liotczik

Let's not mix simulated flying done for the purpose of one's entertainment, with real life, where pilots would like to keep the "entertainment factor" to a minimum ;) Besides, I wouldn't actually call Hornet to be a bad choice for a sim or an inferior aircraft, as it is in real life.

It is a pilot, who is a master. The more "inferior" tool at his disposal, the greater the challenge and glory ;)

Too nice to be true ;) I, for one, would be completely satisfied with such aircraft :) It could be also a diversion: imagine an aircraft that is completely different from this one, in every aspect, and we'll have the answer, what really is in the workshop ;) A supersonic jet, single seat, carrier capable.

In terms of quantity, yes, and in terms of quality, things are quickly changing, as X-Plane's world isn't sleeping: http://x-aviation.com/previews/screenshot_238.png http://x-aviation.com/previews/screenshot_239.png http://x-aviation.com/previews/screenshot_241.png It's a preview of upcoming Oahu scenery for X-Plane, made by RealScenery. Some other States are available now, with more to come.

I've found, that the best helo for training purposes is freeware MD500. It's very stable and easy to handle (5-blade rotor and small inertia), but it doesn't have any artificial stabilisation. That's why BK-117 is easier to fly, but doesn't make a good trainer, because it's fantastic stabilisation computers correct your mistakes and prevent learning true, unassisted helicopter dynamics. After you've mastered "The Teardrop", I'd suggest payware DreamFoil's B206. Great flight model, great sound and feel of the aircraft, more difficult to fly, but still pretty straightforward and predictable - as long as you have everything under firm control ;) One moment of distraction and bad things start to happen quite fast. Robinsons, with their unusual geometry, mass distribution and 2-blade propeller are the most wild and crazy helicopters I've ever flown in a sim. They're perfectly controllable, but require much more skills and paying attention. For advanced pilots :) Of course you can also try BK-117 with all the stabilisation off, though it's against the regulations ;) I've tried it (before reading the POH) and it was a true "ride" :D Like it was completely different bird! As for the Saitek, I've found that the best results are achieved with INNER spring removed, while outer is left in place (it can be done without any destruction, just dissasemble the stick slowly, pay attention to what you're doing and use your head, instead of muscles - just like you've been practising hovering ;)). Self-centering is preserved, but it moves more smoothly, without jerking. You can also lubricate the metal centering disc and plastic beneath it with silicone oil. In fact lubricate every surfaces, that have contact with others. The same tip goes for jerky "mini-slider" on the throttle grip. While we are at the throttle, I suggest to open it and remove rubber idle and afterburner gates, they are VERY annoying, while flying helos. In fact, while flying planes, they are annoying too. Skyhawk with "afterburner", LOL!! Actually, BK-117 has two trim methods :) Please read the manual on page 16 - SAS and ATT modes. EDIT: one more thing, that has escaped my attention before. I'd suggest using linear joystick input curve. While it seems harder to make minimal control inputs, especially near center (like in a hover), but it more than pays off, just beacause of linearity and muscle memory. It means, that no matter where is your stick at any given moment of flight, it takes exactly the same amount of stick movement to perform a specific attitude change, which is easy to "remember", as it's a constant relation. Non linear, while it's easier in the center, is more hard at the outside part of stick movement envelope (like at the beginning of a cruise, with stick fully forward, before trimming or cruising on a helo without trim at all), as well as makes much more difficult to develop muscle memory, because the same amount of stick deflection could make small or big attitude change, with regards to actual stick position and flight envelope.

http://xplane10.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/gorans-interview-final-2.pdf Interview with Goran Matovina, who is developing B747 for X-Plane. Some screenshots inside ;) I own the Becchcraft Sundowner he made, and with such high quality it presents, I'm confident that his 747 will turn the sim world upside down.

That will be changed sooner, than you think ;) Great works of art are being done as we speak. Have patience!

The basic knowledge is here: http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=32267 More details are here: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/docs/poh/index.html and here: http://www.copters.com/helo_aero.html Also I find his video tutorials very useful: The rest is practice, practise and even more practise. There is no other way with helicopters, but after you learn it, the experience is VERY rewarding :) For the training flights, set up on a beginning of a runway, because it provides nice spatial reference - you'll need it especially to learn how to hover.

