Louis Colignon Thanks! I’m recording from inside my VR headset with my phone, is very hard to get the angle right and it takes a long time to record but it is worth it, I think. Cheers! Thanks for watching!
@@perdiki2073 I have the Samsung Odyssey +. But it doesn't look this good with my own eyes, I think because the camera lens is smaller and doesn't dilate af far as human eyes. Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS I thought DCS didn't support WMR headsets. Anyways how is the screen door effect and tracking on the headset? Also what specs do you have?
@@perdiki2073 I'm using Steam Vr! With windows mixed reaality, I have the head set overclocked to 190% it is about 2500 to 2100 on each eye I can't remember exactly, but it is in 2000s for both eyes I'm sure.
That bring memories. I did engine runs and worked on this aircraft for 20 years. By the way he is a F-16 maintenance technician. We have few qualified technicians among the maintenance personnel recommended by their flight chiefs.
You lucky! Got to touch an F16. If they tell me...take this F16 for a spin but after we'll cut off your right arm, I will do it in a second. Thanks for watching!
One thing to consider, someone mentioned MFDs looking different. The last time we wore DCU camo was around 2008, and back then most 16s were still block-25, 30, 32. I'm not sure which block is in DCS since I don't have the F-16 yet so there could be some differences. I was an F-16 run qualified technician but it's been around 10 years since I ran one. Since then I'm on A-10s and an engine rune trainer/certifier. I do know when I ran 16s we didn't mess with all of the avionics unless we had an avionics guy on headset on the ground. The guy in the video was fast because he didn't want to get caught and just needed to get the run done for maintenance...which is why the camera was so low...lol. *EDIT* Just saw the original video of the live start was from 2008 in Iraq...which was likely filmed in 07 about the time I was there since we had no interwebs to upload anything until we got home back then...lol.
Awesome! Great story my friend, yeah he has that camera low, also, I see a guy next to him keeping an eye out.? Spotter?. What would be the punishment for getting caught filming like that? Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS Guy on the ground...any engine start there's a guy hooked up to comm, be it the pilot or a maintenance run. He's there to make sure things are going well and to do visual ground checks for safety and to see if things are working as they should. If there's a fire in the JFS or a massive hydraulic leak, they're the guy who says "shut 'er down!". There was generally a fire guard guy too who'd hang out by the fire bottle just in case. I don't think anyone would really get into trouble for running all of the avionics, however, it's not that safe for anyone on the ground with the radar or radio radiation in close proximity. I forgot to mention in my first comment that this was still a cool video comparing the two.
No. There was a time when technicians were allowed to perform taxi runs but after a certain incident when a technician took an A-4 Skyhawk up in the air for a unauthorized ride tech personnel is only allowed to do static tests on airplanes, that includes engine runs.
@@hba8103 From what other Air Force guys have said is was a legitimate accident. Another pilot flew up to talk him down and things worked out. End result, techs can't move the planes anymore for their tests. There's an interview with an F-16C tech in GR's youtube channel, he talks about the incident.
@@Fubuki_Kai That is classified! If I tell you, I will have to kiss you. :). I upgraded my phone so I removed the camera from my old phone and attached it to my glasses. Thanks for watching!
The problem with DCS is that the engine is spinning up the moment you hit start 2. It should take a couple of seconds for the JFS to spin up and clutch in before the engine even starts to spin up.
Yes! A minor hiccup I think, the sound of the engine spooling up is prettty sweet! Can't wait for my favorite weapon, MAVERICKS! cheers! Thanks for watching!
8A SIMULATORS totally agree. The sound of JFS spool up is my favourite sound of the F-16. It’s right up there with the sound around 40% RPM during startup right before the JFS cuts out. It sounds a bit like a car going up a gear, high pitched sounds followed immediately by a low pitch growl. Being able to experience a F-16 launch from right next to it is unfortunately something not everyone will get to do, but everyone who did won’t forget. The heat, the smell, the vibrations.
In the old days went with start1 first. Then if jfs no-start, went to start2. If still no jfs start, pump the accumulators by hand. Try it again. If still no start, or only starts with start2, time for troubleshooting.
