Many thanks for the review!
I am sure that will also be helpful for the devs.
Maybe they can get it a bit closer to what one can expect.
Many thanks for the review!
saved me $20. If the only thing the module can do is fly around, and it doesn’t simulate flying around properly, whats the purpose? I can fly like a jack-ass in the TF-51 for free.
I am not done with the Eagle! The P-51 was an equal basket case when it came out. It took a few years but eventually she became a delight. The rest of the props seem fine too but to be honest I never bothered putting them through the same test. It could just be how DCS does physics. Having said that, I really doubt that the CE went through the hands of actual Christen owners without these same concerns being raised. The devs must have known.
Wasn’t the CE’s stated purpose being practice for a F4U module?
Oh no, the spitfire has some fierce torque on her. It’s a bug in the CE2, I am 98.76% certain of that. Some value set at 0.10 instead of 1.0
True that. I flew it around Normandy a bit last night in the Mustang and she was a joy to fly and behold.
Form the official newsletter:
I have been a professional aviator for over 15 years and my family is heavily invested in aviation. I have been flying aerobatics for over 5 years learning basic acro in an Acrosport II, followed by a Pitts S1, and now the Christen Eagle II. I teamed up with Magnitude 3 this pass summer to assist in fine tuning the FM and the 3d model by taking videos along with pictures for direct simulation into DCS. Since then the Eagle’s FM has… Read more…
…gone through countless fixes and changes. From basic straight and level flight, to the more advanced maneuvers that this aircraft can accomplish, everything was constantly tested and tweaked to make it as close as possible to the real aircraft. With that being said, Magnitude 3 has recreated this simulation to be nearly identical to what it is really like to strap one of these airplanes onto your back and give it all you got. For example, my Eagle was down for a little over a month while we installed a new radio and fixed a few items that needed some attention. During this time while I was being deprived of that Vitamin G that I require weekly, if not daily, I put a lot of time into flying DCS Christen Eagle. I fly DCS solely in my Rift and using VR for the Eagle is by far one of thee best experiences I’ve ever had flying a sim on my PC. One maneuver that I had yet to try and perfect was the torque roll. I practiced this maneuver countless times in DCS in between the painful hours of ripping nearly every panel off my Eagle in order to re-wire the new radio. After getting to the point of not having to think about what was next in this Aresti routine I had come up with, I knew I had to try it out and see if I could re-create it once my baby was back on her feet.
Once she was put back together, radio tested, and bathed it was time to truly put Eagle to the ultimate test in comparison and make sure what we had been working so hard on these passed few months was worth it. The point at which I knew that we had achieved an amazing recreation for sim was when I did my first torque roll. Yes, everything else was spot on in loops, rolls and all your typical “gentlemen” acro maneuvers. But when I went into vertical to start the torque roll, I was saying to myself, “ok this looks like it did in DCS this is good come on keep going.” Then when the roll came on with the rate and speed, I literally screamed in excitement because the sim was EXACTLY IDENTICAL! This was one of the greatest moments that I’ll remember in my aviation career. After landing I realized that I now have almost a 1:1 simulation in my basement. It is literally improving aerobatic abilities exponentially.
My lines are more straight while snaps and 4 point rolls more crisp. Avalanches more solid and round. All of this is greatly in part to Magnitude 3’s Christen Eagle. Yes there are a few things that need tweaked here and there but it’s being worked on. As of now this recreation is nearly spot on but one thing that you must understand when flying this airplane on your computer is that you’ll be missing one key component that is essential when flying aerobatics and that is the feeling of G’s. G forces are a huge component when throwing these airplanes around in RL. It lets you know how the airplane is performing and how much energy you’re wiping off while your head is pinned outside trying to line up your routines. This can never be fully re-created in a sim unless you have rumble seat pad or you can create a fully enclosed motion sim that can somewhat simulate the feeling of G’s. But if I was to give someone who had zero experience in a CE2 a pair VR goggles and told them to put them on and start learning how to truly fly the Eagle and put it through all of the motions, I could then take that same person and put them in the front seat, with me in the back, and most likely have them flying solo within a few hours if that.
Based on users input and suggestions we’ve worked for the past week not only on fixing any discovered bugs, but also enhancing existing features – as you can see above, we’re working on more detailed pilot models with improved animations. We’re also updating trim tab animations, improving internal sounds and further adjusting the flight model.
