SC Designs F5E just released

Barfly said:
Also surprised at all the negativity - this release has flying characteristics closer to a real T-38/F5 than anything I've experienced in any MSFS variant, including the T38 myself and several others here helped Milviz make quite a while back. There are certainly a number of visual issues, functional switch problems, and the before-mentioned rudder roll oddity, but overall I haven't had this much fun with a sim aircraft in quite a while! Spent some time beating up the pattern with it in a spectacularly sloppy, if workable fashion.
Click to expand...

So I’m guessing you’re a T-38 pilot who helped put this together or are you the F-5 pilot who helped with the flight dynamics?
 
No a guy name John Visser did the flight test, and another group of guys did the FM, according to the manual.
 
I remember spending years developing the flight mechanics of the old Aersoft F-14. It was a deep collaboration with a flight engineer who worked with Lockheed Martin, three former Tomcat pilots, and about five other former combat aviators. I always found Greg's observations insightful and valuable, and that won't change here. Yes textures are pleasant for the eye, but I will choose coherent flight mechanics every time.
 
Add me to the “likes it” crowd. Systems feel good, and the flight model (other than the rudder thing) feels top-notch. Inside the plane looks great, and I don’t fly from the external view, though it’s fun to pop out and look at the plane occasionally.

Textures outside might not be jaw dropping, but once the paint kit hits I imagine we’ll have the usual wonderful selection of optional liveries to choose from.

I guess I’m a rarity around here in caring more about the authenticity of the flying experience than the texture density. I’d expect that from the official forum, but I thought the fellow old fogies here were more about how the plane flies than the eye candy.

(Edit: Or, what JohnC wrote just above me. There are a few of us, I guess!)
 
Barfly said:
Also surprised at all the negativity - this release has flying characteristics closer to a real T-38/F5 than anything I've experienced in any MSFS variant, including the T38 myself and several others here helped Milviz make quite a while back. There are certainly a number of visual issues, functional switch problems, and the before-mentioned rudder roll oddity, but overall I haven't had this much fun with a sim aircraft in quite a while! Spent some time beating up the pattern with it in a spectacularly sloppy, if workable fashion.
Click to expand...

Which, in my opinion, is the reason most developers have left. I remember when we had scores of developers here contributing to the threads. I have also noticed, if my survey of one is correct, the absence of many onetime regulars.

As I look around in MS2020’s forum, most of the threads are about new releases or pending releases, usually WWII and earlier era aircraft. Now there is nothing wrong with those threads. The original purpose of the forum was older warbirds. However, we once had a much more dynamic and vibrant forum. Sadly, I don’t see that anymore.

Maybe, what I see is a natural progression. I have been a member of this forum for over a decade and a half. In all that time, I have never seen a lower number of people posting. I am afraid SOS is dying. I don’t want to see it die. It has too much history. I have made a lot of internet friends on SOH. Again, most are no longer here.

As for the F-5E. It was based on the T-38. I assume it flies a lot like the T-38. If I recall correctly, the T-38’s roll rate was like 720 degrees a second. I remember how it would bang your head against the canopy if you weren’t the PIC and he didn’t warn you before rolling. I don’t think MSFS can truly simulate a fighter type aircraft.

Dean, from DC Designs, doesn’t even claim to fully represent his fighters. He has stated over and over that he builds fun to fly aircraft, not study level, DCS realism. To expect the F-5 to be any different is like expecting your house cat to be a tiger.

One legitimate criticism, in my opinion, are the scarcity of working items like heading and course knobs. I don’t own the aircraft yet, so I can’t test the knobs. (Besides, I use cockpit controls to simulate course and heading controls, so I don’t worry about them, so long as I can find a sim event or LVAR to set them.) Still, I think the basic functions should be there.

I will give Dean credit for fixing many early release bugs on his other models. I admire him for going back and updating, upgrading his models, I fully expect he will do the same for the F-5E.
 
HDG and CRS knobs DO 'work', BUT...

