Booger

SDeath's versions are cool, but with the different color coding, if you're not really used to the cockpit all you see is a rainbow. That isn't to suggest his checklist isn't good, rather it could easily add to the confusion if you're not used to it. You don't have English labeling? The english version is labeled accordingly. Perhaps you purchased the wrong one?

Watch the developer's notes on the Ka-50 Startup.

Engines need to be ran up to auto in order to generate enough electricity to power the onboard systems for one. What checklist are you using? The one from the 29th is a very decent "starter" checklist until you learn all the ins & outs of the cockpit. Another stellar reference is War Hawk's Pit Trainer.

Hardly bad form when he (Toast) asks a honest question in the official forums just to be "put in his place" by his squadron mate & Eries calls it. The bad form is bringing squadron drama here, which Toast obviously didn't do.

You can just click the Turbo Gear/APU/Engines selector switch As far as the Engine Trottle Levers, push [Page Up] to move them up (single notch, you'll have to push x2 to move it to auto), [Page Down] to move them down. Closing & opening the cockpit door is [RCTRL]+[C] Manual starting will take a bit longer lol.

Many will "upsale" the Black Shark, noting how awesome it is...and they're not wrong. The sim is simply fantastic. First, if you narrow your options to just US aircraft, you really rob yourself of 'flying' some really awesome aircraft. I wish I could find a youtube video of the Blue Angels (actual, not virtual) having the opportunity to fly MiGs--they were madly stoked (as I'm sure their Soviet counterparts were flying the F/A-18 ). I'm not suggesting you're naive, I'm simply suggesting you don't become it. Flying is flying...period. Second, as far as being more of a "fighter jockey" guy, waiting for the A-10 is kind of erroneous since it's a slow attack aircraft. Last, what they will both offer is a realistic environment as far as aircraft dynamics and systems. Rotor or fixed wing, that's a plus. Oh, as far as the price, it's really trivial compared to the controllers/enhancements used to play the game. For the realism, I would have gladly paid double.

Agreed. I really don't anticipate any 2-seat options anytime soon. There are far more profitable single-seat options available before ED "needs" to jump that hurdle. To be honest, I'm rather shocked at how many are hoping for the F/A-18. I still think it would be wise to spread the load among the different countries. Fighter pilots have FC2 to entertain them (with DCS "crossover") making the British Harrier a solid option. I disagree. Or wait, a US Harrier would be ok but a British one wouldn't? Further, people would go nuts over the Eurofighter...but it's obvious you won't see any unclassified data for it for some time, making the request for one unreasonable.

Your basing your conclusion on using AI manning the second seat while you toggle from "front to back". That in itself isn't realistic. There is indeed the potential of solo play with two seaters, unfortunately very limited...and to the pilot only. You don't need a RIO/gunner/etc in order to fly an aircraft but you obviously DO need them to conduct combat ops. I haven't flown FSX, but from what I've read it's possible to sit in the same cockpit with the pilot of an aircraft. How good/bad they've done it, I honestly don't know. Is it possible? Sure it is. Is it feasible? That remains to be seen. Anyway, the concept is wonderful for those already in squadrons since you can simply swap roles with your fellow pilot. Unfortunately it completely eliminates any/all casual flyers who sim solo. AI RIO/gunner option? Possible. I suspect it would really be no different than the current wingman as far as communication.

lawl

Ha, beat it...but forgot NVGs lol. The flight back was skeery.

You could say the same thing about almost every aircraft besides the F-16. Dude, the page says.. Good god.

I kind of agree. I would like to see a built in system that uses existing voice software, but honestly, there are just too many to support...and I don't see ED getting in the business of responding to 1001 help/support problems involved per day when the majority of problems is the user or server end...not the medium used. With TS, you can group each flight in their own 'room' and broadcast for the common channel. Easy easy. Honestly, do you want voice or do you want the developers to spend more time bug fixing/plane making. The answer is simple, at least for me.