I think it’s interesting that there seems to be a different perception when knowledgeable people compare sims and the real deal.
Definitely. I will repeat folowing IRL observations. It is writen with humor, but there is so much truth in that :
And one funy story from my experience. Involved are bikes instead of airplanes.
Few years ago my brother wanted to buy second hand Honda VFR 800 '09 model.
Our friend ( most experienced biker ), my brother ( not so experienced at the time ) and me ( same level as my brother but after wild night so planed to do only company ) we all went to check it to the owner.
First impresions were great. Good looking bike from outside. Then we asked for test ride.
First went our friend. After return he prized the bike and its performance. Next went my brother. His impresions were not that hot as he complained about shaking of the handlebar at certain speeds.
Again went our friend and he didnt confirm my brother’s observations. My brother went again and he complained again.
It was already early afternoon so I felt much beter so I had to ride it to confirm one or other result.
The fact was that the shaking was there around 80kph.
Then we undresed the plastic fairings and we found that it was crashed and repaired.
No buying hapened oc. But the point is that even the more experienced rider did overlook quite noticeable performance failing.
So yes, diferent people, diferent preceptions. And even the experience will not save you from false conclusions.
It is funny how his impression and mine differ entirely. I played a similar defensive roll when I was helping to test the x737. So maybe we get invested when we get into these relationships. Or maybe I am just making excuses. I would back up my points with some video but the plane has been down since June. 2018 was simply an ugly year.
I only bought the CE for one purpose, to go nuts w it on my TV w my MSFFB2. TO this end, it is a brand new toy. The flight model needs some polish but OMG, what a fun plane. You’re in the weeds or through the buildings. In and out like a rabbit. No one can stop you. Ever since the first time I seen one… I wanted one. Now I Got one. If you ever had a Ferrari dream or a Porshe dream, This is it! Come and get it!!!
I’ve been popping over to Magnitude 3’s Christen Eagle DCS channel from time time to see if there have been any updates or promises of same. There have been zero posts in a week…anywhere. The DCS forum must have thousands of hits a day. For a sub-forum to be such a desert may not the worst indicator of how little interest the module has generated.
Hey! I just misspelled “module”, “Mudule”. I see great potential for the term. You’re welcome.
I appreciate the effort you put into analyzing the FM, although it would appear they have not acknowledged your post on ED forums yet. Hopefully they will at least consider opinions from people with real world experience and detailed observations.
Personally, I’m still out on the CEII. It’s a good price, but it doesn’t really draw me in. Maybe if I flew VR.
As I see it all of the devs ( ED included ) have these people involved somewhere in the dev proces.
Problem with having real pilots as testers is that they don’t necessarily have extensive PC flightsim experience, and are easily impressed when devs tell them that this is as good as it gets.
Devs that are pilots, or pilots who know the limits of flightsim realism, is another matter.
But simply stating that a real pilot has tested the sim or module, doesn’t have to mean anything.
Disclaimer; I don’t know this is the case with the CEII module.
You mean like when they had pilots talk about how great sims in the 90s were? How they looked “photoreal”? When we had 700MHz P3’s and Voodoo2 cards?
We all thought the same
Sort of. We all consider realism in comparison to what is achievable, at the time. If it is due to hardware or software limitations…
MSFS was ”As Real As It Gets” a looong time ago…
Totally true. I remember how impressed I was with Microprose’s “Stealth Fighter” because of the way stall speed was connected to bank. Now of course we all know that AoA has nothing to do with bank angle and everything to do with wing loading. And I knew that at the time as well. But just the mere fact that they considered it in the model was enough for me back then. Plus, it forced you to fly a certain way which helped to make the GAME aspect of the game one of the best in my flight sim life. I spent last December at my company’s training center. Displayed in the lobby is an old Link trainer from the 40’s. It’s quite cute. It is mostly made of wood and shaped like a toy monoplane with room for one. It closes completely dark and is equipped with the basic “6-pack” plus a couple of nav radios. It was rendered entirely worthless by advances in the 50’s but for it’s time it was a realistic enough training tool to be useful. It is always a dangerous path to apply present standards to the past.