_Joch]

The issue is not really the AI, but the cruising speed set by the mission editor. The same problem was with Pat Wilson's Campaign. problem is finding the sweet spot.

 

I am currently flying a BOM 110 career as wingman and love flying formation with the AI. Like everything else, practice makes perfect. Make sure you are going same altitude and direction. It is then a matter of making small corrections to throttle to keep your distance. Using icons helps tremendously.

 

Of course, I used to love refueling from tankers in Falcon 4 and Jane's F/A-18, so formation flying in BOX is a breeze. 

Edited August 20, 2018 by Sgt_Joch

[Scottvdken]

3 minutes ago, Sgt_Joch said:

 

 

I am currently flying a BOM 110 career as wingman and love flying formation with the AI. Like everything else, practice makes perfect. Make sure you are going same altitude and direction. It is then a matter of making small corrections to throttle to keep your distance. Using icons helps tremendously.

 

 

 

So, random question for you. I've found if I don't mess with my loadout/weight I can actually keep up with the AI, but what position do you take? My squad is always in a right edge formation, but they don't leave a free space for me. Do you just hang out at the edge of the formation?

 

Basically, I have no trouble keeping up with them, but staying IN the formation is a massive chore.

Edited August 20, 2018 by Scottvdken

[Sgt_Joch]

3 hours ago, Scottvdken said:

 

So, random question for you. I've found if I don't mess with my loadout/weight I can actually keep up with the AI, but what position do you take? My squad is always in a right edge formation, but they don't leave a free space for me. Do you just hang out at the edge of the formation?

 

Basically, I have no trouble keeping up with them, but staying IN the formation is a massive chore.

 

Really depends on the tactical situation. I try to keep the position assigned to me. i.e. if I am no. 3 in the mission schedule, I will be no. 3 on take off and try to stay more or less at that no. 3 spot, right or left.

 

As to how close, that is always the RL problem with formation, too close and you spend all your time just keeping an eye on your squad instead of potential enemies. If it is a long boring flight, I will sometimes get very close. Usually, I try to stay around 500 meters, close enough so you can easily see what the flight is doing, but far enough so you can spend a good chunk of time looking around for potential enemies.

[busdriver]

On 8/18/2018 at 11:08 AM, Semor76 said:

Forget it. The AI is completely broken in this Game. AI formation flying is part of it.  Try to stick to the flight leader and dont care about the rest of your flight.

 

I get why Jason loses his patience at times. This is COMPLETELY wrong. I can say with complete confidence that I spent a great deal of my time testing enroute airspeeds for fighters and the 110,  offering suggestions to make formation flying work. To their credit, I think they made most if not all the changes I suggested. As it relates to the OP. I just tested a P-40 campaign. The enroute airspeed for the P-40 should be a nominal 240 mph (indicated).

 

Note the highlighted boxes.

 

I used airstart for this mission. At spawn in I dropped back as I gained control of the airplane. However I was quickly able to regain my position as #2 by setting the RPMs (with the prop control) to about 2650 and adding throttle to get the manifold pressure at the top of the yellow arc. This allowed me to accelerate, catch up. Once I passed #3 I reduced throttle keeping it between the two green tic marks. From here I had no problem flying formation simply making small throttle movements. Notice what my indicated airspeed is.

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Sgt_Joch said:

The issue is not really the AI, but the cruising speed set by the mission editor. The same problem was with Pat Wilson's Campaign. problem is finding the sweet spot.

 

You are correct. For the Allies the I-16 presents a particular challenge in mixed formations as types separate into formations of similar types enroute. That challenge remains. Because of the pace of testing I focused on the P-39, P-40, and Spitfire enroute airspeed and the need to keep it below Max Continuous power (just below Combat power that typically has a 30 min time limit). I know you can fly formation in all three of those...I do so consistently.

 

I rarely play a 109 career and never play a 190 career. I prefer the 110.  I did suggest (during Kuban testing) that ALL 109s and 190s use the SAME enroute speed to eliminate problems with mixed formations. I think I suggested 400 kph, but I don't think the common speed was adopted (could be wrong). 

 

I made a pitch to Pat about using a common speed (and the RL logic of doing this) . I know he adjusted them down but don't recall what they are. 

[busdriver]

22 hours ago, sniperton said:

Practice will teach you how to take-off together with the AI. As to climbing, the trick is to set pitch trim to 50+ as soon as you get airborne. I don't say it's easy, you have to be fast and co-ordinated in your actions, but it's doable.

