Leg2ion

??

For what reason/use? Currently got 2xTMs for A10 mounted on a face plate on a 10.4"screen, and considering separate MPDs for the AH?

?

Thanks.

Link?

Go helo - you can just stop!

Screenshot for Nostalgia purpose sometime in 2025!

But then why should it? In that it should get additional 'features' - such as??? It is a simulation, some (me) see it as a game, TBH I only want Arc210 in the hope the pre-sets will be fixed. The sim model is based on a variant and corresponding systems (I believe) as true to life as they can be subject to information release up to a certain modification/Blok level, so once at that level - endgame. Same really as the current AH module - D model. We'el - there is now an E model - so when is that going to be rolled out in a 'DCS Modification Programme' - maybe/probably never - it is currently a simulation of an aircraft at that development (D) standard - although still enhanced from the original D model specs (TEDAC coupled with MTADS vs the older ORT as an example). Could also argue for the Brits out there why hasn't the UK DAS suite been modelled, likewise Israeli, etc etc etc... I guess ultimately as 'simmers' 'we' will never be happy (to a more or lesser degree), similar to real life pilots, and will always want the best kit, against what the simulation actually represents in terms of modelling at a particular date stamp?

From the manual: LRFD Trigger. Activates the laser rangefinder. • First detent. LRFD determines target range. • Second detent. LRFD determines target range and designates target for laser guidance.

Get Apache Learn Apache. From real life Gazelle 'sensitive', Huey 'forgiving'. If you want to 'play' with another Helo go Blackshark - contrarotating Main Rotors so no real issues over pedals, but you do learn the basics of hovering, low flight, transitioning into and out of the hover, left and right sideslip manoeuvres etc. Still learning the AH - and definitely small steps needed. Do something, so you do it well, then it becomes 2nd nature, then move on, but keep the repetition up. Worst case is you divert your focus onto one platform to learn another - then it becomes muddied, and you are constantly comparing the differences.

Yes I do! Think it's only been planned for around a couple of years so hopefully by the time it reaches the masses there will have been a full trial installation, flight and functional trials, a proof installation then productionised so all works as advertised...

Hopefully the presets will work - properly!

Hopefully that will include the A10 and we will get a finished module (hint - ARC210!).

I think... When the MR rotates, if there was no anti torque (tail) the airframe would rotate the opposite direction - so the main rotor rotates anticlockwise when viewed from the above, and the airframe would rotate clockwise. To counter this affect the tail rotor pushes the tail to the right in an anticlockwise rotation, so when you put some left pedal in - in normal flight - it pushes the tail to the right. When you increase collective pitch (as you initially pull into the hover as an example) you also have to introduce some left pedal to counteract against the increased torque - so if when trying to roll you are applying full left pedal then in effect you are introducing maximum anti torque thrust which is trying to push the tail to the right - or in this instance upwards, to maintain an upright attitude - so despite having full left stick over by going full left pedal you now have a rotor at the back end trying to maintain you upright. By going right pedal you are unloading the anti-torque effect, so would allow the aircraft to continue on its manoeuvre without trying to fight against a left-hand roll. In addition, I believe the tail fuselage is constructed in a profile that allows the AH to maintain straight (ish) flight if there is a tail rotor failure above around 50-60 kts - but not sure if this feature is modelled. If you look at the tail - it is basically a wing designed to provide lift to the right, so as you go near 90 it is acting in profile as a normal wing - so again would be attempting to maintain level flight and resist any attempt to further roll over. I think...?

BUCS is an emergency back up system, and isn't used normally unless there are issues or seizures in the control system, so wouldn't be used to transfer control... BUCS = Back Up Control System. So - both pilots/CPGS stations are linked mechanically - in the same way any (most) dual seat helicopter is designed (either side by side or tandem seating arrangement) - so mechanical rods between one station to the other. Move one stick fwd - be it front or aft - the other one should replicate the action. BUCS is a pseudo emergency 'fly by wire' system - in that the controls are locked into the overall system by cams and springs. The idea being if there is a seizure or failure in the system (bearing failure, pilot shot and leaning against the stick etc) there is an ability to knock the stick out of its mechanical connection by overcoming a certain amount of force - which breaks the stick out of its cams, and from there on in it relies on input into an linear transformer which relays any detected movement electrically to the controlling servos.

In what way? Ah - just read the updates. Out of curiosity is it possible to display both Pilots and CPG displays onto 2 individual screens, then with corresponding MPD displays onto separate mini screens? Thinking the dual Pilot/CPG MPD displays is the 'easy' bit, but is there anyway to display the CPG view onto a second screen whilst simultaneously displaying the pilots view on the main controllable screen? Failing that will put the tedac onto the second large monitor. Basically got 2 x 27" plus 2 x 11" with 4 x cougars so trying to figure out how best to utilise the space/screens!

@Bunny Clark - many thanks for your very simplistic easy to understand guidance - very much appreciated! At the risk of getting lambasted by Osram (haha ) in case there are other similar posts, just fired up DCS after a few weeks (months) away, my normal .lua file setting is set for A10c with the MFD exports being to my secondary 11" display with cougar surrounds. I did run a single 27" screen with the 11" display, but have now upgraded to 2 x 27" plus the 11" for the MFD. Kept the same .lua in place - only changed purely to take into account the additional screen now placed in between the 1st 27" screen and the 3rd 11" screen by adding to the values where required. From what I can recall - there were issues with the MPD displays - in that one would overwrite the other. With that said, went into an AH64 mission today - pilots position - and MPDs working as advertised - then swapped forward - also working and displays swapping dependent on what is selected at each position. Cannot recall seeing any indication in the update files that this was now fixed - but either way - happy days. Is everyone else getting this?

