ARM505

Petrovich takes time to aquire and guide the crosshairs onto the target - they've simulated a real human taking the time to do this, which results in some delays that don't really have any feedback to you, the player - also, when the crosshair does 'lock' onto a target, it snaps onto it faster than a real human would do it, further enhancing the idea of a 'lock on', when IRL it's supposed to be a progressive movement towars the target, with some 'wobble' around it (see multiplayer videos on YT with human CP/G). Is that what you're encountering maybe? This is obviously in relation to the OP's second paragraph (Petro not putting crosshairs on tgt, not the first problem) Give it/him a chance to actually do it maybe, see if that helps?

Seconded, also looking for those translations - thanks for asking.

The patch definitely got rid of the trim button causing the stick to 'step' in a certain direction over and over with repeated presses of the trim button for me, even with neutral 'real' stick (ie. pre-patch, the 'virtual' stick would 'step' in a certain direction on repeated pressing and releasing the trim button, even with the 'real' stick being completely neutral, which resulted in a large cumulative change). So there's definitely an improvement to how it works. The interplay between 'real' and 'virtual' sticks certainly adds a level of complexity absent from the real thing.

They've got rid of the sudden tendency to pitch up very aggressively if you slightly overdid the nose up cyclic input, which is great. Now it's a far more intuitive, linear reaction. I'm liking the progress, good job so far.

They're probably much along the lines of the implementation in the Su25, given that it's basically the same sight and weapon? Maybe an extra switch to enable them, with the weapon selector on 'Off', or another rotary position (unlikely)? Get a tone, fire....something along that line. I'm guessing, sorry. But yeah, the Su25 is probably the closest example. Boresighted to the normal sight, and they come off the rails quickly (very little, if any, initial drop, so may be able to fired quite low).

Further to this, in every instance where I've had the pilot killed, BOTH pilots are always killed. I've never only had only 'Pilot 1' killed, always both 'Pilot 1 and 2'. The most recent one was a Stinger hit to the rear of the airframe, which seems unlikely to kill both pilots, but ok - given that the aircraft can be flown from both cockpits, surely both pilots won't always die, and you should be able to switch seats and fly from the weapon operators seat? Has anybody been able to do this?

As a fixed wing pilot, this is why helicopters, while fun, are actually highly reliant on witchcraft to keep them in the air. There's a lot of stuff happening that's mathematically far above my simple mind, so I just know 'if this, then that', and assume that the gods of earth-repulsion technology (ie. primary gods governing rotary winged flight) are appeased for the moment. Until they're suddenly not, and there's a pile of spare parts - this also explains why helicopters utterly disintegrate with even the smallest crash - the gods weren't pleased/pilot didn't pray to the machine spirit enough, the magic fails, and the craft is struck down into it's component pieces. In Chapter 2 of my book, I explain electronics, and the 'magic smoke'. Thank you for subscribing.

Another thing I just noticed. If you let Petrovich fly, then move back to the pilot seat, he will trim the pedals away from neutral (normally to the left obviously). You'll once again need to reset the trim to get the pedals back to neutral to allow your full range of motion. And yes, as has been mentioned, LTE is not simulated.

I haven't watched the track file. But I've had what you describe happen. Here's a quick test: first, enable your controls indicator. Then, when it happens again, take your feet off the pedals. Note the position of the pedal indicator on the control indicator. You will almost certainly see that it is not centered, even though your physical pedals are centered, and you are unable to get full pedal authority because of this, almost as if the virtual pedals have taken a trim bias to the neutral position as well, even though you don't have this option selected under the 'special' menu. This seems to 'stack up' over time. To fix this: double tap your trim button (this centers all trim, so watch out), observe that the virtual pedals return to center, continue from there. It occurs only if the rudder yaw channel is engaged for some reason. I cannot comment if this is accurate to the real aircraft, but the other helicopters don't behave like this (notably the Hip).

Check that the gun actually has ammo in the mission editor - if you do something like check the 'civilian aircraft' box in the loadout tab, uncheck it, then load a normal loadout, the gun may not have ammo. I can't quite remember the steps I took to do that, but I ended up loading in with zero gun ammo loaded. I think the fault may also occur in the rearm panel in mission as well, but that might have been something I misheard?

I remember walking around this thing at one of the shows at AFB Waterkloof in Pretoria. It was fugly then, it's fugly now. I laughed at the 'ZU' registration - South African commercial/light civilian aircraft are normally prefixed by 'ZS', with light sport/experimental/non-certified being 'ZU', but they're normally civilian. Bit of a laugh to see a large Hind with bits hanging off with the callsign prefix you'd normally find on Koos with his little Cubby buzzing around Stellenbosch.

Even with the box checked (by default it starts off checked, but I verified anyway) the AI can sometimes go absolutely beserk and just slam the helo into the deck - it's happened to me once so far. I engaged (switched cockpits) at a very reasonable height and speed, and it just nosed right over into the ground. Bit of a surprise...

The fan has assumed near religious status. Removal, or even the option to do so would be sacrilegious. Burn the heretic! In fact, I think it should be taken one step up - when you lean forward with Track IR or VR, there should be the loud BRRRRRRT! as it collides with your helmet/headset. Back when I flew Twin Otters, this was an ever present threat (making contact with the little rubber fan blades, the fan in the Twotter was mounted just over your head. It came as quite a surprise sometimes!)

