F-18 can't cacht the cats
-
Hmm… from what you are saying it looks like you haven’t even tried F/A-18C.
You are 100% correct…and I don’t intend to until/unless it becomes as good/hi-fidelity as the BMS Viper. For reasons that fall outside of BMS.
-
Unless NASA have published wind tunnel data for it a la TP 1538, I wouldnt hold my breath.
In fact even then I think I wouldnt hold my breath, but I might at least acknowledge it as a future possibility. Like how one day people might be able to walk on mars without pressure suits. No guarantee Ill live to see it, but it might happen.
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
-
Actually, it would take more than that. A lot more. For any modern fly by wire jet…control theory and application have advanced considerably since the design of the F-16, and with modern computer modelling wind tunnels don’t really have much to do with how the surfaces are moved to put he jet where it needs to be in the sky. And even that depends on the control approach taken by the designer - there are many. Very many. Which allow the most modern jets to do some really crazy things…but as far as a C flight model goes, the single best one out there in a desktop sim is still the old Hornet 3.0 one.
I’d settle for decent hifi avionics and systems models - like we have with the BMS Viper…but I’m not holding out much hope for that either. The BMS Viper is simply THE best there is that is available for us.
-
A computer modelled wind tunnel is still a wind tunnel. Still expensive to build too, by the amount of cycles you need.
If the BMS team think it better to improve the viper avionics instead of adding hornet stuff, I for one would be happy with that. Theres still lots of room for improvement as a cockpit simulator.
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
-
Actually, it would take more than that. A lot more. For any modern fly by wire jet…control theory and application have advanced considerably since the design of the F-16, and with modern computer modelling wind tunnels don’t really have much to do with how the surfaces are moved to put he jet where it needs to be in the sky. And even that depends on the control approach taken by the designer - there are many. Very many. Which allow the most modern jets to do some really crazy things…but as far as a C flight model goes, the single best one out there in a desktop sim is still the old Hornet 3.0 one.
I’d settle for decent hifi avionics and systems models - like we have with the BMS Viper…but I’m not holding out much hope for that either. The BMS Viper is simply THE best there is that is available for us.
the f18 flcs while a little more complex than the f16 is using same principles and is not very different.
as far as fm is concerned bms 4.33 U1 is lihgtyears more advanced than hornet 3.0.
next iteration will be probably the most accurate f18 flcs ever created for a public sim.
as far as avionics and systems are concerned… this is a long road indeed
-
the f18 flcs while a little more complex than the f16 is using same principles and is not very different.
as far as fm is concerned bms 4.33 U1 is lihgtyears more advanced than hornet 3.0.
next iteration will be probably the most accurate f18 flcs ever created for a public sim.
as far as avionics and systems are concerned… this is a long road indeed
You make the assumption that the F/A-18 FLCS uses the same principles/approach as the F-16…it does not, and that’s one of the problems/challenges in developing a decent flight model for it.
-
This post is deleted! -
You make the assumption that the F/A-18 FLCS uses the same principles/approach as the F-16…it does not, and that’s one of the problems/challenges in developing a decent flight model for it.
okay are you aware that i have the real flcs f18 logical diagramm under the eye when i am writing this post ? i am not making assumptions, i just read it.
you misunderstand me.
F16 is a Glimiter with a G/AOA limitzr in cruise gain and a pitch rate blended aoa in LG gain.
indee F18 is 100% different since there is no concept of cruise / LG gain but everything based on TEF switch.
thz flcs is a complex Glimiter coupled with a AOA limiter at the higher aoa range. In Tef half or full this is a pure AOA command flcs with aoa trim. (i explain it in a simple way i know but average reader should be able to follow)
it is also quite different behavior for roll control and yaw control
BUT, what i am saying is that the basic bricks of the flcs are similar, the way those bricks are imbricated make the flcs a complete different beast.
for instance both flcs have aoa and accel feedback branches like any flcs in the world.