 

While keeping the airplane trimmed is always a great technique, I've not found your suggestion to be "the answer" or "the trick." In RL you trim to relieve the control pressures for the desired airspeed. Automatically setting trim to 50+ is IMO less than helpful without some idea of what indicated airspeed you intend to fly. I confess I don't know what airspeed 50+ trim equates to in the P-40, I don't look since I don't have force feedback.

 

In response to Zippy-do-dar lamenting his inability to fine tune his station keeping (formation position) you suggest:

22 hours ago, sniperton said:

Never mind. You can fly with them, adjusting both trim and throttle simultaneously, but it's not worth the effort and constant attention. Just let them go, and shadow them as if you were covering them.

 

That is certainly an option. If however a 1G comfy Chair Fighter Pilot wants to get better as a formation flyer I have a couple suggestions. A RL fighter pilot technique is to fly with a little bit of nose down trim. In RL I never trimmed the Phantom when in close formation. I suggest Zippy start with a known airspeed, a known RPM, and simply make smooth & small throttle movements. Another RL technique taught in USAF pilot training is to gently "stir the stick" when in close. By that I mean very tiny, gentle circular motion, making the smallest diameter circle you can imagine. The theory is this will keep you from squeezing the stick too hard and reinforce the notion that you are constantly making adjustments to fly good formation.

[sniperton]

This was just a practical advice with no guarantees and with no science behind. This is my way to keep pace with the AI. There might be better ways to do so. I'm eager to learn.

[busdriver]

13 minutes ago, sniperton said:

This was just a practical advice with no guarantees and with no science behind. This is my way to keep pace with the AI. There might be better ways to do so. I'm eager to learn.

 

Understood, that's why I tried to add something solid to build upon. And please accept my apology if you inferred snark or insult when none was implied.

[unreasonable]

@busdriver In my current F2- F4 career I certainly find that the cruising speed of 450 kph on the mission briefing is well within reach of continuous power, so formation flying is possible as you say: unless you are carrying a bomb, in which case the F2 in particular is really struggling to keep up without staying in climb and combat power.  Ideally the mission cruise speeds should have an additional setting for for the most draggy configuration, (assuming the effect of the bomb on speed is correct) but at the moment I have to just try to stay within visual range and join in a ground attack as the AI flight makes it's second pass.

 

Just a quick question:  the speeds shown on the mission briefing are IAS, I assume from experience, but I wonder about the time shown: is that just distance / IAS? 

Given that it is rounded, approximate flying etc that will be fine 90% of the time but I have had a couple of missions on the Moscow map with vectors straight into or against a strong wind:  this could be 80-90kph at 2000m for a 8m/s ground speed: so enough to get me lost if I am not paying attention!   So currently I am assuming that I need to adjust for wind speed myself just as I need to adjust heading to achieve the desired course when the winds are significant. 

 

 

[busdriver]

1 hour ago, unreasonable said:

@busdriver In my current F2- F4 career I certainly find that the cruising speed of 450 kph on the mission briefing is well within reach of continuous power, so formation flying is possible as you say: unless you are carrying a bomb, in which case the F2 in particular is really struggling to keep up without staying in climb and combat power.  Ideally the mission cruise speeds should have an additional setting for for the most draggy configuration, (assuming the effect of the bomb on speed is correct) but at the moment I have to just try to stay within visual range and join in a ground attack as the AI flight makes it's second pass.

 

You are witnessing something I saw, and the reason I want a slower enroute speed. I just didn't have enough time to fly all the missions I wanted and take the screenshots (showing how far behind an F2 hauling a bomb could get sucked behind an F4 in the same configuration) and present my logic. Not that you asked, but what I did was take a screen of the map with the planned airspeed noted. Then record a mission, for example flying an F2 with a bomb. During track playback I would take screens with icons on to show the disadvantage I had at that airspeed in terms of separation. A cockpit screen showing my airpeed with power set at max continuous (techno chat enabled too) and another cockpit screen showing what power setting is required simply to stay in formation. I'd fly another sortie in the F4 and note the power required to hold 450 kph with a bomb. A flight leader would not fly around at max continuous power (or in combat power), he would allow his wingmen to have some power to play with. The Devs IMO are receptive to making these kinds of changes, they just want evidence.

 

1 hour ago, unreasonable said:

 

Just a quick question:  the speeds shown on the mission briefing are IAS, I assume from experience, but I wonder about the time shown: is that just distance / IAS? 

