DCS

[CanadaOne]

I find myself looking for excuses to buy it, which means I should wait for a free trial or a sale. For $88.00Cdn, that's a chunk o' change for a plane that doesn't blow warm air up your skirt.

 

I reeeeeeally want the F-15E. That and the Kola map by ORBX are my two big ones. I'm dying to see what an ORBX DCS map looks like. 

[ROCKET_KNUT]

5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

rudder authority

Seems to be way off. It slides a lotttt. At least for sombody like me, no actual flying experience and coming from a game called IL-2.

Where is a Laobi-video on the subject when you need one? ?

[Mmaruda]

Just out of curiosity, what do you guys think of DCS warbirds? I've playing a lot with them lately and I can't really come to terms with the ground handling. Like in IL-2 I feel like the ground looping might be overdone, since sometimes it just happens and no amount of opposite brake and rudder will help, but in DCS taxiing is a breeze and take off is the real struggle. There's all sorts for tutorials and guides, but just through trial and error, I found that the easiest way for any plane to get off the ground is just advance the throttle decent acceleration, correct with some rudder and then just add more throttle smoothly, slowly center the stick and the plane gets airborne by itself. At the same time, any flaps make the process harder and once passed a certain speed the machine just baloons up, goes all over the place and it takes ages to clean the plane up. It's like the only sim, where take offs are a lot harder than landings.

[Guest deleted@83466]

13 hours ago, Mmaruda said:

Just out of curiosity, what do you guys think of DCS warbirds? I've playing a lot with them lately and I can't really come to terms with the ground handling. Like in IL-2 I feel like the ground looping might be overdone, since sometimes it just happens and no amount of opposite brake and rudder will help, but in DCS taxiing is a breeze and take off is the real struggle. There's all sorts for tutorials and guides, but just through trial and error, I found that the easiest way for any plane to get off the ground is just advance the throttle decent acceleration, correct with some rudder and then just add more throttle smoothly, slowly center the stick and the plane gets airborne by itself. At the same time, any flaps make the process harder and once passed a certain speed the machine just baloons up, goes all over the place and it takes ages to clean the plane up. It's like the only sim, where take offs are a lot harder than landings.

 

If you’re talking about the Bf-109k4, do what you normally would do with the rudder in IL-2 game, but also hold your stick in the lower right hand corner at the start, easing off as you go (edit: stick full back and right).  Use no more than 1.35 ata, not maximum. Counter the ballooning as you lift off with some down pressure.  And that’s it, you’ll nail your takeoff every time and you won’t think of it as difficult.  Some of the warbirds in DCS just take a little technique.  I think some of the various factors like torque, and p-factor and all those kinds of things are undermodelled in IL-2, and I’ve heard many others say the same.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 31, 2022 by SeaSerpent

[DBFlyguy]

Pretty cool Halloween easter egg:

 

 

 

[dburne]

20 hours ago, Mmaruda said:

Just out of curiosity, what do you guys think of DCS warbirds? I've playing a lot with them lately and I can't really come to terms with the ground handling. Like in IL-2 I feel like the ground looping might be overdone, since sometimes it just happens and no amount of opposite brake and rudder will help, but in DCS taxiing is a breeze and take off is the real struggle. There's all sorts for tutorials and guides, but just through trial and error, I found that the easiest way for any plane to get off the ground is just advance the throttle decent acceleration, correct with some rudder and then just add more throttle smoothly, slowly center the stick and the plane gets airborne by itself. At the same time, any flaps make the process harder and once passed a certain speed the machine just baloons up, goes all over the place and it takes ages to clean the plane up. It's like the only sim, where take offs are a lot harder than landings.

 

I personally feel - rightly or wrongly - that DCS WWII aircraft are harder to take off and land than their counterparts in IL-2 Great Battles.

They are very well done though with those cockpit interiors and of course all those switches/buttons that can be manipulated.

[SCG_motoadve]

37 minutes ago, dburne said:

 

I personally feel - rightly or wrongly - that DCS WWII aircraft are harder to take off and land than their counterparts in IL-2 Great Battles.

They are very well done though with those cockpit interiors and of course all those switches/buttons that can be manipulated.

Agreed, but the performance in VR is horrible, how is the new damage model? Any fun single player campaigns?

[SCG_Tzigy]

2 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

Agreed, but the performance in VR is horrible, how is the new damage model? Any fun single player campaigns?

