Which F-16 does BMS simulate and how far?
-
They call it Frankenviper because apparently the F-16s in BMS are mixed together with different updates and all that stuff, is that correct?
From what I saw that was in reference to people wanting the DCS F-16 to be a mix of everything to everybody instead of the single version they want to do. Some might have took that as a swipe at BMS but really cant say and best if both sides just STFU.
-
This is an interesting read. this says more about human nature and consumerism than it does about any flight sim. The only criticism in my mind that truly holds up on falcon topically, are graphics, which is a note of vanity, again- vanity applied to a video game, or lack of it- it’s only when we are challenged we get philosophical or rhetorical, it is only when we need to overlook hypocrisy or dissonance we engage philosophy, or rhetoric, in law, in war, in life.
they deserved to die
he had it coming
etc etc etcback to the real criticisms. Anything this old, aged this well is not old, it’s vintage. But I am one man. The real criticism that sticks, in my view, is the amount of attention the viper has gotten in contrast to the enemy mud and air. I think the AI , the pilot skill and strategy of the AI both in 2d and 3d is lackadaisical. It could be that I’ve been flying it since the late 90’s and I am proficient, but it is not something I would point out earnestly, just something I hear and kinda went “yeah I can see that”
the f16 is like a super fighter when flown against the AI by a veteran bms flier. you’ll lob pinpoint accurate missiles with no failure rates at four flights which will always track perfectly from 35 miles out. That is not accurate, and it creates somewhat of a pocket.
This all stirred back into my recollection upon reading. I don’t feel that way, I think in the endgame you should be dominant, But facts commonly eclipse feelings.
-
That being said, individual systems do have rooms for improvements though, especially the A-G radar (on radar mapping mechanics) and HTS (if possible to be more realistic than our “arcade” one now; really looking forward to DCS’s implementation). Systems like Link-16 is still being modelled as well.
(… for both titles.)
-
This is an interesting read. this says more about human nature and consumerism than it does about any flight sim. The only criticism in my mind that truly holds up on falcon topically, are graphics, which is a note of vanity, again- vanity applied to a video game, or lack of it- it’s only when we are challenged we get philosophical or rhetorical, it is only when we need to overlook hypocrisy or dissonance we engage philosophy, or rhetoric, in law, in war, in life.
they deserved to die
he had it coming
etc etc etcback to the real criticisms. Anything this old, aged this well is not old, it’s vintage. But I am one man. The real criticism that sticks, in my view, is the amount of attention the viper has gotten in contrast to the enemy mud and air. I think the AI , the pilot skill and strategy of the AI both in 2d and 3d is lackadaisical. It could be that I’ve been flying it since the late 90’s and I am proficient, but it is not something I would point out earnestly, just something I hear and kinda went “yeah I can see that”
the f16 is like a super fighter when flown against the AI by a veteran bms flier. you’ll lob pinpoint accurate missiles with no failure rates at four flights which will always track perfectly from 35 miles out. That is not accurate, and it creates somewhat of a pocket.
This all stirred back into my recollection upon reading. I don’t feel that way, I think in the endgame you should be dominant, But facts commonly eclipse feelings.
you havent flown 4.34 much ….
-
Block 30/32 went trough a similar upgrade called UCP and this is modelled too in BMS, only thing missing is the center console which per latest UCP upgrade is now a big MFD.
Block 30 that we have in the game is nothing like it’s real-life contemporary counterpart. EGI, HUD details, RWR, not being able to carry weapons, lack of any HMS etc…
They took the Block 30 from 4.33, slapped yellow mfd colors and tried to make it modern. It doesn’t accurately represent any current Block 30 F-16’s in service.
If the intent was to keep the Block 30 in it’s original then thats fine, but I’m confused why they gave it yellow MFD’s
-
Block 30 that we have in the game is nothing like it’s real-life contemporary counterpart. EGI, HUD details, RWR, not being able to carry weapons, lack of any HMS etc…
They took the Block 30 from 4.33, slapped yellow mfd colors and tried to make it modern. It doesn’t accurately represent any current Block 30 F-16’s in service.
If the intent was to keep the Block 30 in it’s original then thats fine, but I’m confused why they gave it yellow MFD’s
My bad then, the yelow MFD is what hey have with the UCP update.
-
(… for both titles.)
I’m confused of what you mean. Would you like to clarify? Thanks!
-
I’m confused of what you mean. Would you like to clarify? Thanks!
I guess he is bored on the topic about fidelity of BMS concerning on different Viper variants. If anybody call Frankenviper I do not know what term should be used on DCS planes because airplanes from LOMAC era are - khöm - are totally mixed and generalized as the MiG-29 or the F-15C…
-
They took the Block 30 from 4.33, slapped yellow mfd colors and tried to make it modern. It doesn’t accurately represent any current Block 30 F-16’s in service.
If the intent was to keep the Block 30 in it’s original then thats fine, but I’m confused why they gave it yellow MFD’s
The current US ANG Block 30 plus is not achievable…… but the classic can be had again with a few clicks on the config editor.
-
I’m confused of what you mean. Would you like to clarify? Thanks!
Sure.
You will have to wait “a bit more” before seeing an enhanced A/G radar in BMS … and a multimode A/G radar in DCS for F-18 & F-16 + complete (really realistic) HTS pods on both sims.
-
If I’m not mistaken the 50 and 52 are the most accurate modeled.
The Belgians that use BMS and have 15MLU then the MLU must be also accurate enough. -
If I’m not mistaken the 50 and 52 are the most accurate modeled.
