4 ms·

I wonder about DCS "study sims" of combat jets. No, no, I'm not saying one could actually be a fighter pilot just by flying DCS F-18. But I wonder about the re

by the_af 5y ago

I wonder about DCS "study sims" of combat jets. No, no, I'm not saying one could actually be a fighter pilot just by flying DCS F-18. But I wonder about the realism. It seems every single knob and button and thingy on the cockpit is clickable. Every subsystem is simulated. The manual is reportedly huge (I don't own it, just watched videos on YouTube). With such a realistic flightsim, TrackIR, a HOTAS setup, and all the gadgets, how far is it from the real thing? I wonder how far you can go on an actual F-18 with just DCS experience. I suppose a huge detail that is missing is the pressurized suit and the enormous G forces. (I also wonder how come most of this isn't classified, and is instead generally available to the paying public. I suppose the answer is "because as a private individual, you cannot buy an F-18 with weapons").

Nextgrid 5y ago
I think a big part is also to be able to operate under pressure and not panic. It's one thing to operate a complex machine from the comfort of your office chair, it's another thing to operate the same machine when any small mistake could mean death.
meheleventyone 5y ago
The biggest issue is that the physical simulation is still pretty rough in modern games particularly when considering stalls and other "out of true" flight dynamics dealing with turbulent flows. Which is quite important for landing and take-off. Likewise whilst flight models are aiming for accuracy they're still full of fudges, guesses for missing data and mistakes so I'd take any correspondence to real aircraft with a massive grain of salt. You will probably be able to turn all the systems on in an aircraft of the right vintage though.
- lutorm 5y ago
  That, plus the lack of full sensual inputs (G-forces, turbulence, vestibular experiences, the full outside view) makes it quite a bit of a lesser experience than the real thing. There's a reason you don't need much equipment for a procedural flight simulator, as opposed to one that can replicate actual flight.
Sakos 5y ago
I could turn on a real F-16. Zero chance I'd try to fly one irl. I just don't think the knowledge/skill transfer is very good for actual flying without any sort of (realistic) haptic feedback for how the plane actually feels to fly. Maybe if you shat money and could afford a 6DoF rig and trained on that?
Juicyy 5y ago
Ive been in the sim world for a while and i guarantee the good DCS pilots could make the move to real life flying with no problems. Combat, fitness, and the organization of the military would be the difficult part.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
robscallsign 5y ago
I've been a fairly serious flight simmer for about 20 years now, including 13 years of DCS, and have flown the DCS F-18 since it's initial release 4 years ago. This topic gets discussed a fair bit within the flight sim community, and we mostly conclude that we'd likely get the F-18 into the air, but would most likely kill ourselves: either passing out from lack of tolerance and training to handle the G forces, lack of familiarity with the sensation of flight which can wreak havoc on your inner ear and result in vertigo, dizzyness, nausea, or paying attention to any of the hundreds of small details and checks that real pilots do that you don't do in DCS (is the OBOGS working properly? cabin pressurization working properly, icing, etc). Simulator pilots would also not likely be able to handle any inflight emergency or problem in the air. Then, assuming we didn't already kill ourselves during the flight, we'd at best damage the aircraft during the landing, or kill ourselves and destroy the aircraft at worst. Still, DCS offers a tremendous value as a low cost training platform. The DCS A-10C module was built for the US Air National Guard to use as a training simulator platform to train A-10C pilots, and other countries and airforces are increasingly using DCS to train their pilots. A Spanish company built the Aviojet C-101 module for DCS because it is used in the Spanish airforce and they wanted to use DCS as a training platform. A Chinese company built the JF-17 module for DCS. An Italian company is currently building an MB-339 module for DCS. You can search online and find images of Chinese fighter pilots using DCS for training. There are a ton of things you can train to in DCS very cost effectively - practicing communications, tactical formations, administrative tasks and procedures, weapon switchology, etc. It doesn't completely replace real flight training of course, but it sure can help countries and militiaries with limited budgets stretch their training budgets. > I also wonder how come most of this isn't classified All of the "good stuff" is very, very classified. Particularly electronic warfare, radar performance, modern beyond visible range tactics, modern weapons performance porifiles, nuclear weapons delivery profiles. A lot of the "nuts and bolts stuff" and basic training materials is unclassified and readily available. If you read through and study all of these documents you'll be well on your way to being a fairly competent virtual fighter pilot: https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/pubs-pat-pubs.asp https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/pubs-pat-pubs.asp Most of the topics discussed there are fairly "traditional" fighter pilot stuff that have been discussed by airforces for over a hundred years now, so aren't really secret, even though they're being flown in a modern jet trainer like the T-45.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