TBH I will be happy with anything that fixes the pre-sets and makes them work - properly!

As per ASAPs - if you are slow with a crosswind the HUD will drift. Try setting up a couple of training missions - onto the same runway etc, with different crosswinds, and you should see the difference.

If that did actually happen are you that bothered about what indications you get??? Look at the wings - big lump of metal and ordnance missing - no real indications needed? Regardless of what the systems say - you can fairly guarantee you cannot drop a missile off the missing launcher? As far as I know (using simple terms) there is a EMRU bolted to the wing, then 'plugged in' to allow stores jettison etc, then a launcher hangs off the EMRU, with each store being 'plugged in', so when the system is polled it details a missile load at each station. So, if the whole load sheared it may depend on how it fails, but I guess it should show the launcher in a fail state, tho ultimately how would the pilot react??? What you need to remember is the vibration and trauma to the aircraft after being hit to create such a failure, along with the human interaction and subsequent reaction would probably dictate a set of responses in line with getting their backsides back home in one piece?

Note: The ARC-210 radio is now in work. Oh Happy Days!

'How does a collective work' - such an innocent question and bound to elicit a few multi faceted responses! So, (and as eluded to in a few responses to above) a Collective control is a pilot input lever that will 'collectively' increase/decrease pitch on all blades at the same time. Unfortunately - things are not that simplistic, so whilst the desire may be to increase pitch (initially) uniformly across all blades - this cannot happen due to advancing and retreating blade speeds coupled with aircraft forward speed. In essence - in forward flight advancing blades - so those going forward into the airflow - need less pitch (which equates to less lift) due to increased airflow (advancing speed plus fwd aircraft speed) across the aerofoil section of the blade, whilst those retreating - so heading backwards away from fwd speed airflow need more pitch (equating to more lift) due to decreased airflow (retreating blade speed minus fwd aircraft speed). Overall effect is to keep relative lift across the rotor disc equal to prevent dissymmetry of lift. This is governed by basic flight control rigging where everything is pinned in position and angles set by adjusting the control rods (simplistic explanation)! In terms of 'power' - in the good ole days a lot of levers had a twist grip throttle, so was down to pilot skill to 'roll on' power to the engines to sustain power to maintain rotor speed - so the engines were manually governed. If you can picture a case whereby the blade pitch increases when the collective was raised to, say, transition into a hover from initial start-up, so in terms of airflow across the disc the blades will slow down, so the engines need to provide more power to maintain or increase rotor speed to counter the slow down effect. Then things got a little bit more advanced, whereby the throttle (independent of the collective) would be set (to fly), and the engines were fitted with a governor which would detect engine slow down (which meant rotor slow down) so would open a valve in the fuel management unit to increase fuel flow to increase speed and counter the slow down. Minor pilot input was required. Nowadays there are electronic control units fitted, and the system is basically automated - the idea being to take the workload off the pilot (who has better things to be doing on a battlefield). So these units govern the engine power output into the rotors transmission to maintain rotor speed - and are fed by a myriad of variables (from the airframe sensors and the engines), and in addition have 'anticipators' - another unit that will detect collective movement and anticipate a power demand (or reduction) and tailor the fuel flow to suit. Then you need to factor in the yaw and cyclic inputs and how the interlinks interact ...

Hi @Caldera . I think you may be getting some of your terminology mixed. When a 'hot start' is referred to it means just that - in that the temperatures that are monitored - normally at the turbine end of the engine - are too hot and have been exceeded on start up - hot start. Normally occurs when the engine power lever is advanced too quickly or too much load/power is demanded at start up before the engine is working correctly, and caused by insufficient airflow through the engine before a large amount of fuel is dumped into the combustor can. Once the engine is up and running properly bleed air is used to maintain/shape the flame in the combustor can to provide clean gas flow into the turbines to drive them, and then also provide cooling air across the turbine discs. IRL a hot start can result in something simple as a few boroscope inspections in the can and on the discs, or dependent on temperature reached engine rejection. As to your questions: Oil pumps - engine driven. Overall fairly low pressure so a quick rise is to be expected. In older aircraft types you would expect to see the pressure rise higher than normal (into the yellow) then as the pressure relief valve in the system kicks in start self regulating and come back down to the green. In terms of mimicking the rotor speed rise - assume you are monitoring No2 engine - so there is a direct relation between engine acceleration/speed (and subsequent drive to the engine mounted oil pump) and Nr. Rotor rotation - shouldn't be able to be used to restart an engine as the freewheels should decouple the rotors (spinning faster) from the engines (spinning slower). Normally either an APU is used to go through a 'standard' engine start or there is an ability to use bleed air off the one good engine if there is one. Purging - also called venting. If you have had a real hot start (but within limits allowing normal ops to continue) or aborted start for whatever reason then (dependent on engine manufacturer requirements) a shut down is required, sometimes a cooling off period of time, and sometimes a purge - so run/vent the engines for 30 seconds with fuel/ignition turned off as an example. Looking at some of the other questions/comments I believe that both the GE T700 (US) and the RR RTM322 (UK) are spun up with a pneumatic air starter powered by bleed air off the APU.

I fly with custom curves - shown at this link - I did feel them to help. Initially I found that the slightest yaw input would give me a spin, so after some guidance from elsewhere in the forum flattened the yaw/pitch/roll out around the centre point. Hope that helps - though really think a lot depends on your setup/feel and what works for you...

Glad to be of help. I do occasionally have a play with them - but normally end up back from where I started.