Given that it is rounded, approximate flying etc that will be fine 90% of the time but I have had a couple of missions on the Moscow map with vectors straight into or against a strong wind:  this could be 80-90kph at 2000m for a 8m/s ground speed: so enough to get me lost if I am not paying attention!   So currently I am assuming that I need to adjust for wind speed myself just as I need to adjust heading to achieve the desired course when the winds are significant. 

 

You are absolutely right. At low altitude (less than 350 meters) generally it is a reasonable assumption that indicated airspeed (IAS) equals ground speed (GS). Therefore the distance of the navigation leg divided by the IAS gives you the enroute time for that leg. I suggested the rounding off of airspeeds and approximating leg enroute time, because IMO it eliminates a false sense of precision. Winds aloft at 2000m (and higher) will throw off those numbers as you note, and yes you must adjust your timing. Realistically you wouldn't know the direction and magnitude sitting in your 109 cockpit. You'd recognize that it's taking longer flying in one direction or see your drift across the ground.  I've not played any SP missions as the flight leader, I'm always a wingman just hanging on and checking six. The terrain is gorgeous and the navigation maps are superb, so I use pilotage (map reading) when I get separated or RTB alone. 

[unreasonable]

Thanks - that makes sense and confirms my impressions. I know a fair bit about the basics of navigation from a foot slogger's POV but the whole wind, track, course thingie I have ignored up till now, until I found myself flying a 180 degree course in 8/10 cloud and wondering why I was bumping into the west end of the the Moscow map! Unlike London's West End this does not contain shopping and showgirls, but a rude message in yellow letters.  Come to think of it, you can find this in the West End's Soho district as well. So a quick evening with some websites and a spreadsheet program revealed much about why I was getting lost. 

 

On the wind, I have cheated a little by loading the last mission from career into the mission editor a couple of times to get a retrospective weather analysis...   so far the wind direction has only veered or backed ten degrees or so up to 2,000m: not enough to throw out my crude mental arithmetic, but I still have an urge to brush up my meteorology to see which is more likely on a given map.  I think in RL you would have some idea of wind speeds at altitude since you would have had a weather forecast which surely must have estimated those.  The mission generator seems to use a fairly regular wind gradient: roughly double ground speed at 500m, triple at 1,000m and quadrouple at 2,000m after which the rate of increase slows sharply.  (As an aside, that really should be in the mission briefing, even if it is somewhat inaccurate. I would bet that x% of people playing career have not yet cottoned on to the fact that they are sometimes travelling at a ground speed of  up to 20% greater or less than  their IAS at 2,000m).

 

On the subject of mental arithmetic: I find your "fly at multiples of 60" advice impractical when I am a wingman: or even when I am not, as I always had trouble with times tables. (Mother drank G&Ts while pregnant).   But I can divide by ten, so 450 kph becomes 45 km every six minutes! Since most of the career legs are around 40 - 50 km long this makes it fairly easy to estimate leg time. Then add or subtract one minute for wind  if it is strong and you are heading into or away from it and you will be close enough "for government work" as you say.

 

The time that wind will really come into play is in FC, if server mission makers do it right. I took a Dr.1 for a spin in a high wind recently and could see that the town over my right wingtip was getting further away: but still over my right wing tip! The track on the post mission briefing was interesting, to put it mildly. 

Edited August 21, 2018 by unreasonable

[=OPFR=ColNinny]

Zippy, as they say, it's likely  you and your skills at fault. I can suggest trying to bracket the leader in the side window to stay on station. My tutorial explains. It may help.

 

 

[Trooper117]

I generally have no problem keeping up with and formating on AI aircraft... 

Unless you are the leader, once in position you will have to keep making minor adjustments on your throttle and flight controls.

Often, pilots over correct with those inputs and loose formation or force the AI to alter their position.

 

[Zippy-do-dar]

18 hours ago, colninny said:

Zippy, as they say, it's likely  you and your skills at fault. I can suggest trying to bracket the leader in the side window to stay on station. My tutorial explains. It may help.

 

Thanks @colninny

  i have seen some of your tutorials mainly on navigation something else i can't do very well.

 

But i have improved in formation flying by using some of the suggestions in this thread thanks all.

I'm getting off the ground quicker and now climbing with the AI better, So i do not have to play catch up.

Trimming the aircraft better (this surprised me in how much it helped)

Looking at my speed more not just manifold pressure & RPMs  thanks for pointing this out@busdriver

[TP_Jacko]

One thing you could try is to select autopilot for your aircraft and watch the engine settings rate of climb  radiator settings etc etc. Then maybe you have a chance to understand what you are aiming for. With flying in a human squadron it takes a lot of practice and good comms on settings between us to keep in formation. So don't feel bad about struggling with AI.