Leaderboard

A little teaser...

CJ-10 GLCM 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Panzerhaubitze 2000, Yessss

Well your disappointment would be short I hope. Due to the persistence of a certain user on my Discord (who should remain nameless ), I have implemented the quad views support extensions for Quest Pro. It is currently in final beta testing and should be released in the next few days. So far the feedback is pretty good so hopefully it will make it worth your while and also signal Meta to wake up when it comes to supporting feature on their PCVR runtime.

Вы совершенно правы! Тем не менее, поясняем по мере возможности, а про сырой продукт - так текущая версия и есть - открытая "Недоделанная версия")). Это не есть релизный продукт. AH-64D Вам точно не рекомендую покупать... там всё еще хуже будет в Вашем восприятии. Теперь про удобство освоения, удовольствие от игры... для справки: при отборе кандидатов с целью определения годности к летному обучению в реальных вузах (и в РФ, и в США) проводится оч.серьезный психофизиологический отбор. Огромную долю тестов включают тесты на способность к освоению нового моторного навыка, способность инвертирования моторного навыка "на лету", скорость реакции, способность к распределению внимания, способность к концентрации внимания, возможности зрительной памяти, психологическая устойчивость. И далеко не все желающие стать летчиками эти тесты проходят с удовлетворительным уровнем, потому оч.многие кандидаты не становятся летчиками. И даже после этого, уже во время обучения "списывают" не мало курсантов "по нелетке" - т.е. как неспособных достигнуть требуемого уровня освоения ЛА за установленное время. А в плане освоения виртуального ЛА всё еще сложнее, т.к. в реальных условиях пилотирование (управление ЛА) осуществляется на основе получения информации почти от всех органов чувств (за исключением вкуса)), а в симуляторе, в отличие от реальности, у игрока отсутствует или "урезаны" несколько важнейших источников информации с соотв.органов чувств о положении ЛА, его тенденциях и состоянии: отсутствует чувство ускорений; отсутствует возможность использования периферического зрения (у большинства игроков даже с большим монитором поле зрения в районе 60гр); а также повышаются требования к точности перемещения органов управления ЛА: в реальном ЛА ручка управления примерно в три раза больше по длине, чем настольный джойстик (не говоря про РОШ - имхо основной источник разбалансировок вертолета!). Т.к. команда ЕД старается в максимально возможной степени смоделировать физику (динамику) полета (в т.ч. поведения несущих поверхностей, инерционных характеристик и прочее), работы силовой установки, работы систем, то виртуальному пилоту в плане освоения ЛА и точности его пилотирования значительно сложней, чем реальному. И это не шутка. Но у виртуального пилота есть неоспоримое преимущество перед реальными курсантами и пилотами: это его устремленность и условно "бесконечное" время на освоение ЛА))) Так что, всё в Ваших руках. И все суждения о недостатках модели лучше выкладывать в формате: должно быть так и так (на мой взгляд), а в модели это вот так и вот эдак. Тогда будет гораздо более конструктивно. И ни кто ругать не станет, если Ваше мнение о конкретных проявлениях поведения и возможностях ЛА будет ошибочным.

