Am I the only one who's missing something?
-
You some kind of poofter? I hit ctrl+E. Works every time.
As for aerobrake on landing, the -1 specifically mentions that aerobraking significantly decreases at AoA less than 11. Light that green doughnut up on the indexer. If you are aero at 9 AoA you might as well put the wheels on the deck and use the brakes instead. It’s doing so little help at such a small angle. Once in the 3-wheel attitude open the speedbrakes (you don’t have to hold). When speed is insufficient to raise NLG, pull back all the way on the stick. This helps both 3-point attitude drag and makes the brakes work better. Use moderate or better braking when required. Long periods of light braking use produces much heat in the brakes so avoid. These are all in black in white in the manual we all have access to. No points are awarded for creative personalized alternatives.
The procedure that I still am not confident at is the minimum run landing technique (per -1). Using wheel brakes in the two point attitude takes skilled hands and mine are in the shop. I’m also interested in flying a 13 AOA approach. Typically I fly an 11 AOA approach.
-
@Faman:
Oh, I forgot to mention one thing: Y O U G U Y S S U C K !!!
1st and last time.
-
Soooo, what you’re telling me in this thread is that I’m not supposed to throw the parking break switch the moment I touch down until I’ve reached a comfortable taxiing speed?
-
Or open the canopy and use your hands and speedbrakes.
-
Soooo, what you’re telling me in this thread is that I’m not supposed to throw the parking break switch the moment I touch down until I’ve reached a comfortable taxiing speed?
For me, “parking brakes”…no, “wheel brakes” (below 70knts)…yes.
-
Or open the canopy and use your hands
You’re saying there’s another way to get airborne?
-
-
In short learn to fly the real f16 , apply the real procedures instead of bitching that the habits you took on an arcade game flight model were realistic !!
One question to you MavJP - are you a RL F16 pilot? And where do you draw conclusions about how this airplane should be flown from?
I can read everything but BMS FM unrealistic , I can’t LOL
Well in quite a lot instances BMS is still pretty far off, I’m sure you’ll agree on that I’m not talking about the aero braking solely but in general, no offence but 99% of the guys here are not RL F16 pilots, they are all ‘learning it through the internet and the community’, and your opinion would be worth more than theirs only if you were RL fighter jokey
-
@mookar:
One question to you MavJP - are you a RL F16 pilot? And where do you draw conclusions about how this airplane should be flown from?
Well in quite a lot instances BMS is still pretty far off, I’m sure you’ll agree on that I’m not talking about the aero braking solely but in general, no offence but 99% of the guys here are not RL F16 pilots, they are all ‘learning it through the internet and the community’, and your opinion would be worth more than theirs only if you were RL fighter jokey
He spent 6 years developping the flight model on his free time. He had a lot of feedback from RL pilots. So I’d say hell yes, he is qualified.
There might be some times (not many, I assure you) where BMS FM is irrealistic, but given the data available, this is the closest from the real thing you can get on a simulator.
One question for you in return : did you take the time to read the FM articles on the home page ? If not, do so, and then you can make some remarks about the FM.
-
@mookar:
One question to you MavJP - are you a RL F16 pilot? And where do you draw conclusions about how this airplane should be flown from?
Well in quite a lot instances BMS is still pretty far off, I’m sure you’ll agree on that I’m not talking about the aero braking solely but in general, no offence but 99% of the guys here are not RL F16 pilots, they are all ‘learning it through the internet and the community’, and your opinion would be worth more than theirs only if you were RL fighter jokey
Well, I can’t speak for where Mav-JP got his habits from, but I can say that in my case I draw conclusions about how the plane should be flown from the plane’s manuals. Haven’t run into a problem with it yet.
Care to offer one of those instances where BMS is pretty far off? The sooner you bring it to someone’s attention, the sooner it can be fixed… either the problem or your perception of a problem, as in the case of the OP.
EDIT: Oops, beaten to the punch.
-
One question for you in return : did you take the time to read the FM articles on the home page ? If not, do so, and then you can make some remarks about the FM.
I was not making any remarks about the flight model per se. As far as that goes I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of people ‘buy whatever the devs have to offer’, not everyone is a fighter pilot, that’s why the job of the dev is all the more important, he has to try and make it ‘as close as it gets’ Glad to hear that Mav was and is up for it But let’s be fair - BMS is the ONLY F16 COMBAT sim out there at the moment. I mean, what do you compare it to? I does not have a competition, it doesn’t have the stimulus to improve…Ever since update 1 no significant change has been introduced to the weapon systems (I might be wrong about this one, but at least none that I have noticed to qualify as a ‘big’ or ‘fundamental’) either munitions wise or sensors wise
-
Because that’s not a job for the update. Such major new system is for a new version like 4.33.
-
Care to offer one of those instances where BMS is pretty far off? The sooner you bring it to someone’s attention, the sooner it can be fixed
Oh wow, that’s gonna be a rather long list, quite honestly I don’t even care to post it But yeah, it’s been discussed before, it has been, for a long time. But it has to be said that BMS at this state is more than enjoyable, it is more than accurate enough for 99% of the people to work with. But do not claim it is a pro mil sim (software wise) which costs millions of bucks
-
@mookar:
I was not making any remarks about the flight model per se. As far as that goes I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of people ‘buy whatever the devs have to offer’, not everyone is a fighter pilot, that’s why the job of the dev is all the more important, he has to try and make it ‘as close as it gets’ Glad to hear that Mav was and is up for it But let’s be fair - BMS is the ONLY F16 COMBAT sim out there at the moment. I mean, what do you compare it to? I does not have a competition, it doesn’t have the stimulus to improve…Ever since update 1 no significant change has been introduced to the weapon systems (I might be wrong about this one, but at least none that I have noticed to qualify as a ‘big’ or ‘fundamental’) either munitions wise or sensors wise
Although I do not find the logic flawed, in principle, I must say that there are a lot of pilots, F-16 or else, who have flown BMS and are in awe of the fidelity of the flight model, avionics and more. Could it be better? Sure. Is it the best sim out there? You bet.
