Realiable sources about BMS realism
-
This is indeed not an F-16 but an Alpha Jet …
So that video lends absolutely no credibility to BMS’ implementation of the F-16
Hehehe… just messing with you there. What I’m curious about is WHY the OP’s friends are asking… will BMS suddenly be more interesting to them?
-
What I want is a relliable source or a way for the end user to testify all those claims.
For your engineer friend (the airliner pilot won’t probably understand a single line or page! ) the NASA TP1538 used by MavJp to create BMS’s FM. : https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19800005879.pdf
… IMHO you won’t find any other better “proves”.
-
here’s my limited feedback:
My friend has a F-16 simulator, which he takes to air shows, for the public to try on for size.
He runs BMS 4.33.1Last year at a local air show, the F-16 demo team was there and put on an amazing demonstration.
Later on the two pilots stopped by the booth and took the sim for a spin.Of course they had many minor comments about features that were not implemented or partially implemented but,
with regards to the flight model and handling characteristics of the sim, they were impressed on how closely it mimicked the real thing.Of course I’m just a guy on the internet saying this so ….
-
This guy hasn’t realised yet that this is a religion community forum.
sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
-
VaPal, good luck on your quest to find the answer for your friend. A lot of pilots may view flight sims this way, but this sim in particular is a far cut above most when it comes to systems and flight modeling. It is quite good. There are a number of developer blogs on the main page that describe in detail the high fidelity of this particular flight sim and I can offer you the token, “I know a couple Viper pilots who say it is so too.” But if you’re really interested in learning some of the stuff under the hood of BMS check out these sections:
Flight Model - great detail of the AFM and a video showcasing the many features available. There is about 7 articles in that blog alone with tons of detail from how the AFM itself works to aeroelastic flutter experienced at certain gross weights and wing loading.
Avionics - Blurb about the HMCS.
Environment - Many good articles about real to life features of the sim.
Graphics - Articles about particle system, ect.
Granted, these are from the 4.32 days so we have even more features than today. But this sim has truly no match when it comes to fidelity of flight, checklists, ect in addition to a fairly realistic war simulation with the dynamic campaign. It would be nice if we had some developers update those relevant sections, but as this sim becomes more complex it becomes harder to find the free time on all sides.
Hope you can find some useful info within those blogs about this wonderful sim and hobby!
Thanks! I’ll look into these!!
Same for your friend airliner pilot … can he prove that he is still a “pilot” lol
This is indeed not an F-16 but an Alpha Jet …
Hahaha he is, I flown with him and we are scheduling another flight as soon as he’s available! =P
For your engineer friend (the airliner pilot won’t probably understand a single line or page! ) the NASA TP1538 used by MavJp to create BMS’s FM. : https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19800005879.pdf
… IMHO you won’t find any other better “proves”.
Thanks a lot, I’ll also give a look into this!! I don’t as much aerodynamics knowledge, but you know…
here’s my limited feedback:
My friend has a F-16 simulator, which he takes to air shows, for the public to try on for size.
He runs BMS 4.33.1Last year at a local air show, the F-16 demo team was there and put on an amazing demonstration.
Later on the two pilots stopped by the booth and took the sim for a spin.Of course they had many minor comments about features that were not implemented or partially implemented but,
with regards to the flight model and handling characteristics of the sim, they were impressed on how closely it mimicked the real thing.Of course I’m just a guy on the internet saying this so ….
That’s very cool! I believe most of you guys, but I know that there are a lot o hoaxes out there and my concern comes from people that just said what others said, not from sources of history like you and your friend. =D
-
Jeesh. I wish I could comment….
-
BMS is realistic
source: my dad works for nintendo
-
So, I know that the Falcon BMS has and spot on flight model, avionics and everything, from everything that I’ve read out there.