Ein paar Impressionen vom Tag der Bundeswehr 2023 beim Internationalen Hubschrauber-Ausbildungszentrum in Bückeburg. Leider habe ich fast nur Starrflügler fotografiert, die Helis habe ich mir lieber mit eigenen Augen angeschaut, sorry. Anreise... äh... Anmarsch. Die Shuttlebusse am Bahnhof kamen nicht los, der halbe Landkreis Schaumburg steckte im Stau. Zu Fuß vom Bahnhof ging es letztlich fast genau so schnell. Schwer zu schätzen, wie viele Besucher da waren; mehrere 10.000 auf jeden Fall, die Bundeswehr selbst meldet 100.000 (!) Besucher allein in Bückeburg (Nachtrag: laut Lokalpresse waren es circa 41.000 Zuschauer). Zwei Tiger sind gerade im Anflug auf den Platz. Die Luftwaffe hat eine C-130J-30 aus Évreux eingeflogen, Anreise circa 1,5 Stunden laut Crew. Die Kollegen aus Wunstorf hatten vermutlich 5 Minuten Anflug oder so. Der A400M war unspektakulär gelandet und hat dann einen umso spektakuläreren Kurzstart mit Power-Climb und 60° Angle of Bank hingelegt. Hier ist er zwischen Flügel und Stabilisator der C-130 gerade im Anflug... ... und wenn man genau hinschaut sieht man sogar ein paar kleine Vortexe an den Flügeln, außerhalb der äußeren Triebwerke. Hatte bis dahin schon 20 Minuten angestanden, um mir die C-130 von drinnen anzuschauen, deshalb wurde das nur ein hektischer Schnappschuss. Ich war echt beeindruckt, wie viele Menschen alleine nach Bückeburg gekommen sind. Der Einlass hat ziemlich lange gedauert und es sah so aus, als wären die Organisatoren selbst vom Ansturm überrascht gewesen; nachdem Minister Pistorius mit seiner Rede fertig war, wurde der Einlass schließlich drastisch beschleunigt, indem man die Taschen- und Rucksackkontrollen auf "sieht okay aus, viel Spaß" reduziert hat; die letzten 200 Meter vorm Tor gingen plötzlich super schnell. Alles in allem war das genau wie erhofft ein fantastischer Tag mit wirklich brillanten Vorführungen vor allem natürlich der Drehflügler; leider gab es (obwohl im Programm angekündigt) kein eigenes Display vom CH-53 (der kam in einer simulierten Luftlandeübung vor, aber eben nicht als Solo-Flieger). Dafür haben NH-90, EC-135 und ganz besonders der Tiger mal wieder eindrucksvoll demonstriert, dass die Schwerkraft nur erfunden wurde, damit Cappoeira und Hubschrauber besonders elegant aussehen. Ich habe in der knallenden Sonne zwei Leute mitbekommen, die Hilfe brauchten, und da waren sofort Sanis am Start. Etwas doof war, nachdem man schon eine Stunde in der Schlange steht, wenn dann direkt vor einem noch eben zwei Busladungen Besucher ausgespuckt werden, die sich vor einem einsortieren. Ich denke daraus wird man lernen und macht es nächstes Mal besser. Alles in allem war die Orga aus meiner Sicht echt toll, die Hallen waren richtig schön hergerichtet, das Static Display war ziemlich gut, es waren überall Soldaten ansprechbar, und die Flugvorführungen waren einfach mega. Das alles mit freiem Eintritt, super! Ganz großer Bonus für den riesigen Fahrradparkplatz direkt gegenüber vom Eingang, der auch ganz massiv genutzt wurde - dank gutem Wetter und dank E-Bike-Boom sind da ganz viele Leute mit dem Rad angereist. Wer für nächstes Mal noch am Schwanken ist: Am Ausgang gab es einen halben Liter Wasser und einen Kugelschreiber geschenkt.

I'm still very much pissed at them for 2 things: - developer mode fiasco, hiding your features behind this very unreliable developer mode which is causing a lot of people coming to me with their issues (while it's a Meta issue) - most importantly they are the vendor in the best position to make a positive impact to the PCVR gaming industry, yet they seem to create more barriers instead of taking them down. The eye tracking data as a vendor-specific API is a great example of how you discourage developers from implementing these techs. What I'm doing with the upcoming "Meta-Foveated" project, I am not doing it for them. I am doing it to promote the streamlining of these technologies. I'm doing it because I want more developers to use these techs and implement foveated rendering in their games. I'm doing it because I think we deserve a good PCVR gaming Ecosystem. Because you deserve a delightful VR experience!! And in the process, I can say I wrote this project in 4 evenings, on a laptop, while watching garbage TV with my wife and my bunny. If I can do that, then Meta's large $$$ has no excuses to not be doing it themselves. Edit: don't get me wrong, I am not disparaging the skills and competence of Meta's engineers. I've met them and they are great. Their leadership is probably asking them to not spend resources on PCVR, which is the issue. FYI the first version will not be compatible with ASW. It looks like the Oculus runtime cannot do ASW when you submit multiple projections. I'm looking into an alternative. Edit: Taking this ASW thing back. Solved it, it will be supported Day 1.

Great job C.H, love all your additions. any chance that a LAV 6.0 could be in the works?

Ein paar Fotos hab ich noch aus einem kurzen Video von der Luftlandeübung rausholen können (das Video taugt leider nicht, zu viele Leute vor der Linse): Luftlandeübung mit NH-90: Einer landet, einer demonstriert Fast-Roping. Ein CH-53 kommt dazu und bringt ein leichtes gepanzertes Kettenfahrzeug Wiesel mit, das die Truppen verstärkt. Im Hintergrund leistet ein Tiger Unterstützung. Alle Truppen sind abgesetzt, die Hubschrauber verlassen das Einsatzgebiet. Die Transporter im Abflug, während die Tiger weiter Unterstützung leisten.