-
Is it the best sim out there? You bet.
Hate to nitpick but ‘The best F16 Sim’ - yes, it certainly is that
-
Im sorry, perhaps we should have been more clear.
@mookar:
I can read everything but BMS FM unrealistic , I can’t LOL
Well in quite a lot instances BMS is still pretty far off, I’m sure you’ll agree on that
Mav defends the Flight Model BMS uses, you describe it as being pretty far off.
@mookar:
I was not making any remarks about the flight model per se.
Now you have concluded that the flight model is not needing remarks, per se?
@mookar:
As far as that goes I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of people ‘buy whatever the devs have to offer’, not everyone is a fighter pilot, that’s why the job of the dev is all the more important, he has to try and make it ‘as close as it gets’ Glad to hear that Mav was and is up for it But let’s be fair - BMS is the ONLY F16 COMBAT sim out there at the moment. I mean, what do you compare it to? I does not have a competition, it doesn’t have the stimulus to improve…Ever since update 1 no significant change has been introduced to the weapon systems (I might be wrong about this one, but at least none that I have noticed to qualify as a ‘big’ or ‘fundamental’) either munitions wise or sensors wise
You’ve missed the point of the updates… they were not intended to offer fundamental changes. They were optional quality of life updates. You want big or fundamental changes, you want to wait for 4.33 - and you will not likely see anything big or fundamental being changed there, in the area of the F-16s flight model - which as Im sure you have noticed, is the topic of this thread.
You want to comment on the accuracy of the sim in areas other than its flight model, then fine - but a 10 month old necro’d thread about the flight model and aerobraking is not the place to do it.
EDIT: well, beaten again, this time by Amraam. Seems I need not be so quick to say what can be said by others…
-
Quote Originally Posted by mookar View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Mav-jp View Post
I can read everything but BMS FM unrealistic , I can’t LOL
Well in quite a lot instances BMS is still pretty far off, I’m sure you’ll agree on that Mav defends the Flight Model BMS uses, you describe it as being pretty far off.Yeah maybe a misunderstanding is in place - maybe I should’ve said ‘In a lot of instances OTHER THAN the FM…’ that would’ve made more sense in the context of the thread, btw is it really that old it popped up in the beginning of the ‘General’ Section that’s why looked at it, I must’ve missed it at the date of it’s creation
You’ve missed the point of the updates…
It appears that I’ve missed it totally So is it even ‘decent’ to ask when 4.33 is due? :D:D:D
-
Nobody know, even the dev team. When is ready.
-
@mookar:
But do not claim it is a pro mil sim (software wise) which costs millions of bucks
…
Yesterday, I have dined with a friend (RL) former Mirage2000’s pilot, now on RAFALE, and who are F4 BMS user … and discussed about the benefits of such public simulation.
He confirmed (what I already knew because I am in the same case) that BMS is far superior on some (many) aspects to most of RL pro sims which are not made to reproduce dynamic environment like we have in our “game”.
As an air defence pilot, flying BMS taught him to REALY pay attention, when engaged in air combat not to descent too much to avoid MANPADS and SHORAD exposure which were not really as demonstrative during pro sim trainings or in flight trainings than in BMS where the “bad” surprises can be everywhere.This is just on of the examples he gaves me.
In the pro sim, no COMAO with real human players (except the very last generation of RAFALE sim which can be linked in network, but only three cabins in the same room/bulding ATM.) no dynamic environment, no AWACS tactical comms … Sometimes even no working RWR or SAM except a scripted missile trail effect just to force the pilot to initiate an evasive but without a “real” missile guidance. Etc…
Pro sim are not necessarily made or contains all the BMS features. Simply because most of pro sim are not all made to train to TACTICS but mostly to procedures, failures, weapon delivery mechanisation etc…
Why those features are usually missing into pro sim? … Simply because each feature cost $$$. A LOT of $$$
Just an example: on my RL pro sim, we have asked TALES if it could be possible to add (place) customs object like tanks or vehicles on given coordinates to simulate a recce mission … Answer was:
_YES! No prob, they will just have to creat a basic model (three cubes with a tube for the canon) and thats it!
How much?
Cheap! … About 3000 - 5000€.
“Glup” … Can we do the model ourselves and integrate it in the sim world?
Sorry, no, this is not possible.
Ok … Thank you … Will do without._
…
Pro sims doesn’t have the same depth as BMS and are more “task specific” because of the cost of each asked features.
…
Back on the RAFALE pilot … This guy and some other RL pilots including Mirage2000, MirageF1 or even tactical airlift a/c’s pilots actually use BMS which can train and enhance the global SA that their pro sim can’t.
I imagine the benefits for the F-16 drivers.
Thoughts…
…
-
With BMS you have :
- the best F-16 FM for a personnal computer.
- not all, but most of the F-16 avionics.
- an IA sometimes stupid, but which, all in all, get around.
- a whole combat and flight environnment.
As DeeJay said, even military grades simulations often miss out on at least two of these aspects for a given AC.