But everytime is the same old claims:
“I’ve talked to real pilots”
“Only what’s classified that is not modeled, everything else is spot on”
“It handles and feels just like the real viper”
“Developter had access to the real FLCS code, and the implementation is almost a copy”
“It’s USAF certified”
…I’m not saying those are false, but recently two friends of mine (one is an airliner pilot, the other is an aeronautical engineer) got me cornered with “what’s the source for all of this, show me”. And I found nothing, no real pilot saying, no developer claim, only ordinary people saying such things. And even if I found a F-16 pilot on a forum, I don’t want to go saying “prove me your are a real F-16 pilot so I can believe you”.
What I want is a relliable source or a way for the end user to testify all those claims.
Just to make things clear, I not doubting the capacity of BMS, how realistic it is, or anything. I know it is one of the best, to not the THE best, fighter simulator outside the military world. I just want to separate the truth from the hoax (that I sure exists in some way) so when I talking to people involve in aviation (military or civil) I don’t give wrong info about BMS nor look stupidy.
Thanks!
You should really be asking two questions -
Q1: how much of BMS is modeled realistically? A1: quite a bit.
Q2: how many people actually use BMS realistically? A2: Quite a few…but many more do not.
Mileage can/may/and does vary wrt A2. Widely.
-
-
Q2: how many people actually use BMS realistically? A2: Quite a few…but many more do not.
Well, I always thought that for Falcon BMS this would be the opposite, given the amount of virtual squadrons out there.
-
But can you prove it……
That I’m a guy??
Didn’t you get the photos I sent you?
That wasn’t a python I was holding. Haha. -
here’s my limited feedback:
My friend has a F-16 simulator, which he takes to air shows, for the public to try on for size.
He runs BMS 4.33.1OMG. I’d want my 10 bucks back. haha.
-
-
This guy hasn’t realised yet that this is a religion community forum.
Word
-
Performance charts are available here :
-
For your engineer friend (the airliner pilot won’t probably understand a single line or page! ) the NASA TP1538 used by MavJp to create BMS’s FM. : https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19800005879.pdf
… IMHO you won’t find any other better “proves”.
As explained in one of my article about FM , this is the source of the NASA flcs that I used first (( as explained the NASA one is 99% identical to the real except it does not include LG gains and wow gains) and that is used for mirage 2k for instance) , but then after I found the real flcs logic diagram so I updated it
-
Performance charts are available here :
Bloody Hell !!! are there really people in THIS planet who understand all this stuff ???
-
Bloody Hell !!! are there really people in THIS planet who understand all this stuff ???
Well this one is pretty basics because this is supposed to be read by pilots (end user style)
NASA tp1538 is more interesting , more engineering orientated
The documents I used for LCO simulation are even more interesting
Dowell, E. H., Thomas, J. P., Hall, K. C., and Denegri, C. M., Jr., “Theoretical Predictions of F-16 Fighter Limit Cycle Oscillations for Flight Flutter Testing,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 46, No. 5, 2009, pp. 1667-1672.
-
What I want is a relliable source or a way for the end user to testify all those claims.
Why don’t you turn this around? If your airline pilot friend and aeronautical engineer friend are so knowledgeable, let them proof BMS wrong.
You don’t have to waste your precious time defending BMS. You know it’s as accurate as accurate can be on a desktop PC. You have nothing to prove. If someone doubts BMS, let them provide evidence as to where BMS isn’t accurate.
And while they are trying to figure that out, you just get airborne and waste some bandits. -
Well this one is pretty basics because this is supposed to be read by pilots (end user style)
NASA tp1538 is more interesting , more engineering orientated
The documents I used for LCO simulation are even more interesting
Dowell, E. H., Thomas, J. P., Hall, K. C., and Denegri, C. M., Jr., “Theoretical Predictions of F-16 Fighter Limit Cycle Oscillations for Flight Flutter Testing,” Journal of Aircraft, Vol. 46, No. 5, 2009, pp. 1667-1672.
Usual abstract/first page teaser, right? Hesitating to get frustratingly hooked by the first page…