so what i was saying is that i have been able to rewrite the flcs to match the f18.
the difference is that in BMS the f16 flcs is 100% the real one, the f18 is a “simplified” model since i considered the very very fzw people would see the différence between a simplified (but still complex believe me lol) and the real.
now in 4.33 the flcs of the f18 is quite accurate in TEF auto… far more accurate than any other f18 sim out there.the TEF half /full flcs is not implemented in 4.33 (this is still the f16 pitch rate blended aoa which is plain wrong), but trust me it will come ;), with autothotle, aoa trim, Take off trim, toe in toe out, etc etc etc…
please trust BMS because i find your lack of faith disturbing
-
You make the assumption that the F/A-18 FLCS uses the same principles/approach as the F-16…it does not, and that’s one of the problems/challenges in developing a decent flight model for it.
Please stop disturbing these guys who give the best of themselves to provide us this beautiful sim.
We are nobody to judge them in that way. Let’s them to work, if you are not happy with such FM on the hornet try to find something better, what I am sure it is impossible.
My confidence in guys like Mav-jp is abosulte, it is demonstrated during long time ago, if Mav-jp says it flies like that, then it is how it flies…that’s all.
Thanks Mav-jp keep pushing!!! Escuadron111 is supporting you
-
All bow to the flight model guru. :bowd:
-
okay are you aware that i have the real flcs f18 logical diagramm under the eye when i am writing this post ? i am not making assumptions, i just read it.
you misunderstand me.
F16 is a Glimiter with a G/AOA limitzr in cruise gain and a pitch rate blended aoa in LG gain.
indee F18 is 100% different since there is no concept of cruise / LG gain but everything based on TEF switch.
thz flcs is a complex Glimiter coupled with a AOA limiter at the higher aoa range. In Tef half or full this is a pure AOA command flcs with aoa trim. (i explain it in a simple way i know but average reader should be able to follow)
it is also quite different behavior for roll control and yaw control
BUT, what i am saying is that the basic bricks of the flcs are similar, the way those bricks are imbricated make the flcs a complete different beast.
for instance both flcs have aoa and accel feedback branches like any flcs in the world.
so what i was saying is that i have been able to rewrite the flcs to match the f18.
the difference is that in BMS the f16 flcs is 100% the real one, the f18 is a “simplified” model since i considered the very very fzw people would see the différence between a simplified (but still complex believe me lol) and the real.
now in 4.33 the flcs of the f18 is quite accurate in TEF auto… far more accurate than any other f18 sim out there.the TEF half /full flcs is not implemented in 4.33 (this is still the f16 pitch rate blended aoa which is plain wrong), but trust me it will come ;), with autothotle, aoa trim, Take off trim, toe in toe out, etc etc etc…
please trust BMS because i find your lack of faith disturbing
That’s not really correct either for the Hornet…but that’s about all I can say about it. And I’m not going on “faith”…
-
That’s not really correct either for the Hornet…but that’s about all I can say about it. And I’m not going on “faith”…
Can you inform us what exactly you are ‘going on’ then?
Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
-
That’s not really correct either for the Hornet…but that’s about all I can say about it. And I’m not going on “faith”…
do you read what i write ?
no its not fully correct since the fulls flcs is very complex and if i write all systems and gains laws etx, noeone would understand.
the main idea is there.
aditionnaly i wrote that i have NOT coded the 100% real f18 flcs like the f16…am i clear ?
and your mystic attitude about the f18 is ridiculous. real flcs logical diagram can be found on the web so there is nothing secret about it.
let me come back home and i will search again the link to download the logical diagram. Then you will argue with me what is correct or incorrect.
too easy to say : this is plain wrong but sorry i cant tell about it… ROFLMAO… i am a too old monkey here to fall in this baby’s trap
i am talking f18C since i have no idea about the SuperHornet FLcS
now just tell me what other sim available publically has a better FLCS in Tef auto…? and still i al saying 4.33 U1 does not include half of the features…