by the_af 5y ago

Nextgrid 5y ago

I think a big part is also to be able to operate under pressure and not panic. It's one thing to operate a complex machine from the comfort of your office chair, it's another thing to operate the same machine when any small mistake could mean death.

meheleventyone 5y ago

The biggest issue is that the physical simulation is still pretty rough in modern games particularly when considering stalls and other "out of true" flight dynamics dealing with turbulent flows. Which is quite important for landing and take-off. Likewise whilst flight models are aiming for accuracy they're still full of fudges, guesses for missing data and mistakes so I'd take any correspondence to real aircraft with a massive grain of salt. You will probably be able to turn all the systems on in an aircraft of the right vintage though.

lutorm 5y ago
That, plus the lack of full sensual inputs (G-forces, turbulence, vestibular experiences, the full outside view) makes it quite a bit of a lesser experience than the real thing. There's a reason you don't need much equipment for a procedural flight simulator, as opposed to one that can replicate actual flight.

Sakos 5y ago

I could turn on a real F-16. Zero chance I'd try to fly one irl. I just don't think the knowledge/skill transfer is very good for actual flying without any sort of (realistic) haptic feedback for how the plane actually feels to fly. Maybe if you shat money and could afford a 6DoF rig and trained on that?

Juicyy 5y ago

Ive been in the sim world for a while and i guarantee the good DCS pilots could make the move to real life flying with no problems. Combat, fitness, and the organization of the military would be the difficult part.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

robscallsign 5y ago

I've been a fairly serious flight simmer for about 20 years now, including 13 years of DCS, and have flown the DCS F-18 since it's initial release 4 years ago. This topic gets discussed a fair bit within the flight sim community, and we mostly conclude that we'd likely get the F-18 into the air, but would most likely kill ourselves: either passing out from lack of tolerance and training to handle the G forces, lack of familiarity with the sensation of flight which can wreak havoc on your inner ear and result in vertigo, dizzyness, nausea, or paying attention to any of the hundreds of small details and checks that real pilots do that you don't do in DCS (is the OBOGS working properly? cabin pressurization working properly, icing, etc). Simulator pilots would also not likely be able to handle any inflight emergency or problem in the air. Then, assuming we didn't already kill ourselves during the flight, we'd at best damage the aircraft during the landing, or kill ourselves and destroy the aircraft at worst. Still, DCS offers a tremendous value as a low cost training platform. The DCS A-10C module was built for the US Air National Guard to use as a training simulator platform to train A-10C pilots, and other countries and airforces are increasingly using DCS to train their pilots. A Spanish company built the Aviojet C-101 module for DCS because it is used in the Spanish airforce and they wanted to use DCS as a training platform. A Chinese company built the JF-17 module for DCS. An Italian company is currently building an MB-339 module for DCS. You can search online and find images of Chinese fighter pilots using DCS for training. There are a ton of things you can train to in DCS very cost effectively - practicing communications, tactical formations, administrative tasks and procedures, weapon switchology, etc. It doesn't completely replace real flight training of course, but it sure can help countries and militiaries with limited budgets stretch their training budgets. > I also wonder how come most of this isn't classified All of the "good stuff" is very, very classified. Particularly electronic warfare, radar performance, modern beyond visible range tactics, modern weapons performance porifiles, nuclear weapons delivery profiles. A lot of the "nuts and bolts stuff" and basic training materials is unclassified and readily available. If you read through and study all of these documents you'll be well on your way to being a fairly competent virtual fighter pilot: https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/pubs-pat-pubs.asp https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/pubs-pat-pubs.asp Most of the topics discussed there are fairly "traditional" fighter pilot stuff that have been discussed by airforces for over a hundred years now, so aren't really secret, even though they're being flown in a modern jet trainer like the T-45.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]