In game, there are the buoys. Hard to find in ME. Then I posted this request ---

I bought the set when they were announced and they finally arrived this week. NLR never responded to emails sent prior to order with questions, let alone about the account /website error that forced me to order with a guest account as you cant add or remove items to my accounts cart to place the order. Regardless of that I ordered from them based on peoples here opinion of them. Well the set arrived and its an absolute joke of a paper weight. Damage is horrendous on both packages and so bad there is no way this all occurred in shipping. Scrapes to bare metal on parts that are warped in burble wrap that had no signs of damage, missing parts, bent bolts, broken washers, dents, broken plastic fittings and covers warped beams so parts can't sit flat, zip ties that were already sheared or cut prior to arrival and this is on parts that are within another box. I have never received items this damaged and do not suspect all the damage was done by UPS some had to have slipped QC. Preinstalled bolts had actually come out too and the nut to the bolts are missing. NLR isn't replying to my emails for help so I have a 1000 USD + paperweight. Damage is so bad replacement parts cant fix the stand but the chair might could be saved with many replacement parts and paint to patch and prevent rust. The stand is bent and warped so it can flatten where it needs to and even one preinstalled bolt in the chair cant be used/removed as it has no spares in the package and the bolt head is filled with metal and you cant use the allen wrench you supposed to on it. That for sure was a QC oversight they should have seen that prior to powder coat. Some of the damage to the brown exterior box is me ripping it anyway to take photos as the parts sticking out of the interior boxes against the other box made it so I couldn't lift them out and the box is a two man lift anyway and I wasnt gonna hurt myself doing it alone to get the photos. The parts where so loose in the inner boxes that they can move around which caused them to try to rip out of the boxes and the scrapping I dont know how it occured unless at their shop as these parts where sealed in full coverage bubble wrap and still are scratched but the bubble wrap was undamaged.

Assorted cargo and transports If armed, and work, it was un intentional!. All come from free 3d, cad nav, sketch Fab etc and have a common use license, Saved games install .OvGME ready Enjoy and, Have fun! https://www.dropbox.com/s/bmjpw474b2hcenn/WW II Cargo Transports V 2.8.0.zip?dl=0

Just wanted to say a huge thank you to the developers of this map - it is SUPERB! Sorry Syria, a new product has my complete attention! Love fhe terrain, the lighting, the attention to detail. Also a massive shout out to ED for their FANTASTIC continued work improving the core product and stuff like the Viper and Hornet. It really is the best sim in the business. Now back to the cockpit ...

Any chance this is going to come this guided shells, is that even possible?

hier ein schönes Video vom Air Defender 23 aus Hohn. Können die F-15 begeisterten schon mal schauen wie richtig gelandet wird.

Interesting video released by Lukas. Explains really well why some headsets have "useless" pixels. Good to see that QP and the like are using technologies that are less wasteful in both physical world and compute

Got it back now, the instructions said to redownload it, as the authorisation was still active. Happy to say that it worked, so all good now Cheers for the assistance guys Les

Thank you all for your kind assistance in this matter. The hint with the buoys was crucial, and the speed limit. Below is a mission that has the Samwise Giant navigate the Suez successfully, marks all orange buoys for better orientation on the map (ME only), and also populates the entire Suez Canal with ships based on Samwise's path. Suez Populated.miz

Was that part of the Sinai map? Heard there was a valley full of them

Not sure what makes you so confident to make the above statement and continuing a bit off topic, but:

As interesting as this might be, this topic is for the DCS: Me 262. This module is currently not in development, it has not been dropped either, but chances are we would see a different Luftwaffe fighter before it. Thanks. PS I understand the Kickstarter made promises (by that team), but we have done our best to support those the best we could, but also they were not made by us. The 262 would be the coolest thing to fly at DCS levels, but also probably would not be as fun as some might think in real combat environments like MP, engine failures, fuel limits, etc... PSS also, please be kind to each other and do not resort to low brow name calling and such. Save it for the playground. Thanks.

This error occurs because the original VPC mod re-defined some textures of the Su-27 to employ on its Su-35 static object. I corrected this error by replacing the textures of the Mod with those of the current Su-27 ... are you using my corrected version, or the original one? Just tried it and I can connec to MP servers without breaking the IC in spite of having the VPC Mod enabled.

Причины тут очевидные - изменилось вооружение самолета. Вообще, пристрелка пулеметов на самолете - это довольно интересная тема. Но не в отношении вооружения - там-то все ясно. Это прекрасный пример влияния интернета на процесс разрушения человеческих знаний. В былые времена для того, чтобы получить достоверные знания по какому-нибудь вопросу (или, по крайней мере, считающиеся достоверными на данный момент) - нужно было пойти в библиотеку. Книги (по крайней мере, технического характера) были штучным продуктом человеческого интеллекта - все, что там излагалось - было многократно проверено специалистами, отрецензировано и утверждено. Вероятность получить недостоверные знания была чрезвычайно мала. В настоящее время книги перестали служить источником знаний. Источник знаний сейчас - это строка в любой поисковой машине, выдающая ссылки на сотни графоманских статей людей, ни грамма не разбирающихся в том, о чем они пишут и занимающихся лишь бессмысленным перекладыванием информации с одной странички интернета на другую, зачастую еще и с добавлением своей собственной интерпретации известных фактов на уровне, доступном для их понимания. Парадокс ситуации заключается в том, что сейчас получить нужную книгу по тому или иному вопросу так легко, как никогда раньше. Мало того, что в научно-технические библиотеки и в РГБ (бывшую Ленинку) сейчас может записаться любой желающий - так еще и масса книг оцифрована и лежит в свободном доступе. Но их никто не читает. Говорю об этом не понаслышке - еще лет десять назад оцифровал и выложил в интернет выдержки из книги по теории воздушной стрельбы, где среди всего прочего подробно разбирались основания пристрелки вооружения и на всех форумах говорил - вот, смотрите, это так, а это - эдак, читайте, изучайте. Что имеем на настоящий момент? Открываем интернет и наблюдаем там самую разнообразную муть о том, что дистанция пристрелки вооружения зависит от индивидуальных особенностей пилота и должна им настраиваться самостоятельно. Механизм распространения этих "знаний" очевиден - люди идут по пути наименьшего сопротивления. Для того, чтобы разобраться в каком-нибудь вопросе требуется приложить определенные (и порой довольно значительные) усилия. Для того, чтобы следовать "бытовой логике" - не нужно никаких. Ведь с точки зрения "бытовой логики" все предельно просто и понятно - пули летят по дуге, а крыльевые пулеметы еще и стоят на некотором расстоянии друг от друга - значит, для того, чтобы попасть в воздушную цель, траектории полета пуль и линия прицеливания должны пересекаться; пересечение это возможно только на определенной дистанции, значит - на этом расстоянии и нужно стрелять, иначе промажешь, а раз это расстояние зависит от индивидуальной манеры вести воздушный бой - значит, его нужно настраивать индивидуально. Многие идут и еще дальше и рассказывают о том, насколько важно точно определять дистанцию до цели во время воздушного боя - это же все так логично, что возражать может только тупой. В свое время даже успели и к ветеранам поприставать с вопросами типа "А в вашем полку на каком расстоянии пулеметы сводили?" Интересно отметить, что "бытовая логика" объясняет окружающий мир не просто "немного не так", а с точностью до наоборот! С точки зрения бытовой логики солнце вращается вокруг земли - в реальном мире наоборот. С точки зрения бытовой логики прерыватель синхронного пулемета задерживает выстрел в тот момент, когда лопасть проходит мимо ствола - в реальном мире наоборот. С точки зрения бытовой логики воздушный стрелок из пулеметов с нулевым рассеиванием (даже термин специальный придумали: "лазерганы") будет попадать белке в глаз за километр - в реальном мире наоборот: вероятность поражения цели будет нулевой. Со сведением пулеметов - такая же картина. Сведение пулеметов делают не для того, чтобы попадать в цель на какой-то определенной дистанции, а для того, чтобы попадать _на любой дистанции_ эффективного воздушного боя. И все было бы еще ничего, если бы не интернет, который предоставил этой самой "бытовой логике" мощнейшую положительную обратную связь. "Бытовая логика" захлестнула мир, она стремительно несется сплошной лавиной, противостоять ей бесполезно, силы явно не равны. Когда я еще сто лет назад впервые прочитал в журнале "Вокруг света" научно-фантастический роман "Пасынки вселенной" Роберта Хайнлайна - подумал, что как писатель-фантаст он пишет отлично, но вот только точно ошибается в одном - не может человечество так быстро деградировать всего за несколько поколений. Сейчас думаю, что он, пожалуй, был даже слишком оптимистичен... Поэтому то, что я пишу - я пишу не для любителей "бытовой логики" - я знаю, что переубеждать их бесполезно. Я пишу для тех археологов будущего, которые найдут в земле осколок микросхемы, расшифруют записанные в нее данные и скажут "Ба Бу Бы" "О! Бесценный артефакт погибшей цивилизации!" Так вот, вернемся к нашим баранам. Пушки и пулеметы на самолете пристреливаются на определенную дистанцию вовсе не исходя из индивидуальных особенностей ведения воздушного боя какого-нибудь летчика-аса. А для того, чтобы этому самому летчику-асу максимально упростить процесс прицеливания и избавить его от напряженного вычисления дистанции до цели и расчета и применения связанных с этой дистанцией поправок. То есть, говоря простым языком - для того, чтобы обеспечить поражение цели на любой дистанции практического воздушного боя - это примерно диапазон от 50 до 500-600 метров. Поскольку гарантированное поражение воздушной цели можно нанести только путем попадания в жизненно важную часть конструкции или в пилота - то за воздушную цель условно принимается квадрат габаритами метр на метр. Поэтому дистанция пристрелки зависит не от личного желания летчика-истребителя, а от: 1. Баллистики боеприпаса 2. Количества и расположения пулеметов и пушек относительно прицела При крыльевом расположении пулеметов как на И-16 тип 5 из ТО 37-го года результат вертикальной пристрелка на 400 метров на земле выглядит так (средняя тракетория):