The Mi8 is far too prone to entering VRS. Yes, I'm aware of the lengthy debate on this topic. Sorry, but it's just a fact, as far as I'm concerned (of course I'm nobody when it comes to this, so naturally I don't expect anything to change based on what I say, no illusions on that front). But the Mi8's excellent simulation of rotary winged flight is tarnished by an overzealous implementation of how hard it actually is to enter VRS. Yes, I know how to avoid it in DCS (don't confuse 'hard' with 'realistic'). No, if helicopters, and the Mi8/17 were that prone to enter VRS is would be VERY widely published because people would be crashing them all the time. I hope they don't go so far with the Mi24.

On a small cautionary note, the AI can, for the moment, still see through clouds. From the patch notes, 'known issues': "Currently as part of the initial release, clouds do not affect LOS for the AI."

This is a lot more apparent now because of laser guided, boresight (ie. fired straight ahead) weapons like the APKWS. People are going to try and religiously get the pipper on the target, making the TGP have to rotate around a lot to try and keep on the point target if they get the nose even slightly low. I recommend biasing nose high and allowing the rockets to 'drop' a bit more to the target, keeping the TGP outside the zone where this can happen. The rockets will still hit.

We've all been there at one time or another. PEBESAC (Problem Exists Between Ejection Seat And Canopy)

Incredible work. A night and day difference.

There are quite a few reasons why keeping a RL aircraft cruising in straight and level flight is easier than a sim: 1) Peripheral vision is easier IRL. Even when head down, you can see the horizon out the corner of your eyes. 2) Seat of the pants. IRL, you are cued when the aircraft does something bouncy, in sims you can be pulling a 6G barrel roll and be unaware of it. 3) Trimming. Real aircraft are generally easier to trim for straight and level, it tends to all even out. Most true for slower, piston engined, straight winged (no sweepback) aircraft. 4) Control feel. In sims, your stick doesn't harden up with airspeed. IRL, you fly straight and level with the tiniest movement of the stick, more like just a pressure which gives excellent feedback. This isn't easy at all in sims, where the spring force is constant, and a tiny movement which feels like nothing can make your aircraft go wild. I would therefore have no problem for a simple wing leveller (IL2:BoX has this for example). It would make sense. Wing levellers do not take heading into account, it just keeps the wings level. It's not really a cheat, doesn't confer much advantage at all (I would argue none), makes the workload more in line with RL since long periods of S&L are easier IRL compared to sims, esp with time compression (see, there's another sim thing, we do it all the time).

Question for those who know, do the F18's DDI's automatically adjust for sunlight? I fly 737's, and the -400's displays are CRT (hence the nice burned in images of the horizon etc on the PFD for example), and the -800's are LCD/TFT (one of those, I dunno!) but all are supposedly 'sunlight readable' - BUT they also have a little light sensor, that automatically adjusts the display brightness, so as the sun crosses the panel, the displays brighten automatically. You stil have the main brightness control, but it's normally left in the centre detent, even at night. The setup is generally pretty good, and even in direct sunlight you can still read them with no problems, although the contrast is obviously not as good. So, IMHO, everything should be readable in sunlight, albeit slightly less 'comfortable' to do so.

The OP stated that they will be using the 'standard Vector track clip'. That (to me) means what Naturalpoint calls the 'Trackclip'. That's to differentiate between that, and the 'Trackclip PRO', which is the powered, LED carrying device that could be attached to a hairband etc. if one doesn't use a headset (as the OP stated). All as seen here: https://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/accessories/ The spring steel Trackclip can only be tracked properly if its slightly in front of your head, pretty much exactly where it would be if worn as designed, on a cap peak. The most open air type of setup would be what Naturalpoint calls the 'TrackIR Visor' on that page I linked above, which looks like a sports type cap made to allow better air circulation. That's assuming I interpreted the OP correctly. Again, I don't know a simple means of using the Trackclip that wouldn't involve a peaked cap.

Suck it up and wear a cap. It is, by far, the simplest, most comfortable solution. You'll be putting *something* on your head anyway, and since you don't use a headset, there is nothing else to put it on. Which means you'll be wearing some dorky contraption, or a baseball cap which is comfortable to wear, and for which the clip is specifically designed to easily attach to, and whose position the TiR software is specfically written to track. I'd be very curious to see what else is even possible, that doesn't resemble a cap.

Asking the real question. With 100% maintenance and flawless weapons (ie. they never just drop into the water, everything works every time), a single incoming subsonic missile should be managed quite readily. This is after all the main threat all defensive weapons have been designed to defeat. I would expect nothing less. The fact that DCS allows magical safety for aircraft at super low altitudes (based on what I have seen, and why I quoted the above) is leading to confusion here, as people assume the same treatment for missiles. The whole idea of 'radar clutter' is overblown to a degree. Even with older radars (my only actual experience), sea skimming missiles show up quite distinctly as they get closer.

Just to add, since I have the same problem: Even though the GS (for Ground Speed) checkbox is checked in the mission editor for both CV and helo, the helo still passes/falls behind the carrier. ie. With the GS box checked, wind, density altitude etc should have no effect, but 25 kts for both CV and helo still results in a split.

I get 60 fps + on the deck in the F14 on my old PC, all options high or close to it, some fps hogs like SLR and higher MSAA values turned off, which is amazing for the level of detail and calculation running in the background. This is on 2560 X 1440. It's still playable at 4K. But OBVIOUSLY when you try and run the huge, double images of VR it will suffer. ANYTHING that wasn't specifically designed to run like that (ie. lower poly count, lower draw distances etc) would. That's why there's a VR setting in the gfx options, and it turns everything down massively, and still struggles. VR is a new thing, and the performance hit is HUGE. If you're underestimating that, well.....that's like saying 'My PC can't do 8K at 100 fps! Bad devs!' This is silly.