ARM505

When you're new, turn the Heading AP channel off. That will save a lot of hassles, IMHO, at least until it all makes some sense. There's no use trying to fight both the natural pedal requirement changes as you change speed, AND the heading AP channel trying to point your nose in the trimmed direction. Just turn it off, and fly naturally.

Ground moving target, yes. It's one of the blue buttons next to the pilots left knee - along with 'Turn to target', amongst others. The laser must have aquired a valid range too.

I'd wait for that upcoming Logitech, depending on how it seems to pan out. Take a look here: http://www.lockonfiles.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=447&mode=&order=0&thold=0 I have a Cougar, and have replaced the original dodgy pots with Hall effect sensors. This cures the spiking that almost all Cougar owners will have to deal with one day. The other Cougar 'issue', is that it can seem very stiff to some people, and when moving the stick in the diagonal, one has to fight both X and Y springs, which some find reduces their ability to be precise. To this end, I've also added a home made extension (about 20cm), which makes it great. The stick now sits between my legs on a little platform. I also had old CH Pro Pedals, which connect to the Cougar for rudder input, the actual Cougar does not come with any rudder. So, if you're prepared to do some modding, and spend a little more, a Cougar is ok. I can't comment on other sticks. The new Logitech does seems to cover a lot of bases though, hence my earlier comment. Force feedback, two throttles, proper pedals....I'd give that a good look.

It's awesome in ARMA (now 2), because you can chat to the people you're carrying, and they're actually doing something when you get them to where they want to go, ie you really feel like you're making a difference and achieving something - in DCS it would be a pretty dead experience. Because of ARMA's 'combined arms' nature, it can create a fairly unique playing experience. Just don't look for high fidelity though, but a lot of fun can be had nonetheless.

Random failures in real life happen - but they fail in the game world of DCS, IMHO purely because you're actually the only 'playable' person in the entire universe, ie you can't just climb into another chopper that's also busy with a mission, a la Falcon 4 (for example). Basically, the progression of the entire world hinges solely on your performance in it (kind of a 'the sun revolves around the earth' philosophy), and not as it would in reality, where you're just another tiny cog in the whole show, as it were. No matter how successfully you may deal with any emergency, in the overall picture, you've still failed - and normally very badly too. So even if you're as quick as wickedpenguin there, the game still calls you a loser. :) Hint to developers: If you can find a game mechanic that avoids this, is technically feasible, and fits into your development schedule, you'll be winners. ;)

Shift-P? Ctrl-P? I can't remember, the key combination is something like that (shift-p I think), but you can show your virtual body in the cockpit.

No, just an extra variable to make the one reading more closely reflect reality.

Did you seriously expect some kind of ultra-realistic systems simulation of the aircraft in ARMA2 (which 'grew up' as an infantry simulator)? And I just played an awesome couple of scenarios in the ARMA2 demo, my AI AT guys were nailing BRDM's with some great shots, with excellent reaction times. But if you don't like it, I'm not going to try and convince you. It's your choice. I do think you're expecting a bit much, and being very dismissive of some excellent features. Put it this way - I think you will remain permanently disappointed with non-study military sims. Don't get me wrong - in something of the scale of ARMA, there's massive room for improvement (damage model, systems simulation, AI etc etc) - but I think they've done a good job, and I think you're writing them off too quickly. I like to take the evolution of the product as a good sign, and don't expect perfection with such an awesomely complex undertaking. I also wish anybody who attempts a cross platform simulation the best of luck - they'll need it.

ARMA - Aiming at the pre-teen crowd?! So whats BF2/COD etc - aiming at those still in the womb?! And if you think the amount of work and evolution that's gone into ARMA 2 is a 'lousy, just throw it out job', then I think you misunderstand what's possible from a commercial company. I guess expectations nowdays are unrealistically high. Put it this way: You will NEVER be happy with an all-rounder game like ARMA, so at least you don't even need to try it. Next time you can even avoid the demo too! Time saved! I do believe that military sims like BS / Steelbeasts etc can eventually be combined in realistic ways, but to knock those that try with todays hardware and financial reality is a little short sighted, IMHO.