Oh when move the throttle to idle, light off occurs immediately(FTIT climb)! FTIT climbs so high. Is it a pw-220 engine?? When i was starting up a block 52 f-16, FTIT climb slowly than the video and reach peak 650~700. Because two engines have different limits of FTIT. I’m so interesting to watch the video of different block f-16!!
One thing that surprises me is that all of these aircraft are a pain in the arse to start up. I mean, especially on the F-16, the entire flight control system is fully automated--controlled by computer. So, why isn't the startup sequence fully automated? Push one button, wait a few minutes and you're ready to go? I know DCS has an automated startup, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm amazed that Air Force pilots have to go through all this every time they get into the plane. It's entirely possible that the F-22 and especially F-35 have fully automated startup.
I know! but I think still pretty fast. The jet gets started with 3 imputs, everything else are safety checks mainly for safety, it needs to be check every time, even commercial airlines take a long time to start. I just got a car that starts just by pushing a button, if that system fails I'm screwed, my older car I can troubleshoot the problem and maybe start it. Technology is getting there. One day my friend one day.
A few of many reasons: You have to remember the F16 is a child of the 70s, so it was designed with certain processing/programming limitations. Tasks taken from the computer and given to the pilot, take the load of the cpu and free it for other things, not to mention the computer has a boot up time anyway. The complex startup also adds an extra level of security to the jet, so not just anyone can start it. The main reason is that a lot of these systems, are interdependent but unware of each others state, so a certain pressure or temperature may be required in order to operate/start something (simple example). It is the pilots job to monitor gauges and read outs, if something is not within parameters they might be able to rectify it, if not they have to stop the startup procesure. Continuing with startup may damage the jet. There is also a school of thought (especially when this jet was designed), that too much automation makes the pilot lazy or too dependent on the mission computer. I would imagine (an educated guess) newer jets like F22/F35 have a much more automated startup, controlled by the computer. The rest is what 8A said.
Every aircraft has a selection of systems that each serve a purpose. There is no on/off key in fighter aircraft for that reason. Modern aircraft like the F-22 and 35 have somewhat streamlined the process compared to the F-16 however.
honestly it isn't that complex: turn on battery; start fuel pump, crank engine. the rest are for the added systems: test of cockpit lights, IFF, radio, oxygen, countermeasures, and MFD information; it's mostly the same dance for all aircrafts, even the places are the same, so pilots can change from one airframe to another without being too lost, as the systems are always in the same place. and full automation of the start up sequence is a pretty bad idea: computers have bugs from time to time: what if the computer glitches? then your screwed and your plane is grounded because programmers have to read every line of code and debug it; which will take a lot of time. all told, this is one of the reasons the military does prefer to keep some things old school like gauges and other things: they are easy to maintain, and less prone to failure than a digital counterpart.
Do you fly DCS in VR? Because to me the F16 and F18 cockpits are extremely well done, I've been inside a real F4, F16, F18, and of course a B737 200 300 700 800 cockpit, and the details of the wear and tear are spot on, the cleanest cockpit I've seen was inside a blue angel cockpit. Thanks for watching!
Hi, there is a check list, and a process to shut down the jet properly without damaging any systems or the engine, this takes all the main switches back to normal or to the the cold start state for the next pilot, all the other switches use doing battle are not required to be set back to off or normal. Thanks for watching!
My phone camera. It is very hard to find the sweet spot for the nice res, you can see in my other videos how different it looks when camera is not on the sweet resolution spot. Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS you misunderstand, I mean the only giveaway that its a video game is that the textures are too clean. The actual cockpit has more scuff marks and wear on it lol
Maybe the simulated and real jets are different blocks, which may explain differences in cockpit layout (newer MFDs in real jet?), aircraft performance and operating procedures. Sadly, DCS will just ever get one variant, and to get Falcon 4 BMS (where you can select a lot of different F-16 variants) in VR is a hassle and close to impossible last I checked. For me, VR is essential in flight sims nowadays.
GeFlixes I’ve heard both that BMS is working on VR but it’s a big maybe, and that according to ED we might get more Vipers in DCS after this version is feature complete, but that’s also a big maybe
This aircraft is about twenty years old at the time of this video. His BDUs are hinting at early 2000s time in which alot of the F-16s active around then were block 30/32 that were deployed. These aircraft are put through shit left and right. Cockpits are never clean unless they're commercial aircraft.
