Am I the only one who's missing something?
-
@mookar:
But do not claim it is a pro mil sim (software wise) which costs millions of bucks
ā¦
Yesterday, I have dined with a friend (RL) former Mirage2000ās pilot, now on RAFALE, and who are F4 BMS user ā¦ 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 āgameā.
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 ābadā 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 ā¦ 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 ārealā missile guidance. Etcā¦
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 etcā¦
Why those features are usually missing into pro sim? ā¦ 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 ā¦ 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! ā¦ About 3000 - 5000ā¬.
āGlupā ā¦ Can we do the model ourselves and integrate it in the sim world?
Sorry, no, this is not possible.
Ok ā¦ Thank you ā¦ Will do without._
ā¦
Pro sims doesnāt have the same depth as BMS and are more ātask specificā because of the cost of each asked features.
ā¦
Back on the RAFALE pilot ā¦ This guy and some other RL pilots including Mirage2000, MirageF1 or even tactical airlift a/cās pilots actually use BMS which can train and enhance the global SA that their pro sim canāt.
I imagine the benefits for the F-16 drivers.
Thoughtsā¦
ā¦
-
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.
-
Very Nice thoughts Dee-jay, thanks. You and anyone who are in position to do it, should report more often such conversations.
Windblow -
BMS is far superior to most of RL pro simā¦
Wow what pro sims are you talking about, they sound ancient There are sims (the actual cockpit of a specific type of aircraft, a main tool during flight training, before you even touch the aircraft youāll be flying in service) that, as you said, are geared towards the strictly procedural manner of things, reacting to failures and other important stuff. There are also sim that simulate the exact behavior of an airplane and implement it to a virtual environment. Would that virtual environment contain interaction with other airplanes (shooting at them or cooperating with them), evading or avoiding SAMs, cooperating with ground personal on various mission types, is entirely up to the operator who creates the scenario. So far Iāve heard of such sims as an analysis tool, a āwhat ifā testing instrument, people and whole departments in the security authority sector are paid hundreds of millions to develop and maintain those Do not forget that the āimplementationā of a new design of, an aircraft e.g., goes through those āscenariosā to check its capability before prod. I doubt that even the wealthiest government would like spend hundreds of millions on a ānon plausible and perspective designā
I doubt it would be such grief to make those software platforms āinteractiveā, with modern graphics and compatible with peripheral I/O devices. After all they have much more accurate data on different aspects of different munitions and equipment Heck, the monitoring and scoring equipment during Red Flag was based of something similar (that ātrackedā missile launches and evasion of the participants). -
So far you say āIāve heard ofā āTo many to nameā and āI donāt know the nameā to support your theories.
Meanwhile Dee-Jay has referenced talking to an actual pilot, to say nothing of his accomplished work on BMS.
Do you have any actual evidence? Because your entire argument here is nothing more then unsubstantiated claims.
If thatās your argument, then Iām actually a Billionaire son of Tony Stark, and you canāt prove otherwise because Iāve heard itās true, my sources are to many to list, and I canāt tell you the name of anyone who can corroborate my story.
-
@mookar:
Wow what pro sims are you talking about, they sound ancientā¦
Usualy, flight sims are developed in the same time than the aircraft itself ā¦ Yes, they have been almost all retrofited, but again, it HIGHLY depends on avaibable budget. I do not remeber how much cost the A400Mās simulator (mostly based on the A380ās sim) but it is huge. And like any other aircrafts capabilities, features depends on military request vs allowed $Ā£ā¬
ā¦
ATM, I have ever seen a pro sim able to generate an ATO automaticaly.
-
So far you say āIāve heard ofāā¦
Well, what do you expect me to say, Iām not an employee in such a sector nor am I an expert on the subject. I read about this stuff as have you perhaps, so chill out dude, no reason to be an a^%
ā¦āTo many to nameāā¦
I was referring to the list of positive changes that should be made to BMS in order to improve it and this has been discussed before so you could reference it in other dedicated threads
ā¦āI donāt know the nameāā¦
You could reference it through a search in documents section in the web. Again- whatever is declass should come out at 'ya. A computer game forum is not the most suitable place to chit chat about such stuff.