I just fired up DCs W-2 bird after quite a bit of time and at least with the Spitfire I was impressed with the damage model but maybe this is old? It was quite a bit of work to bring this down and land it...

[Guest deleted@83466]

Get gud Tziggy ?

[SCG_Tzigy]

23 minutes ago, SeaSerpent said:

Get gud Tziggy ?

lol. have been trying for 20 years. maybe i should pick up quilting or something

[dburne]

3 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

Agreed, but the performance in VR is horrible, how is the new damage model? Any fun single player campaigns?

 

Well as far as WWII I only use IL-2 Great Battles for that, and currently using DCS for mostly Hornet and Apache. Mostly Hornet which there are quite a few nice campaigns out there for it off the Super Carrier - some are payware but imho well worth the money.

I have been away from all flight sims the last 6 weeks but hope to be able to return to it here shortly with clearance from doc.

Edited November 1, 2022 by dburne

[BladeMeister]

If you haven't tried to taxi, take off and tried to land, especially landing, in the I16 in DCS you don't know what HARD is. I am talking with the assist at zero. I gave up on landing after two weeks of trying to master it. I absolutely love to hate that Bitch, and I think it's time I jumped back in her to see what I can do. It is super fun to dogfight in though.

 

S!Blade<><

[Gambit21]

On 10/30/2022 at 1:33 PM, CanadaOne said:

I find myself looking for excuses to buy it, which means I should wait for a free trial or a sale. For $88.00Cdn, that's a chunk o' change for a plane that doesn't blow warm air up your skirt.

 

I reeeeeeally want the F-15E. That and the Kola map by ORBX are my two big ones. I'm dying to see what an ORBX DCS map looks like. 

 

I love the Mud Hen...I'm going to buy it and then proceed to never really learn it. 

Although the videos that they're posting make it seem very accessible. 

 

Kola map...meh. Maybe.

 

I need Normandy 2 for Hell Hawks. Then I think WWII Marianas, Sinai, and Vietnam. (yes it's my firm belief that a Vietnam announcement is imminent for many reasons) 

Then later Afghanistan for some Hercules ops and maybe some CAS. 

 

Unless I decide to fly someone's scripted campaign though, I think I'll skip Kola. I'm sure it will be pretty and all though. 

I wish the NTTR map A. had all of the proper ground targets placed at the ranges, and B. was more popular. I really like that map still.

 

 

On 10/30/2022 at 4:58 PM, Mmaruda said:

Just out of curiosity, what do you guys think of DCS warbirds? 

 

Well if you want a proper Jug, then you have no choice but DCS unfortunately.

IL2 will always have the advantage in number of aircraft etc...and some are done truly well...like the Tempest.

 

 

After you start up a warbird in DCS though, it's hard to go back to hitting the E key.

It's always been an "IL2 does some things better, and DCS does some things better" equation, but that equation is growing a bit more skewed IMO and looks to get more so.

[CanadaOne]

5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

I love the Mud Hen...I'm going to buy it and then proceed to never really learn it. 

Although the videos that they're posting make it seem very accessible. 

 

Kola map...meh. Maybe.

 

I need Normandy 2 for Hell Hawks. Then I think WWII Marianas, Sinai, and Vietnam. (yes it's my firm belief that a Vietnam announcement is imminent for many reasons) 

Then later Afghanistan for some Hercules ops and maybe some CAS. 

 

Unless I decide to fly someone's scripted campaign though, I think I'll skip Kola. I'm sure it will be pretty and all though. 

I wish the NTTR map A. had all of the proper ground targets placed at the ranges, and B. was more popular. I really like that map still.

 

 

I'm willing to put a few hours in to the F-15E and neglect some other planes. Unless Razbam really ****s it up, which is unlikely, it's bound to be in instantly my Top 3. 

 

Kola map... yes! As stated, I'm interested to see what ORBX can do with a DCS map. And really interested to see what they're next DCS map will be.

 

Nevada map? Love it. One of my favourites. I'd like to see Groom Lake get a serious paint job.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

 

Well if you want a proper Jug, then you have no choice but DCS unfortunately.

 

 

Can't stand it. It's like flying a giant piece of toilet paper flitting about in the wind.

[Robli]

The problem with DCS is warbirds still is, at least for me, that there is not really much to do with these, once you have learned the systems and know how to operate them. I only have Fw-190D and Mustang and tried out Bf-109 and P-47. Almost bought the Messershmitt until I remembered that there is not much to do with it. Now, when Corsair comes, I might get that just to learn how to operate it and do some carrier stuff, but the combat part of WWII is far behind what BoX is offering.