Falcon BMS 4.35 is still the benchmark for being the most "fully feature implemented" sim, and in fact it's more focused on hardcore realism and a bit less focused than DCS on photorealistic graphics. DCS has plenty of realism settings for most players, but when it comes to fully implemented switchology, if BMS were any more authentic, if you switch off the oxygen system you actually would pass out! I don't put down either. They're both great sims but their strengths are different. It's a matter of record that many years ago, there was a development of F4 that had to be rolled back before release because some of the weapons related data (such as range of a given missile type...) was deemed to be a bit too authentic. Yes, these things ARE monitored by certain people working with certain government agencies. If you set out to build the most realistic flight simulator you can, based on a military aircraft still in active service, you're going to get a little bit of government oversight to ensure that you don't release something that's accurate enough to compromise military secrets even if that data was just wild speculation on your part. The sim can be as accurate as you can make it...but not accurate enough to get into classified territory.
Can't compare BMS and DCS, (F16 wise), if DCS was not VR I would probably still fly BMS. Haven't flown BMS since I discovered VR, and now with clouds (the blest clouds on the market at the moment), it is hard to fly anything else. Thanks for watching!
BMS is actually missing a lot of systems from the F-16, so no, it's far from complete and there are major features added every patch. It's anything but a benchmark. F-16 in DCS is very far from release still, it's early access.
@G E T R E K T Only the hardcore simmers who aren't satisfied with DCS. The dynamic campaign engine in F4/BMS is unequalled to this day. To us, DCS is a little bit better than War Thunder with better graphics.
Yes! If you do not fly in Virtual Reality BMS is better,, it has a campaign engine that last for weeks, also instruments. procedures, radios, and physics very well done. Personally I fly in VR, I have not been back to BMS since I got my VR headset.
@@8ASIMULATORS Why VR doesn't work in BMS? I don't think so... maybe you would want to say that DCS has a better graphics!? In DCS the physical is not as good as BMS? For me at the end of 2021 DCS will be better than BMS...
Hi I use the Samsung OSYSSEY+ .But it looks a lot better when is recorded by the camera, it doesn't look as good with my own eyes, I don't know why. Thanks for watching!
Ok first off that was no pilot but a maintainer. You can clearly see the reflection in the MFD that he is wearing a headset. Out of 20 years working on USAF F-16s that would be the first time I'd ever seen a pilot wearing a maintenance headset and not a helmet. Also with the proper angle later on in the video you can see the right leg is camo pants. All flight suits I've seen the USAF wear have been monotone coloring.
Creo que el DCS es un lugar donde los EEUU prueban set de datos para alimentar a sus sistemas de AI, de la misma forma que los Captcha y otras app desarrolladas para que muchos usuarios generen sets de datos de entrada para sus AI.
It is an Early Access model. There isn't even a functioning ECM system yet. No auto countermeasure dispense, missing MFD features, and it just got the TGP not long ago. It is still an amazing experience and the fulfillment of dreams to fly the Viper in VR.
@@8ASIMULATORS I was joking ;) i got DCS and almost every module ;) Track IR, Thurstmaster Hotas and Logitech rudder pedals and so forth ;) so YES; its for me ;)
It's crazy to see how much dcs looks real with this filter, very nice idea of video.
Louis Colignon Thanks! I’m recording from inside my VR headset with my phone, is very hard to get the angle right and it takes a long time to record but it is worth it, I think. Cheers!
Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS What headset do you have? The quality is amazing. I have a Vive and its impossible for it to look like that.
@@perdiki2073 I have the Samsung Odyssey +. But it doesn't look this good with my own eyes, I think because the camera lens is smaller and doesn't dilate af far as human eyes.
Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS I thought DCS didn't support WMR headsets. Anyways how is the screen door effect and tracking on the headset? Also what specs do you have?
@@perdiki2073 I'm using Steam Vr! With windows mixed reaality, I have the head set overclocked to 190% it is about 2500 to 2100 on each eye I can't remember exactly, but it is in 2000s for both eyes I'm sure.
DCS has a better seat cover. Matt Wagner pimped his ride!
DCS looks almost real.
DCS missing bolts and screws on the dashboard :/
Shany G almost
Yeah
Yeah the right screen is almost as real as the one in the left.
Yes! Check out my F16 vs F18 stratup, it looks even better now with a better recording camera.
