I just realized that they used this plane as a thumbnail for the 1.11 update.
The cockpit detail is indeed amazing, it may not super detailed but the feel man... , it feel legit.
@Rakoval500k
lol
That comment was not rude by any mean, I can assure you, it is just a discussion of some data which I really appreciate.
And this clarify a lot about the testing you've been doing lately which is nice.
The last part about FT code is just fyi because it is what usually happen when using code for difference plane, it might work or might not depend on the plane's performance.
@Rakoval500k
I don't think afterburner was allowed in supercruise but if you really means 1700km/h TAS at 14km then yes, it is reasonable speed but I think it is far from ideal since the air is so thin at 14km, it's max speed can be achieved at lower altitude where engines gain more power at the cost of little gain in drag. (of course not at sea level)
And I hope you do modify the code because the code is made for that Wyvern so they will act weird if the code is in the plane that is too difference in performance.
@Rakoval500k
I haven't.
In fact it can supercruise at Mach 1.8 at altitude of 10km.
Since a lot of Raptor's capability are classified so I just assume that 10km is where it can do Mach 1.8 supercruise.
So how do you know that the Raptor optimum supercruise altitude is 13km, the Mach 1.8 certainty came from optimum altitude where the Raptor perform best in supercruising which I can't get my hand on since it is probably classified.
Also, I can just put more inlet on my engine to combat the loss of power at high altitude and it's much easier than FT and the loss of power will be more natural as well. (unless you use a very complex FT code)
I really like the details of the cockpit especially the girl picture I assume named Samantha.
A quick suggestion though, you should connect the yellow reticle to the g-simulated camera instead of the sight itself so it'll simulate how those sight work irl a lot better.
@Sergio666
Np!
By the way, don't overwhelm yourself with all the PSM stuff at once lol, just deal with one small subject at a time and artificial stability is a good start.
@Chancey21
Yeah.. the paint it the hard part, it not super shiny but not completely matt and for me matt color in SP just look like plastic.
Or maybe I've made it too shiny lol.
AG1 doesn't full disable automatic AoA Correction
Is it a bug in my code or it is just because the plane natural stability so it'll correct for AoA by itself.
I think THIS will do, it show how to use super basic FT code to keep unstable plane flying.
You can find more tutorial like this in my videos.
Also, PID is just one of many functions used to control stuff, more fancy and more capable if tuned right, I recommend to play around with FT parameters first before moving on to PID because PID you need to get every parameters right before handing all of that to PID to handle.
@BBCP117 @rexzion
It's not too difficult with practice I think.
I just recently discovered that lower the stick sensitivity helps a lot, like 70% easier, I tried that on stock tutorial plane and it works for me.
But the biggest problem is judging the depth from a 2D screen lol.
@Nerfaddict
Come to think of it, I might actually can make auto refueling as well because it is just auto aiming plane (which I've made one) with a few extra steps. (Just shift the point of aim and you get an auto formation flying)
@BBCP117
I really mean Hornet irl.
Also I just tried tone my stick sensitivity way down and it works far smoother than this video, even with un-assisted drogue.
My biggest issue with refueling is I sometimes over-correct for drift.
@RC1138Boss
Nah.
You probably make it better than me.
In the refueling vid, I just stuck slim fuselage pieces together to make a simple probe just to test the refueling and it looks terrible lol.
@BBCP117
lol.
Now I want to know how difficult it is in dcs.
I saw a vid of a Hornet stay connected to the drogue for 8 mins, I wonder how he fly so smooth.
@BBCP117
I think DCS plane and it's flight control system is more sophisticated than SP.
If you want to feel like SP in DCS, do aerial refueling using warbirds.
@ReturnOfJeffChandler
I think fixed probe will be dangerous because when you connected you'll have no room to move around without breaking it, even boom refueling system is not rigid, the boom can collapse and extend and also move with the aircraft.
@AWESOMENESS360
Now I want to see if the dev will add boom refueling to SP, I think it's way easier for the pilot, the pilot just need to fly formation to the tanker and boom operator will do the rest.
@OtakuNekoToT
No need for the link, it was built in the beta.
You just need to spawn it, there is a dedicated button to spawn the tanker in the ai spawn menu.
Just testing something new in the 1.11 Beta.
Aerial refueling to be exact.
This is another level of difficulty, I was holding my breath the whole time.
@Airw0lfAO1
Easy, yaw at low speed.
@Meyerbb
I can't.
I've never tune SP prop before and I know little to none about it.
@Dracul0Anderson
+1Yes, it take throttle into the calculation.
@Dracul0Anderson
+1Blinking lights.
I just realized that they used this plane as a thumbnail for the 1.11 update.
+7The cockpit detail is indeed amazing, it may not super detailed but the feel man... , it feel legit.
Damage model looks amazing.
+8That's something we don't see every day.
@Shootlegger
Just take apart my older plane.
This is just too complicate to be a starter.
@Rakoval500k
Yes, I do.
You tagged me while I'm gone so I didn't see it until now.
@IceCraftGaming
+1lol
Good luck.
@Rakoval500k
lol
That comment was not rude by any mean, I can assure you, it is just a discussion of some data which I really appreciate.
And this clarify a lot about the testing you've been doing lately which is nice.
The last part about FT code is just fyi because it is what usually happen when using code for difference plane, it might work or might not depend on the plane's performance.