What comes to landing and takeoffs, then I have no problems with the Mustang, but Fw190 often wants to slip or slide or spin during landing for some reason.

[Bremspropeller]

11 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Well if you want a proper Jug

Proper Jugs are awesome!

[Boogdud]

22 hours ago, Robli said:

but Fw190 often wants to slip or slide or spin during landing for some reason

In the case of the FW190, keep your speed low and your stick full back after you're wheels on.

 

As for differences in flight models, for me personally I think some of the effects are exaggerated or at least feel exaggerated on the dcs warbirds. It feels like the amount of rudder authority and torque are a bit over-the-top in dcs. It's almost like they took the flight model for a Sukhoi-31 and applied it to most prop planes.  I feel like an average between the subdued flight models of il-2 and the crazy modern stunt-plane models of dcs, would be nice.

 

Though I will say the jug in dcs is infinitely better modeled than the poor tub of lard we got in il-2. I'm still bitter.

[Schmehl]

1 hour ago, Boogdud said:

In the case of the FW190, keep your speed low and your stick full back after you're wheels on.

 

As for differences in flight models, for me personally I think some of the effects are exaggerated or at least feel exaggerated on the dcs warbirds. It feels like the amount of rudder authority and torque are a bit over-the-top in dcs. It's almost like they took the flight model for a Sukhoi-31 and applied it to most prop planes.  I feel like an average between the subdued flight models of il-2 and the crazy modern stunt-plane models of dcs, would be nice.

 

Though I will say the jug in dcs is infinitely better modeled than the poor tub of lard we got in il-2. I'm still bitter.

  Interesting that you mentioned the torque being over the top because I was recently reading some articles related to this.  One was about a P-51 accident where the instructor was on the ground observing his student make his 1st solo.  It says: The instructor noted that as the airplane made contact with the ground, the pilot "had not pulled his throttle back to idle, as the noise level of the engine appeared greater than idle." After rolling 50 to 100 feet, the tail appeared to rise slightly, indicating the pilot was applying slight forward stick to pin the airplane to the ground. This was followed quickly by the rapid lowering of the tail to the point where the tail wheel struck the ground with a "loud bang noise." The airplane then "leaped back into the air" and the pilot applied take-off power. The airplane pitched nose high and rolled left to the inverted position. The upper surface of the left wing contacted the ground first, followed by the propeller and the canopy.

 

  Another article about the P-38 says: The most dangerous problem was that both engines were "critical" engines losing one on takeoff, which happened often, created "critical torque," rolling the plane towards the live engine's wingtip, rather than the dead engine's. Normal reflex in pilots flying twin engine aircraft would be to push the remaining engine to full throttle when they lost an engine on takeoff, but in the P-38, the resulting critical torque would produce such an uncontrollable level of asymmetric roll that the aircraft would flip over and slam upside-down into the ground. Eventually, procedures were devised to allow a pilot to deal with the situation by reducing power on the running engine, feathering the prop on the dead engine, and then increasing power gradually until the aircraft was in stable flight.

 

  I don't have experience with DCS, but it seems to me that the torque effect is not properly modeled in IL-2.

[Guest deleted@83466]

Isn’t it a real-life prohibition in some warbirds like the P-51, that you never want to ram the throttle forward on a go-around, because you might almost flip the aircraft?  In DCS, you will definitely dip the left wing on takeoff if you aren’t prepared to counter it.  The Bf-109 needs the right touch or you’ll have an accident on takeoff, because it’s dangerous, like the real thing.  In IL-2, these same aircraft seem pretty tame.

[Lusekofte]

All simulators got ground handeling wrong. On top of that we sit in dead environment and have to use our eyes only to counter any movement. Props got this instrument , a pointer that tells you where it goes. And it do it before you are able to spot it. It helps a bit

Edited November 2, 2022 by 216th_Lusekofte

[Gambit21]

3 hours ago, Boogdud said:

 

Though I will say the jug in dcs is infinitely better modeled than the poor tub of lard we got in il-2. I'm still bitter.

 

 

At least you didn't spend hundreds of hours building a campaign for it.

[Boogdud]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

 

 

At least you didn't spend hundreds of hours building a campaign for it.

We can complain about the jug not being as great as she could be, but Hellhawks is one of my favorite campaigns ever. I've been simming for 30+years.

