Wrcknbckr

I just flew the DCS Huey after a long time and indeed the pitch up and down in forward flight raising collective is clearly noticeable. My initial line of thinking was with hover in mind but raising collective for a vertical climb did not lead to a perceivable pitch up/down. So I guess it's something within the flight model that's off for forward flight.

That's good to know from your operational experience! I'm still looking for a physics-based explanation. Let's stick to a hover case. It's not that the stabilizer area is too small. It's the moment it creates with a down force on it. Assuming the lateral moment caused by fuselage to be zero (forward deck equals out with backward engine deck) than with increasing collective it should lead to a pitch up. Which leads us to the fuselage. Fuselage aerodynamic characteristics may come into play when the airflow comes from above creating a pitch up moment. I wonder to which extend that is modelled in DCS. UH60 horizontal surface is huge indeed, but is placed outside of the rotor disk, with a scheduled angle depending on forward speed, the Huey's stabilizer is placed inside the rotor disk.

Exactly, because that aft limit was based also on pulling collective, so no need address that specifically in a manual. Since you have flown helicopters (Bell included?), can you say something about pulling collective and notice a pitch up (I supposed OP is referring to pitch up...), are you then compensating automatically?

Of course the CG envelope is determined including this effect. It's not that this effect is excluded in the design

I think what you are seeing is that increasing collective in hover, is increasing rotor downwash on the horizontal stabilizer resulting in a pitch up attitude. Unlike other manufacturers Bell puts a this stabilizer under the rotor to compensate pitch down at forward speeds. Other helicopters have the horizontal tail further back.

One simple hint: STOP aerial refueling. START formation flying only. See you in a month.

Pilot head would move for unanticipated rotation, for instance due to turbulence. That aircraft movement was not anticipated and neck muscles are not strained for upright position 100% of the time, maybe that was what OP meant... (Off topic; turning a bike is initiated by pushing the handle bar in the opposite direction - causing you body to fall inward the intended curve, try it, be careful ;))

Set the reticle to 45 mills. Set A/G. Take your time. No hurry. With that low pass you probably would have damaged yourself. No need to adjust parameters, 'Tell Jester' to do that.

For me it's not so much the loudness but the fact it sounds like loud white noise. Same noise as the Tomcat's bleed air (which I switch off almost always). Unfortunately here there is nothing to switch off...

Basically; for a counter rotating rotor the tail rotor thrust is directed to the right to counteract main rotor torque. To compensate drift to the right the only means is by gravity so the helicopter should be tilted to the left (which is then corrected by collective, cyclic, and pedal again and again, still hovering only...).

Ouch, was it there the first week already, did I overlook it? Was doing the Dive Toss and AGM65 training 'from the pilot seat' and remember I was clueless as to what to do... maybe because Jester was supposed to be involved. Anyway... thx!

This would sure save a lot of frustration for those that would rather fly than read manuals (let alone writing one!). Just add a search term 'context' to the related button... Otherwise nothing but praise for the module!

That would be the instructor in the training lessons...

Ralt+Num0 will add your favorite viewpoint of F-4E-45MC to SnapViews.lua. Be sure to check 'User snap-view saving' in Option->Misc.

The aiming point on the HUD is not the pipper but it's the smaller 'x' on the net, slightly lower then the pipper. When you lock the target that target position will remain locked for the GROM. The pipper does not move anymore now. From your replay it looks like the GROM does exactly what you tell it to do.

In short: 'The terrain presented is a representation of modern Afghanistan, most closely matching the years between 2008 and 2010.'

Thx for sharing! He's also talking about AAR using a drogue (time 32:50). When approaching the drogue the airflow of the aircraft (Jaguar in this case) will push the drogue away. A nice little addition to make it even harder in DCS.

True that, I was going along the posters line of operating at sea. Elevation is an issue. I can imagine a local wind speed offset that is related to elevation which may be practical, simple to implement and somewhat more representative.

I guess the wind profile in DCS is based on the Atmospheric Boundary Layer theory. It's a relatively simple formulation (see for instance Atmospheric Boundary Layer | How to Set up an ABL | SimScale ) and based on physics, not on what people think it should be. It's an engineering method that is commonly used for the design and performance analyses of wind turbines (There's a reason that current wind turbines are getting taller, simply to 'catch' the higher wind speeds) Since DCS is not a weather simulator this simple model (physics based) is (probably) used to define wind speed layers at the lower altitudes. In the formulation one of the parameters defines the viscous effects of the surface; being flat (sea/lake) or urban. This parameter defines the form of the profile. Based on numbers presented by posters I'd say that the parameter chosen by ED matches an airfield (somewhere between a crop field and an area of low buildings). For a set surface wind, the wind speed at 1600ft would be lower at sea compared to land (due to less obstruction at surface level) but then this parameter should be dependent on the location (and infrastructure) and apparently that is not implemented (ED?). I do not understand why flying with a wind speed gradient should pose problems. An aircraft is not interested in wind. It only cares about airspeed.

OP is merely asking to sit and relax as WSO to see the pilot do the AAR. Why bring up the 'helpers' again? That's been an endless discussion already. Helpers are for procedural events (dull switch-flipping, no skill needed and easy to implement by devs) and for hardware limitations. In no way we need 'helpers' to do the flying for you.

There used to be fireworks when you hit an ammo depot. Haven't seen it for some time. Was it my aim or was it taken out alltogether?

Aim assist in shooters are meant to aid console players as opposed to keyboard players. Not comparable. Shifting assist in racing cars is not beneficial since in manual assists you can rev up more and gain more speed. Both not applicable to compare assists in DCS. Current assists in DCS are either procedural (auto start up), easy to implement and needed to prevent 'boring' tasks. The other assist such as autorudder are meant to overcome hardware deficiencies. In no form you will find assist to help flying skills (luckily).

Best training would be to place a large object in the air that moves with constant speed and altitude (let's call it a tanker),and a smaller object that moves with same speed and altitude (let's call it a basket), the latter one requires more precision flying but in the end it only means flying straight and with appropriate speed. To make it easier you should ignore rudder. It is not needed for AAR and one degree-of-freedom less...

I'm only familiar with a mobile-phone type 3D viewer. They can even be made of cardboard material where you put the phone in. I have no idea how to view that on a monitor. In that case your eyes focal points should be diverging (!) which is not possible. When you switch the two images you will be able to see it cross-eyed.

You'd see two clear images on the monitor. The left part of the screen for you left eye, the right part for your right eye. You would need a viewer to experience stereo/3D. When you fiddle with the parameters in the stereo file you could place the image for the left eye on the right part of the monitor and vice versa you will see depth by cross-eyed viewing (may take some time to achieve this). It's fun just for the experience but not for actual use in flying for a long time, and of course there's only half the width of the monitor available...