I was having a side discussion with a friend concerning HOTAS (mainly the X-65). We both have the Saitek X52 & to be honest, there really isn't anything else needed. It does everything one would need with the exception of having split throttles. Otherwise, it's really perfect. So if we have (in our mind) the perfect controller, what would we spend money on to 'upgrade'? We both would drop bucks on a HOTAS that would mimic the aircraft controls of our favorite aircraft (plural). Thrustmaster Cougar ring a bell? Honestly, it amazes me how Saitek & these other companies don't capitalize on more themed HOTAS along with their general 'latest & greatest'. Seriously, I would dump bucks for a Ka-50 HOTAS, and dump again for an A-10 set. I -love- Saitek, but I would drop them in an instant if a competitor came out with a decent 'themed' HOTAS.

Just wow at this mission. It's quite challenging to complete & the turbulence has the added "dammit" factor, which is awesome. Still haven't completed it yet, but I love trying.

Leading Edge Training will be producing video tutorials in different blocks. I'm not sure of the publishing times to be honest, but they're one to keep a third eye on. Publisher's notes (videos) and the manual are gold, but one thing you'll need on top of it is a printout of the commands (it's in your \Ka-50\Docs\ folder). Unfortunately the producer's notes is more "show & tell" than they are anything else (e.g. it'll say "uncage the shval" but it won't tell you what key to push to do it)...but still an excellent reference to refer to. Don't be afraid to pause the movie and hunt for stuff. Another handy tool is the Pit Trainer. Honestly, the biggest thing for me was getting a grip on the combos for my HOTAS. Once that was done, it was just practicing basic helo flying (practice range mission is perfect for it). Once I got that down, I started practicing shooting stuff (same mission). Once I got somewhat of a grip on how things worked, I started campaigns. Toast is good people and always offered to fly with me also (which we have yet to do heh). Just have fun with it.

The sim actually does that itself. It really doesn't matter if you're a 24/7 virtual pilot strung out on Mountain Dew or a more casual one...you'll eventually have to learn the mechanics of the aircraft. I'm not even sure why this topic was made here to be honest. The official forum is hardly the place for a temper tantrum about new pilots (a place full of them as well as potential ones). That's better left at your own wing/squadron forum. Anyway, just find yourself a virtual wing/squadron that fits you dude. There are more than enough of them out there (most of which that I personally know of don't mind helping new pilots along).

I agree, this topic is fail...not so much by the message, but the elitist attitude spewing from the original post. In reality, there's nothing wrong with a wing/squadron with very high standards. To each their own. My only question is why was the noob flyer there in the first place? It's simple really: If you don't like new pilots in your wing/squadron, don't accept them. If you DO accept them, stfu and expect bad things to happen as they improve. If the problem is YOU, leave. The wing/squadron will be better off.

I don't think it's impossible to get info on the Hind, but more importantly, the ED standard is to produce realistic aircraft. Unlike previous games where you could fly, shoot & navigate from the same (single) seat, I highly suspect that being impossible in any DCS: 2-seat aircraft. That's not to say there isn't a market for it. I'm sure that if ED took on the task (chance) of doing a two-seat environment they would probably do the AH-64 since it has the most profit potential. Until they decide to do that, expect single-seaters.

You should have used a URL shortening service ;) Still, I was expecting to get rickrolled.

Oh man, that's funnier than hell. I hope you also reported it as a bug.

+1 No one really has other than Janes...and that was such a fantastic & fun sim to fly. When ED decides to do US fighers, I pray they pick the F/A-18 first. Like the AH-64, the Hornet has an early version (ease of getting data) to model. Of course the Super Hornet would be ideal, but the early airframe would still be excellent. Actually, if ED never did another US aircraft it would still be special. This isn't the 1950s lol. I love their product, regardless of what country/flag it flies under.

I'm so with you. I'm a big fan of 3D clickable (realistic) cockpits to the point where anything otherwise would feel like a "game". To each their own, but I like flying simulators, not games. So I'll be the one who doesn't jump on the FC2 bandwagon (nothing against it, it just doesn't offer what DCS does). I'm waiting for the A-10 & equally have no regrets for not getting FC2.

How can you possibly start mentioning rumors after this post was made... http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=861324&postcount=14 I think I'll take the producer's comments over any stray comment any day.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=862388&postcount=10