V 0.9.9 added. New missile program (loadout) added. There are 4 pre-flight programs available in loadout menu for 2 and 5 pylons. PZD ASh/SEAD - Antiship task, attacks cruisers and frigates with powerful air defence. SEAD task to attack land SAM. Standard loft and dive trajectory. PZD2 ASh/SEAD High Tr - the same as above, but missile follows different trajectory PZD2 Land attack - pinpoint task, attacks land targets as ballistic missile PZDA - Antiship task, targets are aircraft carriers and other ships without powerful radar. Missile will fly relatively low and seek target. You need 3-5 missiles to destroy one USA carrier. Remember to set high altitude and speed for H-6 bomber, and launch distance at least 150 km for low trajectory and 250 for ballistic. Please test and report bugs.

thanks, good point, i will discuss this with our artist at the meeting on monday

will do, thanks

I successfully transited the Teddy Roosevelt through the Suez Canal. Comply with the orange buoy channel markers and keep your speed below 15 knots. Transit took 5 hours ...

ILS at certain airports seems to be placed incorrectly. I've counted at least five serious cases of misalignment (listed below), but there are more places where it's just slightly off. 1. Ben-Gurion - most of the runways 2. Cairo International - RWY 05L-23R 3. Hatzor - RWY 05 4. Nevatim - RWY 25 5. Tel Nof - RWY 36' ILS is completely messed up.

Hi, it's not possible to move blue and red bullseye (neutral work's well), they are both outside the map's range (see attach picture of bull position - it's same for both red and blue)

Just installed the latest Nvidia driver 536.23 and the annoying random flicker is gone!!! I have been experiencing this flicker in all VR games including DCS. The flicker would happen following rapid head movement but not all the time, impossible to reproduce consistently and very annoying. After flying a few mission in which I always had a them, they are gone! Not sure if it was specific to my setup, anyone had this problem?

You guys put a lot of work into the buildings in your maps. Why not add some of them as placeable statics?

Hello OnReTech, congratulations on the great success of your Sinai map. Not only does this historically rich map make the DCS world more exciting, but you have taken DCS's terrains technology to a new level. During my tour of the Sinai map, I noticed no transition between the beach and the ocean, in other maps such as the Marianas and the Persian Gulf there are topographic transitions, I will list screenshots and a satellite view of Sinai to illustrate and compare. sinai map： in the google map: null the Marianas map:

its a glass windscreen, it gets removed when they're driving in a tactical or hostile environment .

Devs have stated many times that they were looking at other gfx engines but found them inadequate for the tasks so they decided they are better off developing their own.

Rudel thanks, you advice worked like a charm. Will try it, as I won't live long enough for a full new download:)

Auto hover is WIP and affects auto slave. The aircraft can spin continuously at times esp when auto slaving to a target left of cam center.

