ARM505

100% agree on it being a 'special options' menu item, and defaulting it to 'OFF/OPEN' would save many forum posts. I even have a trigger guard on my stick, and still find it a PITA.

The AI CH47 has absorbed my entire weapons load and continued to fly, dipping and climbing back up trailing smoke and fire from two engines, off into the distance. Yeah, the AI DM isn't......the benchmark for simulations.

Mine did that when the joystick connection (that PS2-like plug between the joystick handle and base) got loose. I had a homemade extension, so it happened more than once.

DCS's tire interaction with surfaces is.......a compromise. Hard/soft, tarmac, grass.....it's kind of simplified. Resulting in some weirdness. There have been quite extensive discussions on this, the F16, the warbirds (taildraggers being a challenge) etc. At all times (IMHO), the common theme is oddities with input variables of coefficient of static and dynamic friction, normal force, velocity etc. This isn't a racing sim, but it crops up often enough, across a lot of modules, that tire modelling might merit a global rework. I might have misunderstood the gist of this though.

On the MPD :FLT -> SET -> Turn your radio altimeter on (R4 or 5, at work so I can't remember exactly which)

They actually do almost all the work on the engine 'on the wing' as it were, and a lot of it is 'on condition' as well. It's only really major stuff that necessitates an engine being removed from the wing entirely. I think it's more to be able to plan that, on average, engines will last approximately the same time before servicing if they started off together - but this is absolutely out of my domain as a normal line pilot, you're right The engineering dudes handle that side - we're just taught how to operate them, and do so as per SOP's, which the company decides on, I'm assuming for the reasons I've stated. When the aircraft goes in for a C or D check, it's easier and more cost effective to just do all the work on both engines while you've got them there as opposed to taking the aircraft off the line again.

Yup, the 737 igniters get alternated - we start using the right first (due to the right igniters being connected to the AC standby bus, and it's slightly more critical that they work, thus we run them first), then switch as we go. Sorry, off topic, but thats the reason.

OK, that is hilarious Gives new meaning to 'co-operative rockets' "Hold still buddy, WAS-ing rockets!"

I'm not sure of the TBO's on these engines, but on commercial airliners, with the typical requirement to achieve the highest possible cycles/hours on wing before servicing, there is a requirement to alternate the starting engine - given that engines are serviced based on hour spent running, and no attention is given to what kind of running (except limit exceedences), we have to 'spread the joy' otherwise over time, a significant hour buildup will occur on one engine. Our company starts the downwind engine first during pushback, which randomly spread the time over both (in theory). I can understand that the military might just keep things the same though, the difference is indeed almost insignificant (especially with such a short startup cycle in the Apache - an airliner start cycle can be a lot longer: even only one days operation might result in 5-6 minutes difference in engine running times......multiply that over 365 days of operation, and one year means ~33 hours of time difference).

Yeah, using the CPG's head as a sight might mean you're doing it wrong. Sorry, this might work, but....no. The guys head is going to be animated at some point, I'd rather focus on learning to use the system as best you can. It's not staggeringly hard to be honest.

There is a way to do it in game as well - I'm not at home right now, so this is from memory, but you can right click (I think) on a controller heading while having the CPG profile up, and select 'load profile' (or something like that) and then find the PLT profile for your controller and just load it - the controls are then imported into the CPG controller profile. Sorry for the vagueness, but it's quite simple to figure out if you play around - no need to rename files etc, although that is easy enough. Just thought I'd mention that they did allow for this in the sim.

You can also change the zoom FOV with (I think) R CTRL and the normal zoom keys (* and / on the KP) - if memory serves me right. This can give zome very nice close ups.

There is also IAT (Image Auto Track), which is not yet implemented at this stage of early access.

Unlike the pilots seat with it's rotary controllers, the front seaters IHADSS brightness is adjusted via the SYM rocker switch on the upper right side of the TDU (the center display, sorry if this is obvious already).

Yes, like a little piece of cloth, at the nose/throat area, visible if you look down.

I think this is the first module with an actual difference between VR and flat screen? Specifically, the IHADSS/NVG's - for those who haven't seen it in VR, the IHADSS is actually rendered and animated in front of your right eye (it animates only when moved away from your eye, it appears instantly when selected I think?), unlike the flat screen with it's little tranparent impression of the monocle, which appears and disappears instantly. Also in VR, you can see the NVG's on your helmet above your head when they're flipped up. It looks very cool. Again, I'm blown away by how good things look in VR. I have to turn just about everything down to nothing on my poor little 1080, but at least getting a solid 40fps (don't laugh, it actually does work ok). That front cockpit feels small! Also, the top strap of the harness on the seat vibrates (while we're talking about little bits that move).