CRS knob rotates but only changes the CDI needle direction if Tacan or VOR mode active, in R/L it works all the time and you would also use the CDI needle as an aide memoire to indicate runway direction for T/O, circuits, landings and cross-country.
I don't think a physical knob (Honeycomb?) to set CRS will help...

HDG works but with no autopilot (correctly I think) it has no effect, and the bug is a bit too small for a visual aid.

Roll rate is as fast as you would want it :)

Bug reporting is now active on their discord, I've reported the Rudder and CRS knob issues, hopefully they will be addressed.
 
Apparently Bugs are defined as GAME/PRODUCT breaking issues that stop/inhibit use, everything else has to be in the discussion channel, so my two bugs have been deleted ...
 
DennyA said:
Add me to the “likes it” crowd. Systems feel good, and the flight model (other than the rudder thing) feels top-notch. Inside the plane looks great, and I don’t fly from the external view, though it’s fun to pop out and look at the plane occasionally.

Textures outside might not be jaw dropping, but once the paint kit hits I imagine we’ll have the usual wonderful selection of optional liveries to choose from.

I guess I’m a rarity around here in caring more about the authenticity of the flying experience than the texture density. I’d expect that from the official forum, but I thought the fellow old fogies here were more about how the plane flies than the eye candy.

(Edit: Or, what JohnC wrote just above me. There are a few of us, I guess!)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you are a rarity in caring about the flight model! I have never actually flown an F-5 but have spent a lot of time around them, photographing them on the ground and shooting them air-to-air at places like Key West, Miramar and Fallon. As a layman I can't tell whether a flight model accurately depicts the real aircraft or not although I do notice when the controls are obviously unrealistic in a 'simming sense'. I'm not a pilot but I have always found it hard to be convinced that it's actually even possible to fully replicate a real flight model in a desk based simulator game. Again I bow to the expertise of the real pilots here who sim as well. To me though for a level of immersion that will get me to use a product regularly (or even simply more than once) it absolutely has to look right and sound right. In MSFS for a Payware product today that means, as a minimum, that the sounds are top notch, the internal and external modelling is accurate (e.g. with properly formed curves on canopy frames etc ...) and the texturing and paint finish is at least a quality of what the freeware community can achieve. I don't consider the latter as "eye candy". When you see the finish that likes of Fly-by-wire and others can achieve on freeware products there is now a very high bar in terms of the texture and paint finish now demanded/expected. I also appreciate that some people have no requirement for any external views as they just fly the thing but personally an accurate and relevant pilot figure is also a big 'realism' factor for me although I appreciate others are less bothered on this aspect.

Anyways I agree that once Dean has got some updates out and our painters have got busy this will be a useful addition to my hanger.

Fellow old fogey
 
GO_Navy said:
Off topic a bit but when did the Ryzen 8700X3D get released? You a beta tester for AMD?
Click to expand...

Not a beta tester. I am a dyslexia tester. Or maybe it is senility.

Thanks for pointing that out to me. It should be 7800 x3d.
 
jmig said:
Not a beta tester. I am a dyslexia tester. Or maybe it is senility.

Thanks for pointing that out to me. It should be 7800 x3d.
Click to expand...


No worries, I was excited for a minute and wanted to get some insight into what's coming next.

I need to upgrade my current processor (10900K).

I have heard great reviews on the 7800x3d for MSFS. What are you thoughts? You like it? Better then Intel you think?
 
GO_Navy said:
No worries, I was excited for a minute and wanted to get some insight into what's coming next.

I need to upgrade my current processor (10900K).

I have heard great reviews on the 7800x3d for MSFS. What are you thoughts? You like it? Better then Intel you think?
Click to expand...

I got interested in it from reading threads started by other members on the virtues of the AMD 7800 x3d. The primary benefit being its huge cache . While I was not unhappy with my i9 10900 CPU, whenever I ran FPS counters, it always showed the mainthread as being the choke point.