BK-117 is a must for everyone interested in virtual helicopters! Also I highly recommend buying the newest Jet Ranger for X-Plane, made by Dream Foil. Fantastic bird! The best B206 I've flown in a sim, and I had a couple of them. A picture gallery of it: http://picasaweb.google.com/nicolas.xplane/Bell206?feat=directlink#

That's why I usually carry gunpods on inboard pylons :) For the long shots I use... wingmans! Proper formation, nice ambush and Hinds go down like in a 'Deer Hunter'. Even Apaches get busted in no time. Thinking ahead and flight management FTW!

I'm going to upgrade my PC and done some research, as what to do. Definitely stronger CPU + more modern mainboard is the answer. Currently I have AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5200+, each core clocked at 2,71GHz, running under Win XP Pro 32bit. While this is enough to run Black Shark on medium-high settings with about 30 constant fps, I'm aware that it may not be enough in a very near future. As for the Game Booster, I can't see if it makes a difference. Neither by fps count, nor visual. As far as I can tell, when Black Shark is launched, it goes to one core and all the other stuff goes to the second core. The result is that user sees increase in both cores loadout and thinks, that Black Shark is multicore, but that isn't the case. Launching Game Booster lowers load on the 'system-utility' core by max. 4% and has no influence on 'simulation' core. Also I've been advised, that it's still better to buy a dual core processor with individual cores running higher clock, that quad core with cores running lower clock settings. Another often overlooked tip, is general health of operating system. Defrag HDD, tidy up the register, remove unneeded applications from autostart etc. for better performance.

Sorry, I couldn't help myself, because bringing Tom Clancy with regards to realistic military games/simulations, sounds funny to me. I'm familiar with his games and books, but I'm not a great fan of them. For me they look more like works of someone only and deeply fascinated with american power and technology, rather than someone trying to be a reliable source of information. Also I don't believe, that his friends in military tell him about modern avionics secret features, so he can relay them to us; most of his knowledge comes form publicly available sources anyway. EW and IFF systems are the most higly classified ones, as far as I can see. That's why f.e. Falcon's radar can't pick up IFF transponders from friendly a/c (a feature known since Battle of Britain and I don't believe that it was dropped since then - in fact I think it was only improved) or you don't even have the most simple IFF working switch (basically on-off, like jammer). Sonar features you mentioned are also present in Sub Command/Dangerous Waters and I don't think, that Mr Clancy was involved into production of these two.

It was already done reasonably well in 'Gunship!' - unfortunately it was one of the only 3 good features in that sim(?). The other two were planeset (2x Apache, Havoc, Tigre) and visual representation of NVG/FLIR. While in CP/G seat, player didn't have had any control over a helo. Instead he could supply AI pilot with commands like go up, strafe left, fly to waypoint no.#, fly slower/faster, fly NOE and so on. At least that element worked well and actually I liked it more, than how it is done in Longbow 2 or Enemy Engaged. I'm happy with Ka-50 as it is, with all it's shortcomings. I've flown Ka-52 in 'Enemy Engaged' and now forgotten 'Ka-52 Team Alligator'. The experience, apart from simulation fidelity and eyecandy, wasn't that much different, from what I have in Black Shark. My reasoning is, why make a whole new module for a very similar airframe? There are many Russian helicopters, that are more different from Ka-50 and would be a better choice, Hind (+ Afghanistan campaign, even current conflict could be modelled) being the first on the list. However, Ka-52 could be an interesting topic for modders, although certainly on a different level of fidelity, with a healthy amount of "educated guessing".

Ah yes, Tom Clancy. I've heard, that he made a fantastic and realistic flight sim recently, 'Hawks' or 'Hacks' was it's name, can't remember exactly at the moment, sorry... I've seen a trailer for it somewhere and was impressed by the top flight model fidelity, especially post-stall maneuvers and realistic avoidance of missiles. That really opened my eyes, as I've always suspected, that our 'barrel roll' trick was too simple to be efficient, also that our Lomac/FC jets are far unmaneuverable and underpowered. Think of it - we're in 21st century and advance in technology surely pushed envelope much further, than we are told. And no one ever performed "inverted reversed low alt double cobra" on airshows, not because it's impossible to do so, but because of it's top secrecy! :D

You should definitely try 'Condor', the soaring simulator. Since obviously you don't even have an engine in a glider, and thermals/ridge lifts are not always so easy to find, I think that lack of explosions'n'bloodshed would be your last concern there ;) Try it, complete 5 hour track and then we'll talk about "feeling" of flight :thumbup: