Search the archive:
YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
Thrust Vectoring (Read 2760 times)
Aug 22nd, 2006 at 8:50pm

swordfish1227   Ex Member
My Country of Origin

Gender: male
*****
 
Does anyone Know if FSX could possibly support Thrust Vectoring(TV)? It would be nice to have an SU-37 that could pull true reverse flight and a harrier(V-22, Eagle Eye, etc.) that went straight up.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #1 - Aug 22nd, 2006 at 9:25pm

Daube   Offline
Colonel
Alternative bloomer
Nice (FR)

Gender: male
Posts: 5833
*****
 
Don't even dream about it  Sad
The actual FSX physical engine does not use a "Newtonian" model (as said by another member Smiley ), vectors are unknown to him, so we won't see any Harrier, Osprey, Raptor or Super Flanker flying correctly until....we switch to X-Plane  Grin
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #2 - Aug 22nd, 2006 at 9:57pm

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
Posts: 6920
*****
 
Quote:
Does anyone Know if FSX could possibly support Thrust Vectoring(TV)?


Highly doubtful.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #3 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 10:06am

ashaman   Offline
Colonel
I'm from Italy, errors
in my text are a given.
LIRN

Gender: male
Posts: 1752
*****
 
Quote:
Does anyone Know if FSX could possibly support Thrust Vectoring(TV)?


You're dreaming, bro. Sad

I'd like it too, but the work needed to change the actual sim engine to one approaching what we dream would be too much for the poor, overtaxed coders in M€$, so tired after having had their golf match in the morning. Tongue

You can't ask them to work after that, can you? It'd be inhuman. Shocked

Tongue Tongue Tongue Tongue Tongue Tongue Tongue Tongue Tongue
 

There's but one real cure for human stupidity. It's called DEATH.&&&&At the moment mourning the assassination of sarcasm and irony for the good of the "higher".&&&&Proud FSIX user. Active user of FS98, X-plane and novice of Orbiter.&&&&Seen the GREAT service pack for FSX and its usefulness, really awaiting for FS11 to upgrade.&&&&AMD Athlon Xp 2400@2700&&MB Asus A7V8XX&&1Gb ram DDR 400 @ 333&&ASL Nvidia Geforce 6600gt 128Mb DDR3 AGP&&Creative Sound Blaster Live&&Windows XP Professional Sp2&&2 HD Maxtor 40Gb - 1 HD Maxtor 80Gb
IP Logged
 
Reply #4 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 11:27am

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
Posts: 6920
*****
 
Quote:
so tired after having had their golf match in the morning.


Actually, it's just Bill Gates who takes the morning off to play golf. I doubt the ACES team is any good at golf considering they're computer nerds like us. Grin
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #5 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 12:35pm

x_jasper   Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 224
*****
 
Lmao

You'd think by now that with helo's being well established in the microsoft series, there should indeed be thrust vectoring.

Helicopters in these sims are actually just fixed wing models, with bizarre flight modelling. However they do work, and you can replicate STOL as in the case of the Harrier / AV8B etc. VTOL becomes a bit tricky.

As for X-Plane, personally I wouldn't even go there. Nice quality scenery but thats about it. Downloaded their latest demo, and wasn't in the least bit impressed with the demo cockpit. In-fact it was only half a cockpit lol. (Overrated piece of junk in my opinion Wink)

My advise stick with MS for all it's faults, if you like Harriers etc at least you'll get acceptable STOL which is how the actual aircraft really is flown. The RAF don't like VTOL because of incurred service demands on the engine.

Good thing about the Harrier in MS sims is it's large anhedral on a high wing configuration, this models particularly well. High wing configs do not generally do well in MS sims, the Harrier is the exception.

Jasper
 

P4 2.5. massive huge 10 foot display.
IP Logged
 
Reply #6 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 4:08pm

Katahu   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
Posts: 6920
*****
 
I like flying VTOL in the FS series because it's more controllable campared to flying VTOL in X-Plane [which is less controllable]. I tried flying the V-22 Osprey in X-Plane and all I kept getting is a wild aircraft whenever I hover. It gets worse as I transition to level flight because of the twitchy pitch controls.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #7 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 4:37pm

x_jasper   Offline
Colonel
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 224
*****
 
I suspect X-Plane is not all it's made out to be.

Strange lot on their forums too ???

Out of interest Kat / Sword, I remember a while back we had a flightstick here which had worn out. For one reason or another I re-assembled it without the gimbal spring i.e. fully floating, and as I remember it was practically useless with a fixed wing on landing approach etc BUT: with helos it was damn near perfect. I attributed this to the fact that input  response to aircraft behaviour was almost instantaneous, there being no force to overcome. Also the inputs were of a much finer degree compared to what was obtainable with a spring.

I remember I was getting near perfect helo approaches and touchdowns with that stick.

No neutral obviously, but maybe in a case where the aircraft needs constant input all the time (Harrier) this is exactly what you need.