The Belgians that use BMS and have 15MLU then the MLU must be also accurate enough.CARAPACE could use some love though ….apart from that, this is my opinion, the Belgian MLU especially is one of the best modelled F-16 variant in BMS so far …. I even find it better modelled than the Block 50/52, which for me is a delight.
-
This is an interesting read. this says more about human nature and consumerism than it does about any flight sim. The only criticism in my mind that truly holds up on falcon topically, are graphics, which is a note of vanity, again- vanity applied to a video game, or lack of it- it’s only when we are challenged we get philosophical or rhetorical, it is only when we need to overlook hypocrisy or dissonance we engage philosophy, or rhetoric, in law, in war, in life.
they deserved to die
he had it coming
etc etc etcback to the real criticisms. Anything this old, aged this well is not old, it’s vintage. But I am one man. The real criticism that sticks, in my view, is the amount of attention the viper has gotten in contrast to the enemy mud and air. I think the AI , the pilot skill and strategy of the AI both in 2d and 3d is lackadaisical. It could be that I’ve been flying it since the late 90’s and I am proficient, but it is not something I would point out earnestly, just something I hear and kinda went “yeah I can see that”
the f16 is like a super fighter when flown against the AI by a veteran bms flier. you’ll lob pinpoint accurate missiles with no failure rates at four flights which will always track perfectly from 35 miles out. That is not accurate, and it creates somewhat of a pocket.
This all stirred back into my recollection upon reading. I don’t feel that way, I think in the endgame you should be dominant, But facts commonly eclipse feelings.
100% PK for multiple AIM120s at 35nm in BMS? OK then… unless of course your target is the ground.
Moving back on topic, the only way you can get BMS (or any sim) to model the F-16 perfectly is to do unique, individual aircraft by serial number. Don’t the DB where you select a flight of F-16C 50s; you’d have to select which of the 4000+ vipers out there that you want to model and do them precisely on an individual basis. Obviously this is not feasible and would be a huge amount of work, but it’s the only you could truly get away from ‘frankenviper’. Pick a squadron of blk30s and you can be fairly sure there will be tape or other differences between each jet. Even if you do go by serial number, and model every single Viper that way, when do you do it? Do you pick now, 2019? Or do you limit it to 2000 before block 60s and 70s were a thing?
BMS does a very good job as it is, modelling the range of Viper types. DCS might be more ‘accurate’ because it has elected to freeze in time; they have taken a 2000s era block 50 and modelled only that. It might be spot on in terms of modelling block 50 specific stuff, but that is all you’ll get to fly in DCS.
-
the only way you can get BMS (or any sim) to model the F-16 perfectly is to do unique, individual aircraft by serial number. Don’t the DB where you select a flight of F-16C 50s; you’d have to select which of the 4000+ vipers out there that you want to model and do them precisely on an individual basis. Obviously this is not feasible and would be a huge amount of work, but it’s the only you could truly get away from ‘frankenviper’.
I am sure Jp could (if is were still there) code a random slight % bias in engine min idle and Max Dry and MaxAB thrust and/or a very light bias in trims simulating each tail number air-frames deformations.
-
I am sure Jp could (if is were still there) code a random slight % bias in engine min idle and Max Dry and MaxAB thrust and/or a very light bias in trims simulating each tail number air-frames deformations.
I’m sure he could, but I think you and I might disappear afterwards ha.
My point was more that BMS does as best it can already at simulating different blocks IMO. In a perfect world you would be simulating each serial number, but how can you keep up to date with that? It just wouldn’t be doable I don’t think, but it would be cool going up in an MP flight and finding out the rookie in #4 has been landed with that serial, and has to fight quirks that everyone but he knows about
-
I’m sure he could, but I think you and I might disappear afterwards ha.
My point was more that BMS does as best it can already at simulating different blocks IMO. In a perfect world you would be simulating each serial number, but how can you keep up to date with that? It just wouldn’t be doable I don’t think, but it would be cool going up in an MP flight and finding out the rookie in #4 has been landed with that serial, and has to fight quirks that everyone but he knows about
Not even worth trying. I am fairly certain it has been stated by a senior member of ED something along the lines of they don’t have access to an individual aircraft or anything to that level, the time frame is currently circa 2007 USAF and ANG - e.g. the only ANG unit to have Block 50s didn’t get them till 2010. So based on that it should be closest to CCIP Phase 2 or Phase 3 that were started 2003/2005 as best I know.
-
I am sure Jp could (if is were still there) code a random slight % bias in engine min idle and Max Dry and MaxAB thrust and/or a very light bias in trims simulating each tail number air-frames deformations.
Should we start a crowd funding to buy JP a real F-16 ?
-
The current US ANG Block 30 plus is not achievable…… but the classic can be had again with a few clicks on the config editor.
Noted. I understand a lot of things just aren’t achievable (3rd MFD, Scorpion HMS etc) but what about some short gaps in between. Like having JHMCS stand-in perhaps with a different 3d model?
-
Noted. I understand a lot of things just aren’t achievable (3rd MFD, Scorpion HMS etc) but what about some short gaps in between. Like having JHMCS stand-in perhaps with a different 3d model?
Should be doable to add that without involving BMS if you want it - could have a quick play.
-
Noted. I understand a lot of things just aren’t achievable (3rd MFD, Scorpion HMS etc) but what about some short gaps in between. Like having JHMCS stand-in perhaps with a different 3d model?
Adding a third MFD would essentially only involve a 3D model and .dat file change. What you’d want to show on it (to be realistic) depends on what it does on the 16V, and would then most likely require code changes. Presumably one of the main features and benefits of the larger central MFD is a colour moving map.