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

 

 

At least you didn't spend hundreds of hours building a campaign for it.

I have to say, it was the only time I enjoyed the P 47 , when flyging Hell Hawk. If not for that the P 47 would never been used. 
so it was not wasted time. I know lots of people enjoyed that campaign

Edited November 2, 2022 by 216th_Lusekofte

[Hanu]

I own most of the WW2 stuff in DCS, I try them, have some fun with the clickable cockpit and engine management but after that... I fly them very little. They just do not feel good. I guess DCS FM just don't work with props perhaps.

 

With jets its completely different story. There DCS shines.

[CanadaOne]

3 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

 

At least you didn't spend hundreds of hours building a campaign for it.

 

If it makes you feel any better, your Havoc campaign is the only campaign I have bought for any sim. ?

[DD_fruitbat]

56 minutes ago, Hanu said:

I own most of the WW2 stuff in DCS, I try them, have some fun with the clickable cockpit and engine management but after that... I fly them very little. They just do not feel good. I guess DCS FM just don't work with props perhaps.

 

With jets its completely different story. There DCS shines.

 

Lol. if your reference point is il2, then to quote oleg from many yeara ago, i am laugh....

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, DD_fruitbat said:

i am laugh....

 ? 

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, DD_fruitbat said:

 

Lol. if your reference point is il2, then to quote oleg from many yeara ago, i am laugh....

Ihave to say of the ones I tried among DCS WW2 contend I like FLYING P 47, P 51 and Spitfire, Latter in doubt  compared to GB, I like the stability in GB Mossie better. DCS mossie is fkind of not behaving in my pow. But for being a pilot and feel you accomplish something *DCS is the one

[CanadaOne]

22 minutes ago, 216th_Lusekofte said:

Ihave to say of the ones I tried among DCS WW2 contend I like FLYING P 47, P 51 and Spitfire, Latter in doubt  compared to GB, I like the stability in GB Mossie better. DCS mossie is fkind of not behaving in my pow. But for being a pilot and feel you accomplish something *DCS is the one

 

I can just fly around for a long time in DCS, in any plane. Not even blowing chit up, just flying for fun. Not in IL2. In IL2 I have to be destroying something or I get bored pretty fast.

 

DCS is a better flight simulator. IL2 is a better WWII air combat simulator. It's fluid, it's scenic, and there's good variety. Like that brothel in Paris... 

[Lusekofte]

12 hours ago, CanadaOne said:

 

I can just fly around for a long time in DCS, in any plane. Not even blowing chit up, just flying for fun. Not in IL2. In IL2 I have to be destroying something or I get bored pretty fast.

 

DCS is a better flight simulator. IL2 is a better WWII air combat simulator. It's fluid, it's scenic, and there's good variety. Like that brothel in Paris... 

I find myself in a state of confusion. 
I like time saving GB for its 20 minutes sessions and no brainier systems. 
DCS demands just too much learning. 
I flown KA 50 and mi 8 so much that I can start up and make them battleready in total darkness even after several month of absence. I am on my way to be as good in Hind.  But after all the start up and planning my limited tactical part of the brain get pushed aside by my well developed impulsive side of the brain. 
This sometimes culminate in finding myself slapping myself in frustration. 
and every time I attempt learning weapon system in Apache , just starting up a training session in that system. I find myself scrolling YouTube videos in my phone

[CanadaOne]

11 minutes ago, 216th_Lusekofte said:

I find myself in a state of confusion. 

 

Welcome to my world. 

 

 

11 minutes ago, 216th_Lusekofte said:

 

I like time saving GB for its 20 minutes sessions and no brainier systems. 

 

That is an advantage to IL2 - some quick fun, in and out. Just like that brothel in Pa... okay, I'm going to stop saying that. 

 

 

 

11 minutes ago, 216th_Lusekofte said:

DCS demands just too much learning. 

 

 

That's one of the things I like. To a point. I like the challenge of doing something "complicated" and getting it right, but I have limits on just how complicated I want it to be. My brain is somewhere between small and medium, so that's what I have to work with. You mentioned the Apache being complicated and for me it's just over the edge of being fun so I don't spend much time with it. It's cool, but it's a pain in the ass as well.   