Jasper
 

P4 2.5. massive huge 10 foot display.
IP Logged
 
Reply #8 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 6:49pm

swordfish1227   Ex Member
My Country of Origin

Gender: male
*****
 
Thanks guys, i guess we will all have to wait a while for thrust vectoring in msfs is a reality.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #9 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 9:17pm

Daube   Offline
Colonel
Alternative bloomer
Nice (FR)

Gender: male
Posts: 5833
*****
 
Quote:
I like flying VTOL in the FS series because it's more controllable campared to flying VTOL in X-Plane [which is less controllable]. I tried flying the V-22 Osprey in X-Plane and all I kept getting is a wild aircraft whenever I hover. It gets worse as I transition to level flight because of the twitchy pitch controls.


Katahu, honnestly, appart from helos, there are no VTOL in FS.
Of course, we have those "super-mega-flaps" aircrafts with their ridiculously powerfull engines (yeah, mach4 Harrier, just for fun, as they say Roll Eyes ), but in VTOL operations they are almost out of control, very slow to react, AND you have to be going forward, else you stall and eventually get the physics engine of FS to perfome some funny things like throwing your rotating aircraft through the sky  Roll Eyes

VTOL in X-Plane is more difficult because it's realistic. That's real VTOL actually, not a stupid trick like we use in FS.

The only short term solution I would see for FS, since it seems that cannot implement those vectors, would be to allow multiple engine types per aircraft.

At take off, a Harrier would use an "helicopter" engine, to lift vertically, and in normal flight it would use a normal jet engine. In transition phase, it would use both of them, with a percentage power distribution depending on the angle of thrust. Yeah, ACES guys, read that !!!
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #10 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 9:17pm

Moach   Offline
Colonel
Jet-Powered PropellerHead
São Paulo, Brazil

Gender: male
Posts: 991
*****
 
didnīt someone develop a gauge for fs9 that produced, as he called it, "True VTOL" dynamics?

thereīs an addon aircraft out there somewhere that works with this gauge me thinks... Tongue

that being the case, anyways, i think itīd be rather easy to migrate that gauge into FSX Roll Eyes
 

Come, one and all aboard!  -  The Russian Roullete in the sky!
One in each Six of my personalities knows not at all how to fly!
IP Logged
 
Reply #11 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 9:24pm

Daube   Offline
Colonel
Alternative bloomer
Nice (FR)

Gender: male
Posts: 5833
*****
 
Quote:
didnīt someone develop a gauge for fs9 that produced, as he called it, "True VTOL" dynamics?

thereīs an addon aircraft out there somewhere that works with this gauge me thinks... Tongue

that being the case, anyways, i think itīd be rather easy to migrate that gauge into FSX Roll Eyes


This gauge does not perform "real" VTOL. It just allow basic VTOL with very unrealistic reactions and controls, because it basically uses the slew functionnality. If you have a look at the videos, you can see that the visual result looks really fake. Bt it's the only exisiting solution at the moment, and it's great that somebody at least have tried Smiley

Someone talked recently about trying to produce another gauge that would make vector based computations, but unfortunately I think the acutal FS9 SDK does not allow to contro the aricraft movements enough.

We will see with FSX... but I'm not realy optimistic.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #12 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 10:14pm

Ashton Lawson   Offline
Colonel
FS Water Configurator
Programmer
Phuket, Thailand

Gender: male
Posts: 1211
*****
 
Well, space flight is possible in FSX, so i'm assuming there'll be thrusters, which activate with the normal controls.  When FSX is released, try making 3 harriers.  One with a normal, realistic config, for normal flight.  One with the engine facing 45 degress, with thrusters, and one with the engine facing straight down, with thrusters.  If they all work well, why can't ACES make a function which just rotates the engine?
 

...&&FS Water Configurator+ has new modifications in the works, plus DirectX 10, Service Pack&&1, and Radeon HD 3+ Series support.
IP Logged
 
Reply #13 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 10:40pm

Daube   Offline
Colonel
Alternative bloomer
Nice (FR)

Gender: male
Posts: 5833
*****
 
Quote:
Well, space flight is possible in FSX, so i'm assuming there'll be thrusters, which activate with the normal controls.  When FSX is released, try making 3 harriers.  One with a normal, realistic config, for normal flight.  One with the engine facing 45 degress, with thrusters, and one with the engine facing straight down, with thrusters.  If they all work well, why can't ACES make a function which just rotates the engine?


Is it possible to create an engine with a given angle ? ???
In that case, it would of course be nice to have a simple orientation system for those motors, of course Smiley But I nver heard of such engines in FS, and I think that actually you have only two choices: Helo = Vertical, and Plane = Horizontal, and the SDK will not let you play around with that...
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #14 - Aug 23rd, 2006 at 11:21pm

Ashton Lawson   Offline
Colonel
FS Water Configurator
Programmer
Phuket, Thailand

Gender: male
Posts: 1211
*****
 
Well, no, no engine vector settings.  But in gMax, you make the entire model, and rotate so it faces straight down, or at a 45 degree angle down.  Then just set the contact points.

In FS, slew the harrier to an upright position, and takeoff.

Keep in mind, the harrier engine power, and lightest takeoff weights must be put in.

I don't see why it shouldn't work.  If it does, then ACES have got the easy job of rotating the model, and contact points around the model's center. It'll be like adding more concorde visor controls. Grin
 

...&&FS Water Configurator+ has new modifications in the works, plus DirectX 10, Service Pack&&1, and Radeon HD 3+ Series support.
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print