What a topic... Personality of AI. Impressive. I'love to have him bit sarcastic - funny like in the WSO blues With my best regards

Thank you @Rudel_chw Method that worked for me was loading profile via drop down menu for each device as suggested in that topic, much easier than mapping it all over again.

+1 for icing. It is a massive factor in real life that must be respected, and it would be great to see in DCS. Especially icing of sensors like pitot tubes and static ports would be a great addition. Both for flying and mission planning, it would add a new element where you have to apply decision-making.

тов.генерал, виноват!.. не было возможности прочесть Ваш вопрос своевременно)) Р-60 по земле требует пересмотреть концепт (подход) к моделированию захвата ИК ГСН в ядре DCS. Разработчики ядра этим озадачены, и уже довольно давно, с момента планирования включения Р-60 в модуль Ми-24. Но т.к. это сотрудники не команды разработчиков модуля, то конкретного срока выполнения задачи пока назвать не могу.

I'm going to open with this, I am not looking for perfection, I am merely looking for "Good enough". Additionally, this is about the PERFORMANCE, model, not the flight model. This is about making the engine use the correct amount of power and fuel for any specific flight profile. So, profiling the huey. Where to begin. Well I feel it prudent to start with the torque calibration factor once again. This isn't something you can profile, but understanding what it is allows you to understand the potential flaws in the current method of profiling. So, what is the torque calibration factor. As simple as possible, this is the value the torque gauge reads while the engine is putting out 1125ft-lbs of torque. So why is it important? The Torque Calibration factor is important because ED has not provided one for our huey, and it is effectively impossible to determine as a client. Therefore, we will assume a calibration factor of 61.4. As shown by the calibration factor chart, this provides a 1:1 representation of indicated to calibrated torque, what you see is what you get. 50psi, is 50psi. It is, however, still important to understand the implications of doing this. If our huey were tuned for a calibration factor of say, 66, our torque gauge at a reading of 50, would actually be corrected to a torque of around 43, a difference of 7psi. Conversely at a calibration factor of 54, 50psi indicated would instead actually be a real torque of well over 50psi. However, as per the graph, this error gets lower and lower as the indicated PSI gets lower and lower. This means that to correct for an anomalous calibration factor, you cannot simply just shift the entire graph up or down. It would need to be adjusted for each datapoint. Additionally, note that the correction is always in one direction, if your calibration factor is above 61.4, your indicated PSI ALWAYS reads high, if your calibration factor is below 61.4, your indicated PSI ALWAYS reads low, it doesn't change throughout the range of torque. However, all data for the real huey is presented in calibrated torque. So if we assume our huey has a calibration factor of 61.4, this would mean that the graphs generated through empirical tests should match up nearly identically with the real thing. So. Where do we begin? First, here is the test mission. Huey Test 15C 29.92inHg.miz Lets start with the static tests. Let's start with the fuel test, the goal here is to profile how much fuel the engine uses for any specific volume of power usage. The method is actually fairly simple. First, use the cargo trigger included in that mission file to add 10,000 weight (it's in kg) to the huey. This will prevent our aircraft from moving during this test. Next, with the aircraft hotstarted on the ground, we raise the collective until we reach the desired volume of power (torque) we wish to test at. Then we time how long it takes for the engine to run out of fuel, you can use the F2 menu's time for this as the huey's clock isn't entirely accurate. Then we repeat for multiple different volumes of power. With our data gathered, we must process it so it is usable on our reference graph. We must provide fuel use in pounds per hour in relation to the amount of specific shaft horsepower used. We have the time it takes to drain all the fuel in minutes We have the indicated torque required to drain the fuel in this time Starting with turning the fuel to lbs/hour, that's actually fairly simple. 60/time in minutes, then multiplied by the total fuel load drained (max fuel is 1391lbs, max fuel will provide the most accurate data) So (60/170)*1391=490.94lbs/hour Now we will turn torque in to shaft horsepower. Take the Torque in PSI and the Rotor RPM, and process those 2 pieces of data through this formula. 