Thanks for watching!
Damn, DCS looks better than real life :)
That bring memories. I did engine runs and worked on this aircraft for 20 years. By the way he is a F-16 maintenance technician. We have few qualified technicians among the maintenance personnel recommended by their flight chiefs.
You lucky! Got to touch an F16. If they tell me...take this F16 for a spin but after we'll cut off your right arm, I will do it in a second.
Thanks for watching!
One thing to consider, someone mentioned MFDs looking different. The last time we wore DCU camo was around 2008, and back then most 16s were still block-25, 30, 32. I'm not sure which block is in DCS since I don't have the F-16 yet so there could be some differences. I was an F-16 run qualified technician but it's been around 10 years since I ran one. Since then I'm on A-10s and an engine rune trainer/certifier. I do know when I ran 16s we didn't mess with all of the avionics unless we had an avionics guy on headset on the ground. The guy in the video was fast because he didn't want to get caught and just needed to get the run done for maintenance...which is why the camera was so low...lol. *EDIT* Just saw the original video of the live start was from 2008 in Iraq...which was likely filmed in 07 about the time I was there since we had no interwebs to upload anything until we got home back then...lol.
Awesome! Great story my friend, yeah he has that camera low, also, I see a guy next to him keeping an eye out.? Spotter?. What would be the punishment for getting caught filming like that?
Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS Guy on the ground...any engine start there's a guy hooked up to comm, be it the pilot or a maintenance run. He's there to make sure things are going well and to do visual ground checks for safety and to see if things are working as they should. If there's a fire in the JFS or a massive hydraulic leak, they're the guy who says "shut 'er down!". There was generally a fire guard guy too who'd hang out by the fire bottle just in case. I don't think anyone would really get into trouble for running all of the avionics, however, it's not that safe for anyone on the ground with the radar or radio radiation in close proximity. I forgot to mention in my first comment that this was still a cool video comparing the two.
"I do know when I ran 16s we didn't mess with all of the avionics unless we had an avionics guy on headset on the ground." Yep, 100% true.
Dcs world f-16 is block 50/52
A tip is that for the rotary knobs you can click and drag to rotate them so you don't have to sit there and scrollwheel
The guy starting the real one is definitely a mechanic lol
And I just read the description lol. I just knew from the way he spoke, also the hearing protection he was wearing.
This is the most exciting video I have watched in 2020.
Awesome and thank you for your comment.
He's a ground technician not a pilot.
Oh good to know! Can they fly the jet if they want to?
No. There was a time when technicians were allowed to perform taxi runs but after a certain incident when a technician took an A-4 Skyhawk up in the air for a unauthorized ride tech personnel is only allowed to do static tests on airplanes, that includes engine runs.
@@spookyNorbert that's crazy...I'm assuming he was able to land safely....LOL!
@@spookyNorbert Hard to blame the technician though :)
@@hba8103 From what other Air Force guys have said is was a legitimate accident. Another pilot flew up to talk him down and things worked out. End result, techs can't move the planes anymore for their tests. There's an interview with an F-16C tech in GR's youtube channel, he talks about the incident.
why does the DCS version look so incredibly realistic in this video?
Hi ! And Ho Ho Ho!
I recorded from inside the my VR head set with my phone camera!
Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS wow how did you manage that? put the camera up to the eye piece?
@@Fubuki_Kai That is classified! If I tell you, I will have to kiss you. :).
I upgraded my phone so I removed the camera from my old phone and attached it to my glasses.
Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS that's quite crafty. The end result was certainly convincing. Thanks!
@@8ASIMULATORS xD
The problem with DCS is that the engine is spinning up the moment you hit start 2.
It should take a couple of seconds for the JFS to spin up and clutch in before the engine even starts to spin up.
Yes! A minor hiccup I think, the sound of the engine spooling up is prettty sweet! Can't wait for my favorite weapon, MAVERICKS! cheers!
Thanks for watching!
8A SIMULATORS totally agree. The sound of JFS spool up is my favourite sound of the F-16.
It’s right up there with the sound around 40% RPM during startup right before the JFS cuts out. It sounds a bit like a car going up a gear, high pitched sounds followed immediately by a low pitch growl.