Well, I for one am shocked at this early access, the total unrealism of the M4 selector - everybody knows that you cannot put it into 'Safe' when the hammer is down, after the trigger is pulled! My goodness, they're just playing with us now! I expect an immediate hotfix. /sarcasm I was really surprised to find the trigger and safety was clickable, awaiting the negligent discharge simulation in a future patch - I too would like to put a 5.56 round into the canopy

Hover, Bob-up (one of the IHADSS modes as well I think) As in , 'bobbing up' from behind cover, ie. rising a short distance to clear an obstacle.

Perhaps I should clarify - what is there, is generally as the manual states. Parts that are missing, are missing in their entirety, and don't really detract in the modelling of the parts that are there - put another way, the manual is useful in that it is applicable to those bits that are actually in the sim. It's a generalisation, but....

To second what Raptor9 says, I will comment on the sometimes ridiculously useless nature of real manuals - I literally just helped a friend with a technical exam, and despite us both puzzling over the Flight Crew Operating Manual (in this case, FCOM2 for the B738), neither of us could find the answer, because it simply didn't go into the level of detail required. The FCTM (Flight Crew Training Manual) elaborates a bit on recommended techniques, but the bottom line is that these are meant to be used in conjuction with actual, real world training by experienced instructors following company/unit SOP's and standards. The books are references, and often blunt to the point of being quite superficial. That being said, DCS actually does an excellent job for a PC sim in modelling the real thing - I remember when the F18 came out, sans manual, and the comment was 'just use the NATOPS manual' - which, to their credit, was actually close enough to be of genuine use.

The AI gunner has built in 'delays' to simulate a human switching to the next missile, getting on the scope and being able to find targets again. I don't know if these delays are fixed, dependant on other variables, or random. I'm not aware of the physical weapon system limitations.

Are you using VR or not? Most people who fly in VR instantly notice that it looks terrible and unrealistic because they don't move like real reflections, and they don't look like real reflections. Again, it's especially noticeable in VR. I have both VR and (obviously) flat screen, and VR is markedly worse. I also fly for a living IRL, and IRL you just move you head, or focus past the reflection, or change the lighting conditions with cockpit shade screens, or something like that. The baked in reflections are much worse than in real life.

I meant to add this part, but didn't want to confuse the issue - I should have been more clear, that the yaw channel, when I last used it (I confess to not using it much at all) seems to progressively use up more and more of the available travel, unlike the SPUU which just limits a certain amount under certain conditions. And, the SPUU indication is clear on the control indicator (small arrow/chevron creeping in from the right on the pedal scale, unlike a potential problem with pedal travel where the position indicator just won't reach the maximum on the scale). In response to something else somebody said, double tapping the trimmer to reset trim to nil no longer works (it worked in initial release, but was removed) Edit to add more: Something is definitely still 'off' with the A/P yaw channel. If it is used, and ends up with an input during straight and level flight, and is then switched off, this input will be held in, essentially being a new 'neutral' position - I just did a flight, and ended up with some right pedal input, even though my physical pedals were centered. This then caused the inability to reach full pedal input to the left (the input mark stopped short of full deflection by the same amount the new center had been deflected by), and pedal input to the right to beyond the SPUU chevron limit.

Some suggestions: - Submit a track of the event if possible if you want other people to attempt to replicate the situation. - Secondly, open your controls indicator (R CTRL & ENTER) and see if you're actually getting full pedal input at the time - I've personally found the Mi24 to be very odd in this regard. I don't want to say 'bug', but for some reason, especially with the yaw channel engaged, something tends to 'eat up' the full pedal travel, and you'll see that the pedal deflection is either massively reduced from its maximum (despite you having full physical pedal input in), as well as a totally off center neutral position. My understanding of something may well be off, but that's been my experience (it has improved since initial release). - Thirdly, attempt to replicate the issue with the A/P yaw channel off and see if that isolates the problem (just a hunch) - Finally, do you have the rudder trim option enabled in the special menu for the Mi24? I'm not sure if this is bugged or not, but there have been some discussions of weirdness in this option, if I remember correctly.