 

But the main part of my spending far more time in DCS remains the mission editor. 100% of my flights are through the mission editor. I've had DCS for years and never flown a campaign mission and haven't touched the quick mission probably in years. Until IL2 gets a proper in-game mission editor, it will remain a far distant second for my time and money. That after all these years and iterations of the game, I still can't, quick and easy, just put one tank there and one plane there and then fly, it's... I don't even know what it is. Reminds me of that joke about Newfoundland not having any more ice because the person with the recipe died.  

[Hanu]

16 hours ago, DD_fruitbat said:

 

Lol. if your reference point is il2, then to quote oleg from many yeara ago, i am laugh....

I have no clue which version of which il2 this famous Oleg quote refers to, but if your reference point is DCS then you must have loved pre-Kuban wobble-FM. In my memory they were quite close family.
 

[Lusekofte]

26 minutes ago, Hanu said:

I have no clue which version of which il2 this famous Oleg quote refers to, but if your reference point is DCS then you must have loved pre-Kuban wobble-FM. In my memory they were quite close family.
 

Well before this turn into a inter sim war. I like you to know that this issue is a individual one. Unlike gb the planes in Dcs are not based on same team. I am not saying you are wrong. But in my opinion bad fm is divided 50/50

[Hanu]

9 minutes ago, 216th_Lusekofte said:

Well before this turn into a inter sim war. I like you to know that this issue is a individual one.

Me neither want turn this into inter-sim war, that's why I'm telling how I feel it as it was asked by Mmaruda what do we think of DCS warbirds.
 

 

16 minutes ago, 216th_Lusekofte said:

Unlike gb the planes in Dcs are not based on same team.

This is very a good note BTW. But even if GB is done by the same team, some planes behave more believably than others.

[DD_fruitbat]

1 hour ago, Hanu said:

I have no clue which version of which il2 this famous Oleg quote refers to, but if your reference point is DCS then you must have loved pre-Kuban wobble-FM. In my memory they were quite close family.
 

 

looool.

 

That would be why I got warnings back then on this forum for making these videos, showing how jank the fm's were back then (eight years ago, how time flies..).....

 

 

 

If you 'feel' like that's the same as current DCS prop fm's, I truly am laugh.

 

Just for clarity, I do think the il2 fm's have come on a long long way since then, and before people get their knickers in a twist, I know that's not representative of how they currently are nor am I claiming it is.....

Edited November 3, 2022 by DD_fruitbat

[Boogdud]

9 minutes ago, DD_fruitbat said:

If you 'feel' like that's the same as DCS prop fm's, I truly am laugh

 

 

 

mmhmm

[Guest deleted@83466]

If I recall, when the Spitfire v came out in IL-2 Kuban, it marked the beginning of a new era for its FM’s, didn’t it?  It was the first plane in the series that seemed to fly “on rails,” at least to me, and then the rest followed suit as their FM’s were revised. The DCS warbirds still allow the pilot to actually “feel” the forces caused by a spinning prop to an extent that IL-2 does not.  Otherwise the same planes feel quite similar to each other in a lot of ways between the two sims (to me), as they should if their FM’s are generally accurate.

[Boogdud]

1 minute ago, SeaSerpent said:

Otherwise the same planes feel quite similar to each other in a lot of ways between the two sims (to me), as they should if their FM’s are generally accurate.

Yeah I feel kinda the same way. It's like most of the big characteristics are there in both sims for specific models (P51 wing-over, etc. etc.) it's just in IL2 it feels more subdued or 'easier' to fly I guess.  

I mean let's be honest, we're flying on a monitor/vr in the comfort of an office chair with no sensation of gravity or feedback from the controls. There's not a lot we can really do to fully simulate the forces of flight so we have to compromise. 

 

It's like when people start arguing over DCS having switches and all the minutia of the cockpit vs il2, like say the startup. "Oh, you only hit "e" to start up the engine vs going through the 1-2 minute procedure in DCS. Well, once you know the procedure forwards and backwards, is there really a difference in hitting "e" or clicking a bunch of switches mindlessly because you have it memorized? I can (and do) enjoy both though.

[Trooper117]

19 minutes ago, Boogdud said:

Well, once you know the procedure forwards and backwards, is there really a difference in hitting "e" or clicking a bunch of switches mindlessly because you have it memorized?

 

Of course there's a difference, are you mad???? 

Mindlessly clicking switches till my fingers bleed is far better than just pressing 'e'... 

[Gambit21]

I personally don’t mind my little computer guy flipping all the switches for me…the fact that their being flipped is enough for me. If I had a “let the little computer guy do the switch flipping” option in DCS I’d use it.