Being able to experience a F-16 launch from right next to it is unfortunately something not everyone will get to do, but everyone who did won’t forget. The heat, the smell, the vibrations.
@@lolvks OH MAN! lucky you! sir! I can only dream, dream dream.
Pass it though to DCS so they can improve it
At least the real F-16 got external lights since day 1...
And damage model.
And weapons.
And pretty much everything else.
@@theonefrancis696 Yeah but it cant quick start xD
Guy in the real video is a mechanic doing an engine run
In the old days went with start1 first. Then if jfs no-start, went to start2. If still no jfs start, pump the accumulators by hand. Try it again. If still no start, or only starts with start2, time for troubleshooting.
Oh when move the throttle to idle, light off occurs immediately(FTIT climb)!
FTIT climbs so high.
Is it a pw-220 engine??
When i was starting up a block 52 f-16, FTIT climb slowly than the video and reach peak 650~700.
Because two engines have different limits of FTIT.
I’m so interesting to watch the video of different block f-16!!
One thing that surprises me is that all of these aircraft are a pain in the arse to start up. I mean, especially on the F-16, the entire flight control system is fully automated--controlled by computer.
So, why isn't the startup sequence fully automated? Push one button, wait a few minutes and you're ready to go? I know DCS has an automated startup, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm amazed that Air Force pilots have to go through all this every time they get into the plane.
It's entirely possible that the F-22 and especially F-35 have fully automated startup.
I know! but I think still pretty fast. The jet gets started with 3 imputs, everything else are safety checks mainly for safety, it needs to be check every time, even commercial airlines take a long time to start. I just got a car that starts just by pushing a button, if that system fails I'm screwed, my older car I can troubleshoot the problem and maybe start it. Technology is getting there. One day my friend one day.
A few of many reasons: You have to remember the F16 is a child of the 70s, so it was designed with certain processing/programming limitations. Tasks taken from the computer and given to the pilot, take the load of the cpu and free it for other things, not to mention the computer has a boot up time anyway. The complex startup also adds an extra level of security to the jet, so not just anyone can start it. The main reason is that a lot of these systems, are interdependent but unware of each others state, so a certain pressure or temperature may be required in order to operate/start something (simple example). It is the pilots job to monitor gauges and read outs, if something is not within parameters they might be able to rectify it, if not they have to stop the startup procesure. Continuing with startup may damage the jet. There is also a school of thought (especially when this jet was designed), that too much automation makes the pilot lazy or too dependent on the mission computer. I would imagine (an educated guess) newer jets like F22/F35 have a much more automated startup, controlled by the computer. The rest is what 8A said.
@@exiletsj2570 just like me a child of the 70s. Thanks for watching!
Every aircraft has a selection of systems that each serve a purpose. There is no on/off key in fighter aircraft for that reason. Modern aircraft like the F-22 and 35 have somewhat streamlined the process compared to the F-16 however.
honestly it isn't that complex: turn on battery; start fuel pump, crank engine. the rest are for the added systems: test of cockpit lights, IFF, radio, oxygen, countermeasures, and MFD information; it's mostly the same dance for all aircrafts, even the places are the same, so pilots can change from one airframe to another without being too lost, as the systems are always in the same place.
and full automation of the start up sequence is a pretty bad idea: computers have bugs from time to time: what if the computer glitches? then your screwed and your plane is grounded because programmers have to read every line of code and debug it; which will take a lot of time. all told, this is one of the reasons the military does prefer to keep some things old school like gauges and other things: they are easy to maintain, and less prone to failure than a digital counterpart.
The JFS in DCS has a bad clutch. You can hear it chug.
Cool vid. ☺
I think that DCS can look a bit more real if they add just a bit more aging on some of their cockpits like compared to the video as so.
Do you fly DCS in VR? Because to me the F16 and F18 cockpits are extremely well done, I've been inside a real F4, F16, F18, and of course a B737 200 300 700 800 cockpit, and the details of the wear and tear are spot on, the cleanest cockpit I've seen was inside a blue angel cockpit.
Thanks for watching!
The engine start seems more dizzying than the actual acrobatics.
the camera on the real one makes the sounds, sound different 🤦🏻♂️
Question: After you land the plane do you have to put all the switches back in their original positions? If yes why?