Meanwhile Dee-Jay has referenced talking to an actual pilot
With all my respect for DeeJay, for the sake of argument - how do I know that the conversation heās talking about actually took place :Dā¦ Anyway, enough b&^%sh(*&^%g around
Do you have any actual evidence?
What do you fancy I am - a detective, a lawyer, a prosecutor in court :D:D:D Most of the guys here know what Iām talking about Itās a hobby thing, people read on it if they like and collaborate with the community.
If thatās your argument, then Iām actually a Billionaire son of Tony Stark, and you canāt prove otherwise because Iāve heard itās true, my sources are to many to list, and I canāt tell you the name of anyone who can corroborate my story.
You seem to be very keen on this debate thing, write a few line PM and weāll argue if you want but do not bother people that donāt care in the forum of a community among which Iāve met very good follows and of which I proudly feel as a part
-
That said, of course BMS will NEVER replace a pro sim. But thinking that this sim is just a simple video game is just wrong
-
remember -
If you meet a viper pilot on an airshow and he knows BMS and is impressed by this sim then this means a lot IMO.
-
I rather think this is pretty damn off topic.
Pie, anyone?
-
If you meet a viper pilot on an airshow and he knows BMS and is impressed by this sim then this means a lot IMO.
Agree, thatās one of the most definitive forms of recognition.
-
Well I am not a real pilot but with bms I feel I could fly the actual jet [emoji4]
-
@mookar:
With all my respect for DeeJay, for the sake of argument - how do I know that the conversation heās talking about actually took place :Dā¦ Anyway, enough b&^%sh(*&^%g around
Sure.
that some RL pilots could actually like/use BMS But I canāt give you one since I didnāt recorded the conversation as I didnāt expected to talk about it today. -
@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, Iām sure youāll agree on that Iām 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 ālearning it through the internet and the communityā, and your opinion would be worth more than theirs only if you were RL fighter jokey
Lol
I would be interested to know.where you think the fm is pretty far off.
Please elaborate because my popcorn is ready
I think you dont even realize how close it is actually
Just ask real pilots you will see.:)
About how i knownhow the plane should be flown ? Just read the real f16 manuals , no big deal.
To me.the aera that.needs improvment is the TEF CL/CD simply because NASA tp1538 did not included them in the wind tunnel testing
This leads to incorrect weight / speed approach at landings ā¦.generally around 10 to 15% off in speed
Much improved in next release where aditionnal TEF CL/CD vs AOA is implemented
-
Sure. There is no proves that some RL pilots could actually like/use BMS But I canāt give you one since I didnāt recorded the conversation as I didnāt expected to talk about it today.
Yeah, itās OK, buddy, I just said it for the sake of argument with ASharp, itās nothing personal
I would be interested to know.where you think the fm is pretty far off.
I already elaborated on that - I was not referring the FM, but to things other than it.
This leads to incorrect weight / speed approach at landings ā¦.generally around 10 to 15% off in speed
Yeah, I suspect that the approach speeds are off a tad bit
Wow, overall you guys are very toutchy on the FM topic considering that I havenāt criticised it at all
How do you like your popcorn - butter, saltā¦? -
Pie, anyone?
ok, can we just eat that pie now? could i have that small piece over there, please.
coffee anyone?
-
ok, can we just eat that pie now? could i have that small piece over there, please.
coffee anyone?
Waiting for 4.33 first[emoji3]
-
It was a couple of pages ago in this topic, but a 5% slope doesnāt mean itās 5% all the way (which canāt btw, max is 2%, at least for civil aviation). What it refers to is the difference in altitude between runway thresholds. You could have a constant slope runway with a 2% threshold, and another runway with a lump on the middle of it and it would still be a 2% slope. All that matters is the altitude difference between the thresholds.
I thought BMS was all flat though
-
ā¦a 5% slope doesnāt mean itās 5% all the way (which canāt btw, max is 2%, at least for civil aviation).
Are you talking about the glide slope, if yes then itās 3.00% almost exclusively for civi approaches