3.88*((10^-3*ROTOR RPM)*((17.76*PSI)+33.33))=Total Shaft Horsepower Now that we have processed the data, we can plot it on the graph. Do note, that formula is only for the UH-1H. So, the next static test is the power/throttle profile, which can additionally be used to chart EGT data as well. This involves checking how much power is provided for any specific volume of N1 on the N1% gauge. Since you now already know how to turn torque and rotor RPM into shaft horsepower, this is simple. Using the stationary huey, measure at torque values specifically marked on the torque gauge (20,25,30,35,etc) and then observe the N1% on the gas producer gauge. (this is more accurate than the other way around.) While you are doing this, gather EGT data as well for each point you measure. Convert the torque to shaft horsepower, and then plot the data on this graph. Then using the EGT data you also gathered during this test, plot it on this graph. Do note that this graph is in Fahrenheit so you have to convert C to F. So, those are the tests that can be done without moving the aircraft. Up next are the flight tests, we'll start with hover tests. I will refer to the previous post for a more detailed description of the hover test and will simplify it here. Simply put the aircraft into a hover at several different weights, and at heights of 2ft,5ft, and out of ground effect (over 60ft but ideally less than 100ft), and record the torque required at each point. Process the data with these formulas. (you can obtain the shaft horsepower from the earlier formula to convert torque into shp) Power Coefficient = ((SHAFT HORSEPOWER*550)/((0.02289013*PRESSURE INHG/(TEMPERATURE C +273.15))*1809.56*(((ROTOR RPM*2π)/60)*24)^3))*10^5 Thrust Coefficient = (TOTAL THRUST [gross weight for this test] IN LBS/((0.02289013*PRESSURE INHG/(TEMPERATURE C +273.15))*1809.56*(((ROTOR RPM*2π)/60)*24)^2))*10^4 And then graph the processed data on this graph. With the hover data completed we move onto forward flight. I have thrust coefficient graphs for the huey in forward flight, however they are unusable by us as clients for reasons stated in the previous post. So we will use the torque chart presented to us in the huey's operator's manual. Specifically the sea level one, because if this one isn't correct, that means the baseline performance isn't correct to begin with. We will also no longer be correcting for the 2 square ft of drag added by the IR suppressor, as not only does it not affect the flight model in any way other than weight right now anyway, we should profile the base, unmodified performance of our variant of the huey, in the same configuration it was profiled in for our data. To do so is fairly simple. In the F2 view during gameplay you are provided with a status bar at the bottom of your screen, within this bar is a measurement of your speed. By default it is set in IAS, however if you press CTRL+T it should toggle it to TAS unless you have rebound this. All flight tests are measured in TRUE airspeed. Not indicated. Using the F2 meanue provides the actual TAS of the aircraft before any speed gauge inaccuracies are modeled. Simply fly the aircraft at a bunch of different speeds and weights and record the torque for each condition. Ideally you don't fly to a specific speed, instead you fly to a specific torque, as the torque gauge is harder to read, so using its marked points allows for more accurate data collection. Multiple sets of data for the same condition can be done by restarting the flight and doing it again. This can help remove any outliers in the dataset. Do not forget to use the unlimited fuel setting to prevent the data from being skewed by the reduction in weight from the fuel consumption during flight. Additionally, do not forget to make sure the mission is not overriding the unlimited fuel setting, thus making your aircraft consume fuel regardless, without your knowledge of it doing so. Up next, the rate of climb data. This is obtained by flying at 55-60knots TAS at different power settings (torque) at a specified weight (7700lbs for this test), and then noting your rate of climb. Interestingly, the data shows a minimum reduction in rate of climb at different altitudes, so it shouldn't matter up to 10,000ft If you want to one up me in this area, record multiple sets of the data for different altitudes. Just remember to keep adjusting your flight to maintain your speed and torque. Up next is the max power speed per altitude data. While I could provide the data to derive the graph for this test, it's tedious and annoying, so I recommend just using the one I have already made. (it involves taking many tables of data and interpolating it) The test is simple. At 7500lbs, fly as fast as you physically can in level flight at different altitudes. Ignore all restrictions, egt limits, torque limits, Vne, all of them. Crank the collective and go. If you can't keep the nose down, lower the collective, and flag that datapoint. Here is the graph. So where do we go from here? Well for now, I'm sure you have enough to think about. However I have some things to think about and process for myself The data is probably for another thread. But it does make me smile. Until next time, keep that mind sharp.

You have a Mummy?!!! Where did you get it.

Maybe someone wants to shorten and lighten their collective from VPC. Head for installation on VPC Rotor/Plus TCS on VPC DIY Addon Board. Coupling, 5-pin connector, 20 adjustable buttons. Hatki 5 trigger positions. 90 Euro with delivery Europe and North America. After connecting the head to the base, it will be necessary to manually register the board in the configurator and assign buttons, in the image and likeness of the screen.