Hi, there is a check list, and a process to shut down the jet properly without damaging any systems or the engine, this takes all the main switches back to normal or to the the cold start state for the next pilot, all the other switches use doing battle are not required to be set back to off or normal.
Thanks for watching!
СУПЕР👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
nice effort bro
What are you using to capture VR footage? Mine doesn’t come out remotely close to the correct resolution.
My phone camera. It is very hard to find the sweet spot for the nice res, you can see in my other videos how different it looks when camera is not on the sweet resolution spot.
Thanks for watching!
The crew chief that recorded that video being called “pilot” is funny to me
He flies a Cessna on weekends.:)
Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS is “he” you?👀
@@8ASIMULATORS and of course. Been scrolling through yt waiting on my hotas
I do fly, but that is not me.
Nice video
Thank you and thank you for watching.
only distinguishing feature at some points is that DCS is just too clean
Yes! It is DCS, but it is a monitor screen recording.
I didn't have the equipment to record through the lenses yet.
Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS you misunderstand, I mean the only giveaway that its a video game is that the textures are too clean. The actual cockpit has more scuff marks and wear on it lol
I see! Got it now! 👍
Look how different the MFCD’s are!
So much easier to read the stuff on em...
Rainbow Dash that and the physical structure of them.
Maybe the simulated and real jets are different blocks, which may explain differences in cockpit layout (newer MFDs in real jet?), aircraft performance and operating procedures. Sadly, DCS will just ever get one variant, and to get Falcon 4 BMS (where you can select a lot of different F-16 variants) in VR is a hassle and close to impossible last I checked. For me, VR is essential in flight sims nowadays.
GeFlixes I’ve heard both that BMS is working on VR but it’s a big maybe, and that according to ED we might get more Vipers in DCS after this version is feature complete, but that’s also a big maybe
@@GeFlixes The F-16 in the video is a block 30, dcs one is block 50 if im not mistaken
they need to clean those cockpits
That video was a maintenance engine run in Iraq. Lots of sand and bigger problems than the cockpit looking shiny are at play here.
@@baileyparadis1815 I disagree. The dirt makes it look depressing and ancient
More like the DCS F16 devs need to work on a grungier look as an alternative skin, would be cool for the Persian Gulf map.
@@stevebarnes8317 I was thinking cleaner. Like brand new.
This aircraft is about twenty years old at the time of this video. His BDUs are hinting at early 2000s time in which alot of the F-16s active around then were block 30/32 that were deployed. These aircraft are put through shit left and right. Cockpits are never clean unless they're commercial aircraft.
900 degrees ftit in dcs??
Wrench Maybe cause I set it up at 1300 in summer.?
Thanks for watching
@@8ASIMULATORS nah. It could be a glitch or something. For an accurate understanding checklist must be checked.
It can go up to 980 on start for block 50s and thats perfectly fine
@@MySuperslayer Thanks for your answer.
Falcon BMS 4.35 is still the benchmark for being the most "fully feature implemented" sim, and in fact it's more focused on hardcore realism and a bit less focused than DCS on photorealistic graphics. DCS has plenty of realism settings for most players, but when it comes to fully implemented switchology, if BMS were any more authentic, if you switch off the oxygen system you actually would pass out! I don't put down either. They're both great sims but their strengths are different.
It's a matter of record that many years ago, there was a development of F4 that had to be rolled back before release because some of the weapons related data (such as range of a given missile type...) was deemed to be a bit too authentic. Yes, these things ARE monitored by certain people working with certain government agencies. If you set out to build the most realistic flight simulator you can, based on a military aircraft still in active service, you're going to get a little bit of government oversight to ensure that you don't release something that's accurate enough to compromise military secrets even if that data was just wild speculation on your part.
The sim can be as accurate as you can make it...but not accurate enough to get into classified territory.
Can't compare BMS and DCS, (F16 wise), if DCS was not VR I would probably still fly BMS. Haven't flown BMS since I discovered VR, and now with clouds (the blest clouds on the market at the moment), it is hard to fly anything else.
Thanks for watching!
BMS is actually missing a lot of systems from the F-16, so no, it's far from complete and there are major features added every patch. It's anything but a benchmark. F-16 in DCS is very far from release still, it's early access.
@G E T R E K T Only the hardcore simmers who aren't satisfied with DCS. The dynamic campaign engine in F4/BMS is unequalled to this day. To us, DCS is a little bit better than War Thunder with better graphics.
