Real Spanish Eurofighter solo display in BMS
-
Hi everyone,
If you want to compare real flying with BMS (maybe if you have a full functional pit with G-Seat and a nice 3D-Screnn setup), you still can’t shut down the engine on the taxi way
And by the way, nice flying in the video
Fly Safe,
Greets Tweety -
I think you dont get it. it is not a question of managing turbulences or whatever atmoshperic stuff…
Whatever the efficiency of the EF2000 FLCS to keep the AC as stable as possible…the Falcon4 OFM code is absolutly not capable of managing Yaw movements nor Inertia, nor ANY coupling . (there is simply no code support for real mechanics parameters) . I think you just dont realize how OFM is arcade.
Therefore OFM is extremly simple to fly and CAN NOT in any case be representative of any real Aircraft, this is why it is easy to be precise with it
Uffff
Im agree with you about FM and I agree with you that OFM is arcade. I know perfectly.
First, show me that you know real Eurofighter FLCS. I think you dont.
Second, Im not a engineer , just fighter pilot. I just compare some real maneuvers with maneuvers in BMS taking into acount speed, energy lost, roll rate, climb rate, aceleration, deceleration, stabilty in level flight, low speed flying, sustained turn, pitch rate, inverted flight, etc, etc. If I can do it like in real life and I can say that simulated typhoon is close to Real one in some aspects. Its arcade, yes. Its easy to fly OFM than AFM, yes. Thats the cuestion. Other things, I dont care.
Congratulations for your developmemts with AFM, is a good thing for our sim. I used to fly the viper here in BMS and I love the FM. In this topic I dont care all the things you are saying about zero inertia, zero couplings and so on because Im not here to analyse that. That is test pilots job. I just fly and maneuver the aircraft.I will fly as closer as possible the display with the limited viper and will show you how to fly with your nice AFM.
-
…
-
Weak? Lol Lol lol lol
-
…
-
I would love to make an AFM for ef2000
Provide me flcs logigram with performance chart and wind tunnel testing and i will do it
Btw i think the ef2000 demo is weak , like the rafale demo is weak….they dont show too much. I prefer demos like f16 or m2k or su27 where they push the machine
F22 demo is nicer
M2KC alpha display was indeed very impressive. Wing curvature during high G turns was almost scary for a delta wing…
But I disagree with you on the Rafale, while it packs less punch than the 2KC, it’s still one of the most powerful demo around. Canard/TVC Su-30 demos are technically impressive but rather slow.I can’t talk about the Spanish EF demo which I have never seen (both on video or real), but the British EF demo during AIR14 was indeed weaker (as a spectator, as JP said) than the RSD one, IMHO (you can easily find the RTS AIR14 videos on youtube).
-
I wonder… is the “weak” display’s purpose to limit the development of foreign intelligence on a given type? Sure the old MiG and Su displays were there to frighten the West, but with most of us be here IN the West, the idea might be to keep foreign intel guessing. This might be a good idea, as weak budgets and high prices keep the fleets of super-fighters rather small.
-
Not sure if you were sitting in the cockpit one would still say weak … there is a good reason why engineers and pilots can,t understand each other, one talks about flying and the other one flies, two different world but fully necessary to get the whole picture of flying.
Typical loool
-
Not sure if you were sitting in the cockpit one would still say weak … there is a good reason why engineers and pilots can,t understand each other, one talks about flying and the other one flies, two different world but fully necessary to get the whole picture of flying.
Typical loool
Weak related to another display… it is obviously not weak from a physiological point of view (had the opportunity to do some aerobatics during my glider license course and i would obviously not find this weak haha).
-
oh oki, thanks for the heads up Corsair
-
FM’s aside, that’s one complicated routine. Excellent flying. Nice work man!
-
A little COMAO flown by GV5Js in march 2012. We mixed OFM, AFM and also Carrier Ops. LoL
-
Just because an individual is an engineer certainly doesn’t mean they’re infallible. Also, from what I remember, before Mav-jp even came along, there was side force data (side force coefficients etc) that attempted to emulate what was missing in regards to lateral inertia etc.
This anal nitpicking is typical of engineers, most especially about our own work. Just because they’re highly developed in one particular area or airframe, doesn’t mean they’re an authority on any other airframes. I work with multiple teams of some of the worlds smartest, and innovative engineers the world has ever seen that help us put things in space just about every month; and I can tell you many of them couldn’t find their own ass with both hands. Genius is not without its shortcomings. I’ve had highly advanced technicians, and/or end users point out some of the most complicated, or simplistic errors in aerospace fields for years and years, and that’s never going to change.
-
…
-
Less study physics laws and more real flying. Yoy are saying I’m lying. Stop saying a lot of things about my thoughts about OFM comparing with Eurofigher.
I say again: Eurofighter = unknown world for you man.
-
Less study physics laws and more real flying mav.
It is finally better to stay where i was during 6 years and where i belong
bye bye BMS public forum you won’t be missed
-
I don’t know how realistic the F16 acts in BMS but i have a few guidelines.
One is how enhanced the cockpit looks compared to OF which means to me at least "Hey, here’s someone who cared for how it feels and looks, i don’t think someone like this would programm the most important part namely Flight Model half-heartedly.
This thing “feels” right, i mean when i look at DCS A10C it’s not far off from the experience both sim give you.Just my two cents to appreciate this marvellous piece of work.
-
This anal nitpicking is typical of engineers, most especially about our own work.
Less study physics laws and more real flying.
I say again: Eurofighter = unknown world for you man.….
Without this “anal nitpiking” you would not have the Advanced flight model in BMS, which is pretty much the closest you can get to a real aircraft in a PC simulation with public data.
Without engineers and studying physics law the Eurofighter would not even exist.
Most of your actual flying is done by a computer in the Eurofighter, I hope you know that at least. As in a F-16, or F-18, or Rafale, or anything Fly By Wire, BTW. So you can fly these jets because an engineer designed laws and control systems for you beforehand.
Now maybe the Eurofighter is more stable than the F-16 because of a better FLCS. Maybe the OFM is not so bad for emulating flying an Eurofighter.
But what is sure is that the OFM is a really poor simulation of flying overall, because a lot of effects are not included.To have a good qualty simulation of any jet, you need good aero data AND the Control laws of its FLCS. Then - and only then - you can have good results. With the AFM, for the same conditions and the same pilot input, the real F-16 and the jet in BMS will react exactly the same, I hope you know that. A lot of pilots have confirmed this - there are even
You might be a pilot, man, but I would tell you the same as the average noob : go read these articles. Then you will see the difference between AFM and OFM.
-
So you are the boss? Lol
-
Are you gona show me something l3ctusader?