@Rakoval500k
I don't think afterburner was allowed in supercruise but if you really means 1700km/h TAS at 14km then yes, it is reasonable speed but I think it is far from ideal since the air is so thin at 14km, it's max speed can be achieved at lower altitude where engines gain more power at the cost of little gain in drag. (of course not at sea level)
And I hope you do modify the code because the code is made for that Wyvern so they will act weird if the code is in the plane that is too difference in performance.
@Rakoval500k
I haven't.
In fact it can supercruise at Mach 1.8 at altitude of 10km.
Since a lot of Raptor's capability are classified so I just assume that 10km is where it can do Mach 1.8 supercruise.
So how do you know that the Raptor optimum supercruise altitude is 13km, the Mach 1.8 certainty came from optimum altitude where the Raptor perform best in supercruising which I can't get my hand on since it is probably classified.
Also, I can just put more inlet on my engine to combat the loss of power at high altitude and it's much easier than FT and the loss of power will be more natural as well. (unless you use a very complex FT code)
@Charris969
You need to tune gyros.
As of now it doing the opposite of stability.
Gyros is too powerful I think, I removed all of them and its not exploding anymore.
I really like the details of the cockpit especially the girl picture I assume named Samantha.
+4A quick suggestion though, you should connect the yellow reticle to the g-simulated camera instead of the sight itself so it'll simulate how those sight work irl a lot better.
@Sergio666
+1Np!
By the way, don't overwhelm yourself with all the PSM stuff at once lol, just deal with one small subject at a time and artificial stability is a good start.
@FlyingFish1
lol
That's just purely my educated guess about the engine.
One day.
@Chancey21
Yeah.. the paint it the hard part, it not super shiny but not completely matt and for me matt color in SP just look like plastic.
Or maybe I've made it too shiny lol.
Is it a bug in my code or it is just because the plane natural stability so it'll correct for AoA by itself.
I think THIS will do, it show how to use super basic FT code to keep unstable plane flying.
+1You can find more tutorial like this in my videos.
Also, PID is just one of many functions used to control stuff, more fancy and more capable if tuned right, I recommend to play around with FT parameters first before moving on to PID because PID you need to get every parameters right before handing all of that to PID to handle.
I'm so happy seeing my Raptor fly in the video.
+1Thanks Jundroo.
@MrShenanigans
+1∃
@UltraLight
+1Yea, fun and complicate don't mix well together.
@ShawnJohn20
That'll be a mess, I'm sure.
@BBCP117 @rexzion
+4It's not too difficult with practice I think.
I just recently discovered that lower the stick sensitivity helps a lot, like 70% easier, I tried that on stock tutorial plane and it works for me.
But the biggest problem is judging the depth from a 2D screen lol.
@Nerfaddict
Come to think of it, I might actually can make auto refueling as well because it is just auto aiming plane (which I've made one) with a few extra steps. (Just shift the point of aim and you get an auto formation flying)
@Nerfaddict
+1Link?
That's sound a bit exaggerated to be honest but I'm curious.
@BBCP117
I really mean Hornet irl.
Also I just tried tone my stick sensitivity way down and it works far smoother than this video, even with un-assisted drogue.
My biggest issue with refueling is I sometimes over-correct for drift.
This thing fly like there's no tomorrow lol.
Edit : Pretty much a rolling airframe plane.
@RC1138Boss
Nah.
3 part is easy.
I'm lazy.
This poet make no sense.
Mom's spaghetti.
@RC1138Boss
Nah.
You probably make it better than me.
In the refueling vid, I just stuck slim fuselage pieces together to make a simple probe just to test the refueling and it looks terrible lol.
@RC1138Boss
It's just my Su-57 with a simple probe on it, go to my profile and it's right there.
This give me an idea about digital camo using only 1 text panel.
+2@RC1138Boss
450.
Tanker
@CC1010 Yeah
@CC1010
Magnet is just for the drogue to stick to the probe so you can stay connect to the tanker as long as you like.
@BBCP117
lol.
Now I want to know how difficult it is in dcs.
I saw a vid of a Hornet stay connected to the drogue for 8 mins, I wonder how he fly so smooth.
@BBCP117
lol
I think warbirds may be too exaggerate, vintage jet fighter air refueling without fly by wires might be hard enough to feel like SP.
@BBCP117
+1I think DCS plane and it's flight control system is more sophisticated than SP.
If you want to feel like SP in DCS, do aerial refueling using warbirds.
@CC1010
Better use magnet part lol.
@lilmonix3
It's stock but hidden like many of stock ai planes.
@ReturnOfJeffChandler
I think fixed probe will be dangerous because when you connected you'll have no room to move around without breaking it, even boom refueling system is not rigid, the boom can collapse and extend and also move with the aircraft.
@AWESOMENESS360
Now I want to see if the dev will add boom refueling to SP, I think it's way easier for the pilot, the pilot just need to fly formation to the tanker and boom operator will do the rest.
It's aerial refueling without the 'aerial' part lol.
+2@AWESOMENESS360
True.
I think my FT mitigate SP's jittery controls a bit though, if I fly without Ft it'd be more difficult.
@OtakuNekoToT
No need for the link, it was built in the beta.
You just need to spawn it, there is a dedicated button to spawn the tanker in the ai spawn menu.
@Pyrrha
+3I lost count of it lol.
I overshooting the probe so many times but no catastrophic crash or anything.
Just testing something new in the 1.11 Beta.
Aerial refueling to be exact.
This is another level of difficulty, I was holding my breath the whole time.
I'd draw the entire deck if I had to.
+2@Beefy
+1lol.
It'll be just fine.