Beginner scenario follows: Flying along, sort of vaguely trimmed, but the nose is not quite on the heading cursor (let's say it's to the right of the cursor), so the heading AP is trying to yaw back to the cursor (in this case, left). So, the pilot compensates by adding right rudder (mistake), then trims (double mistake) - this then re-centres the cursor on the new heading, causing the heading AP to stop making inputs (it's now happy the aircraft is pointing in the 'trimmed' direction), BUT the loss of the heading AP inputs (which were to the left), AND the input of right rudder trim now results in a very strong yaw to the right, and confusing chaos for the new pilot. Something like that - hence, in the beginning, simply turn the heading AP channel OFF (regardless of real SOP), and learn to fly, without having to worry about where the AP thinks it should be heading. It can be unnecessarily confusing in the beginning, IMHO.

...I use the magnetic field from the shrapnel embedded in my head.

I don't think it's too long before it's technically possible - but for a developer to code something so awesomely complex in this financial world, where such a phenomenal quantity of work will still sell fewer copies than 'Super Mario Kart Deluxe!!!!!'....well, that will take a miracle.

Also, to eliminate the autopilot stabilisation system help as an issue, turn on the Flight Director mode (a flat blue button, to the right of the pilots right knee - it's the one by itself on the right of the group of four that look alike). This will just smooth the flight controls out, and not fight back a little - it may have some benefit to see what it's like without the system's input.

Yes. We wish! While they're at it, they must team up with Esim for Steel-Beasts-like armour simulation. Paradise!

The optical tracking system (IRL) works on tracking a shape that is distinct from the background. Hence, tracking just part of a uniform texture won't provide enough for the system to track that particular section of it. In the sim however, the computer can only track specific entities that are preselected as 'trackable'. The greatest disadvantage of this method can be seen when trying to track a destroyed wreck - IRL, the system would track it, whereas in the sim, a wreck cannot be locked up. And so, the way to ID a target in BS is to lock it up, switch to max zoom, and say to yourself 'What the hell is that?!?'

Or the other option......ED can remove SF entirely from FC, thus negating this and all future such issues.... :)

A T-80 is designed to try and resist 120mm APFSDS (basically a giant metal dart) ammo from the front aspect at least, and be very resistant to all kinds of tank killing ammo in general. Despite videos showing A-10's strafing tanks with giant sparks and dust clouds flying everywhere, you're unlikely to destroy a T-80 with the 30mm, and a CBU bomblet would have to land precisely on a vulnerable spot to kill one. The Maverick, on the other hand, is ideally suited to killing tanks. You're pretty much describing real life.

Even if the DFDR and CVR could float, the tons of metal aeroplane and structures to which they are mounted generally don't.... And who says the boxes needed to be stronger? Chances are, they have survived the event, and just need to be found - That's the hard part, despite their underwater location equipment. Given the origin of the aircraft (Airbus), and the carrier (AF), I've no doubt that the money will be spent to locate and investigate.

I don't have the answer for the Ka50 specifically, but in some aircraft the gauges are only driven with power applied - this means that the needles will simply stay where they were last, until power is reapplied. So it could be correct.

Thread resuscitation! Thanks for the idea FiKk, I didn't think of the garden hose option! I hope the local garden shop has something in the right diameter.

'Fighter Pilot', on the ZX Spectrum - a whole 48kb of RAM.

Surely not?

Single player - runs perfectly, always. Multiplayer - starts getting choppy after extended periods (30 min+ in mission), crashes on exit sometimes (does not require a hard reset, the process merely needs to be shut down). So, is that a yes or a no? No, I guess...but only for multiplayer, which somehow seems more demanding than single player, regardless of the number of units involved. My PC is a little old though: Core 2D E6850 @ 3.3 GHz GTS 8800, stock clocks 2 GB DDR2 (good quality, forgotten brand though) A motherboard, a mouse that needs cleaning underneath, a Cougar with some dust on one edge etc etc etc P.S. The light band thing, and sound volume thing are part and parcel of BS - they are not PC related.

I can't believe how popular the F's (-15/-16/-18 ) are. Haven't they been done PLENTY? Hell, there's even been another whole SERIES of sims about the F-16 alone, up to number 4, and even an -18 series!

Also downloaded it - a lot of file swapping of the installation files going on down here, since bandwith is painfully expensive, thanks to the local monopoly on telecoms. Anyway, nice to see sunny SA is catered for with the retail version.