Do you use Track IR
Yes, but not for DCS, I use track IR for F1 and F16BMS.
Thanks for watching!
Alright thanks!
Very good video though, keep it up 👍🏼
question. why do you move the throttle forward a bit? 1:36
Hi.
You have to set the throttle to idle for a small amount of fuel to help spool the engine for it to start.
Thanks for watching!
We need better engine sounds in DCS , but at least our planes dont look as rusty and old as the real ones hahaha
I thought the technician was a about to take off 😲
Thanks man
Those sounds tho crispy
Therefore DCS is better than BMS? For F16 only of course...
Yes! If you do not fly in Virtual Reality BMS is better,, it has a campaign engine that last for weeks, also instruments. procedures, radios, and physics very well done.
Personally I fly in VR, I have not been back to BMS since I got my VR headset.
@@8ASIMULATORS Why VR doesn't work in BMS? I don't think so... maybe you would want to say that DCS has a better graphics!?
In DCS the physical is not as good as BMS?
For me at the end of 2021 DCS will be better than BMS...
Dcs f16 best 80 dollars ever
Which VR glass have you used? Looks it has quite nice resolution.
Hi I use the Samsung OSYSSEY+ .But it looks a lot better when is recorded by the camera, it doesn't look as good with my own eyes, I don't know why.
Thanks for watching!
DCS has better graphics
Sounds are not compareable!! Real jet is filmed with closed canopy, dcs is not .
And DCS sounds are in helmet sounds, not free air capture... I did pick up some things which needs attention though :). Many thanks Nick
In real life you can hear the gyros it’s that consistent ticking sound you hear, i wish it were in dcs
Ok first off that was no pilot but a maintainer. You can clearly see the reflection in the MFD that he is wearing a headset. Out of 20 years working on USAF F-16s that would be the first time I'd ever seen a pilot wearing a maintenance headset and not a helmet. Also with the proper angle later on in the video you can see the right leg is camo pants. All flight suits I've seen the USAF wear have been monotone coloring.
Looks like he's wearing the intake suite. It looks white to me.
Holy shit!
Neat
Creo que el DCS es un lugar donde los EEUU prueban set de datos para alimentar a sus sistemas de AI, de la misma forma que los Captcha y otras app desarrolladas para que muchos usuarios generen sets de datos de entrada para sus AI.
So basically switching on a -60. Copy.
Damn
TEST PLACEHOLDER
Just realized how much detail is missing from DCS. Shouldn't have watched lol.
Y
@@jaysonsmihth3719 Y
It is an Early Access model. There isn't even a functioning ECM system yet. No auto countermeasure dispense, missing MFD features, and it just got the TGP not long ago. It is still an amazing experience and the fulfillment of dreams to fly the Viper in VR.
.. You know that there are screen capturing software available on the very computer you're running DCS on, right?
Sir yes sir! It looks very distorted Sir. Sorry sir! I'm trying to make it look more realistic sir.
Thanks for watching Sir!
Probably a crew chief.... not a pilot..
DCS is free and the F-16 is $70 iirc. I dare you to find anything on the real 16 that is less than 70 bucks.
what do you mean
@17ll3 x214 yeah but still it is a legitimate simulation
Eh u can get one 27$ platinum nut and a 40 $ light bulb lol
Easy to find items that cost less than 70 dollars on the real plane. I did it for a living a long time ago. What is your point jim?
" I dare you to find anything on the real 16 that is less than 70 bucks." => Falcon4 BMS : www.benchmarksims.org ... Falcon4 : about 7$ ... BMS : Free
Neither one are pilots.
Too hard, better to use the autostart option. Sit back and relax ;) Win Key + Home
Aviation is all about patience and procedure, I love it ever since I started my very first Cessna152.
Is not for all of us.
Thanks for watching!
@@8ASIMULATORS I was joking ;) i got DCS and almost every module ;) Track IR, Thurstmaster Hotas and Logitech rudder pedals and so forth ;) so YES; its for me ;)
@@thespectator2976 cheers! :)
@@thespectator2976 What did you do to get rid of the pedals stiction?
@@getsideways7257 Logitech Pro Flight Rudder Pedals theese are mine.