It's also a first version with various errors It doesn't actually say when (in EA or after it) these later CTUs will be released.

I'd argue it is a trust issue. I got a copy from Baltic Dragon's Google Docs, linked by him personally, and also linked by him on his Discord. In that regard, I trust that the file is as virus infested as if it was hosted by ED (meaning not infested at all, hopefully ). When BD's transfer limit was reached, you guys are free to trust that Rudel, I, and possibly others, shared the exact same file from alternate locations, or you can choose not to trust us and just wait until it either gets published on the ED site or until it is shipped with the F-15E in the docs folder. I did include SHA1 and SHA256 sums with my mirror location and people should be able to compare those to the file they got from BD's Google Drive, but I'm not aware of anyone actually checking. Not sure what you mean that those links can be redirected; https://tinyurl.com/f15manual-mirror redirects to https://www.yurgon.de/tmp/F-15E Manual 23.06.14.pdf and instead of changing the redirect, I could just change the file on my server. =========== All things considered, I'd say it's a courtesy on behalf of BD to share the file via an easy to use and very widespread service, and it's also a courtesy by forum and community members to help out and provide mirror locations as the primary went down. Anyone who's a bit cautious just needs to wait a little, nothing wrong with that. But the people here who asked that the manual be released via ED's site or not at all... jeez, just effing wait a couple days/weeks/whatever, guys, and simply don't download it until then. You'll even actually get the added bonus that a lot of issues with the manual will have been fixed by then courtesy of all the community members who already submitted them.

The Apache uses a 4-way-switch for the trim functions. The position that does essentially the same that "Trim Control" does in the Ka-50 is: Force Trim/Hold Mode Switch - R/Up With this, you can fly the Apache just fine. When you get into longer flights and gain more experience, the altitude and attitude hold modes will come in handy, but for starters the R/Up position is all that's needed. It doesn't? I beg to differ, it does. Sure, there are differences in the way force trim is implemented between the Apache and the Ka-50, but on a broad scale they work almost exactly the same: Hold trim, change attitude, release trim. Or, do not hold trim, change attitude, let go of the cyclic and the chopper should get right back to the previously trimmed attitude. I'm not sure how that doesn't count as a "true" trim system.

As map objects, orange buoy channel markers are placed in Suez canal entrance areas , though , it's hard to see them in ME screen , hard to set correct ship waypoints following them. In the other map module --- RAZBAM's South Atlantic --- red and black lines are overlap drawn to show channel guidelines. I request drawing similar guidelines in Suez canal on the orange buoys like ---

People get upset if devs remain silent and don't show anything of their module in advance, so they start declaring a project as dead. People also get upset if devs show off their stuff without releasing the product ASAP, assuming it must be ready for release if there are videos of it. Whatever the devs do, for some people it's always wrong. Damned if you do, damned if you don't

The fixed sites are for S-75, S-125 [SA-3b, SA-3c], I-HAWK [PIP Phase 2 and Phase 3] and Aspide 2000 (which is used with Skyguard). Some are still in use. The S-75 sites will typically have 6 launch positions arranged around the FCR (which may be on a raised berm or be revetted, looking at some sites, it looks like the control cabins are sometimes situated in a bunker that the FCR sits on top of). The S-125 sites will have 4 launch positions either arranged around or in an arc ahead of the FCR. For the I-HAWK sites, some are configured for a platoon (3 launchers arranged in an arc ahead of the FCR) or a battery (consisting of 2 sections). The Aspide 2000 sites have 4 revetments - 2 small and 2 large, unsure what goes where (they all seem empty in available satellite imagery). The sites in Egypt seem to typically have raised berms or revetments for acquisition and fire-control radars and sometimes have a bunker contained within for control/electronics and power generation. For mobile systems, Egypt uses the 2K12M3 [SA-6b] 9K37M1 [SA-11], 9K330M1 [SA-15b], 9K317E [SA-17], MIM-72G Chaparral (in conjuction with AN/MPQ-49 FAAR) and Avenger. They also have the 9K32 [SA-7a] and FIM-92B/C available as MANPADS. They can usually fire in a 360° arc, but the sites are optimised to engage threats from a particular threat axis (typically from the east or north-east in the case of Egypt).