The 7800 has helped a lot. I use a Meta Quest 3 headset and find that I get outstanding performance in VR. I have my frames set at 30/sec and, so far, haven’t experienced any shudders or freezes. I have not tried any performance “tweaks”. The built-in boast pushes the CPU up to 5.1 Hz.

I primarily fly GA aircraft and, as a rule, do not go into major airports. When I first got the system up and running I did a test flight with the SWS PC-12 over Manhattan. I never saw the frames drop below 30, nor did the red long latency graph show its ugly head.

Just be aware that if you go with the AMD CPU, you will have to change out your motherboard, water-cooler, and RAM as well.
 
Javis stated in the F86 thread
The same nose-high landing and take-off procedures apply to the F-5 as well. Non of the two F-5 models i tried (not the current SCD F-5E model) was able to perform these techniques.
Click to expand...
Thought I would answer here:

The SC F-5 can do both, though with caveats

You can ease the nose-wheel off the ground at 100+ and hold the attitude and it will fly itself off when ready.
However you can do this with or without the nose-wheel extension, so not quite 100% maybe.

You can land nose-high and keep the nose up until 100 Kts when it drops onto the nosewheel, conveniently at the limiting speed for the brake-chute :)
But there isn't much aero-brake effect (probably an MSFS limitation) so unless you have a loooong runway it's going to get exciting when the nose drops and you see how close the runways end actually is...
 
keithb77 said:
in R/L it works all the time and you would also use the CDI needle as an aide memoire to indicate runway direction for T/O, circuits, landings and cross-country.
.
Click to expand...

What a Tip! Never thought of using the Needle for that! What a stupído I've been all these years!

Many, many thanks! :very_drunk:
 
Thank you for your thoughts on the 7800x3d.

Thinking about pulling the trigger on it in my new build. Let's see if I can convince the MRS to let me spend a few thousand :)
 
keithb77 said:
Javis stated in the F86 thread

Thought I would answer here:

The SC F-5 can do both, though with caveats

You can ease the nose-wheel off the ground at 100+ and hold the attitude and it will fly itself off when ready.
However you can do this with or without the nose-wheel extension, so not quite 100% maybe.
Click to expand...

Thanks Keith ! Just what i was wondering about, what does this 'nose-wheel extension' actually do/mean ?...

It's very good to know that the nosewheel-up/lift off procedure *does* work with the SC F-5. I watched one review of the SC F-5 that directs the flightmodel to the boneyard straight away...

You can land nose-high and keep the nose up until 100 Kts when it drops onto the nosewheel, conveniently at the limiting speed for the brake-chute :)
But there isn't much aero-brake effect (probably an MSFS limitation) so unless you have a loooong runway it's going to get exciting when the nose drops and you see how close the runways end actually is...
Click to expand...

I honestly can't remember anymore if the nosewheel high landing technique of both our FS-9 F-86 and B-25 did actually shorten the roll out. Knowing Rob's expertise on flight dynamics creation it probabely did. I just loved to watch my take-off's and landings in external- or fly-by view as much as possible. Which with both these aircraft always was something special to see. :)
 
I too, am disappointed with this release. For one thing, the airplane seems ridiculously overpowered (anyone else have any thoughts on that?), and the pitch sensitivity seems too light. Both issues seem improbable since I got the impression Dean was using one or more F-5/T-38 pilots for testing-- so I am certain those issues would have been spotted. My second issue is the AB flame...it looks fake to me, and I'd rather have none in that case. The final item that (for me) detracted from the otherwise decent cockpit were the mirrors....not a fan...hopefully they can be improved (other developers have come up with more convincing mirrors).

Hopefully Dean will issue a few updates, and after a period of time, this release will improve. Keeping my fingers crossed, as I am an F-5 nut....and there is a possibility that they will also do a two-seat F-5F....so matured well, this product could STILL become my "go to" fighter in the sim.

Kent

P.S. I also hope they keep an option to retain the legacy helmet the pilot currently has, in addition to adding the modern-day helmet a number of people are yammering about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top