Kinkkujuustovoileipä

Will look into this.

I hate to say it, because I'm not a huge fan of it either, but it is realistic. Spoke to several pilots who use these types of pads and they all confirmed the glare can be atrocious.

This will be fixed in the next Gazelle update. My apologies for messing this up in the first place.

Did you read the OB patch notes?

ED haven't shared their rotor blur technology yet (for helicopters, fixed wing is different matter). Until they do, there is nothing we can do about it. We are aware of this and it is on the long-term backlog for all our modules if/when the situation changes.

You don't need to move, it'll be right in front of you. You can bind a key to stow/deploy the periscope, that's all you'll need to shift view.

The Viviane camera behaviour has been rewritten, the sync logic was updated to account for this. Multicrew was mostly fixed last year in any case. Yes, of course it was tested in VR. Stop worrying, you'll like it, it becomes very natural to use.

The tablet can be disabled in the mission editor. We're well aware of users wanting older variants

It's not broken rendering, it's deliberate. It wasn't designed for you to peek that far out. DCS uses two separate models - internal and external. For reasons of performance, the internal model sacrifices elements of the outside which you wouldn't normally see, in order to allow more detail on the internal geometry, e.g. switches and gauges. While we could invest some time into adding more geometry to the internal model, it's very low on the list of things we have time to do.

Will come with next update. Added option to decouple view, and there are bindings for control either by joystick/keyboard or mouse. And some other goodies I think you will like with your home system

Fixed internally, will be pushed out with the big 'FM' update.

You can fly together just by joining a slot. However the cockpit displays and switches will not be synced. In order to sync them you will need to follow the extra instructions in the guide. Please be aware that this is a very hacky implementation and has limitations. Afraid I cannot support FFB until I have an FFB joystick on which to test. One day...

Controls Indicator can be shown with 'RShift + Enter' (can be assigned in the Adjust Controls page) There is no 'autopilot' in the Black Hawk, instead you have a flight control system that will try to maintain the attitude you trim the helicopter to, as well as assist in turning (i.e. you don't use pedals to turn in cruise), and airspeed hold (which isn't implemented yet). All you need is the 'Trim Release' button - when you hold it down you have full manual control of the helicopter (i.e. the trim system is released). When you let go of the trim release button (assuming that FPS is on) then the flight control system will try to hold the helo at the current attitude. You can also make fine adjustments using the cyclic trim hat switch (just like in a fixed wing aircraft). There is no collective trim nor altitude hold function. A lot of changes were made to bring more realistic torque values. The biggest factors are weight and airspeed - you'll see a dramatically different behaviour if you have ESSS tanks on for example - but altitude and temperature also factor in. 80kts is the most efficient airspeed in general for the BH, so requires very low torque levels to maintain level flight. You can see in this example performance chart how drastically the torque requirement for level flight (bottom axis) decreases as the airspeed (vertical axes) goes from ~10 to 80kts, and then back up as you get faster.

Yes, the issue is that it is not implemented yet! Mission beacon navigation coming in 1.2

Still not quite what I meant. I could easily add the forward firing rockets, guns etc. But I prefer to keep the mod reasonably realistic. Thus I will not add these weapons unless I have the information to accurately or close to accurately model the weapon selection and armament systems, as well as the sights. Given that these weapons were only ever added to 160th SOAR birds, getting that information legally is extremely unlikely.

Hi folks, since it was brought up a lot, I created an "official" thread here: Which will allow me to update the first post with more news Can't promise I will actually check the forums any more often than I already do though

Hey folks, figured I'd start an "official" thread for the mod, as it came up in the other one a lot but obviously I wasn't responsible for creating it I'll do my best to update this as much as possible, although I'm not that active on the forums. With that said, here's the important stuff: Discord Link - yes, finally a working link for you Mod Download Link Mod ReadMe Link Mod Guide Link - yes, a ReadMe AND a Guide! Now you have no excuse! FAQ: 1) Will you add Door Gunners/Weapons? Short answer, no. It's not possible. Door gunners (and AI gunners) are locked behind SDK (too best of our attempts and knowledge so far). Yes, the Hercules mod has guns you can aim but they're dodgy at best. Fixed weapons on the Black Hawk also aren't happening - there is no unclassified information about the use of these systems and they also depend on other SDK-locked technologies such as FLIR. Of course if any of this changes, I'll be happy to implement some dakka. 2) Will you make this a paid module? Not unless ED change their mind - they won't let us, presumably because they or someone else is already planning one (based on quote from BN: "It's not available at this time"). If they want to work with us, they know where to find us - we'd be happy to work with them given the opportunity. 3) What about slingloading/ground crew/radios/radio navigation/multicrew? Proper solutions are locked behind SDK. As per usual with SDK locked stuff, if I can magic a workaround, then I'll fix it. But that can't be guaranteed. Some of these are already implemented with workarounds that may have bugs due to the nature of being a workaround. Until ED change something, it probably can't be fixed any more than it already is, which makes me more sad & frustrated than you, believe me. 4) When's the next release? At time of writing, 1.3 is expected to be a smaller release that focuses on bug fixes and system improvements. 5) What about a Pave Hawk/Seahawk/Jayhawk/Oceanhawk/Firehawk/Gods-knows-what-hawk? Without the ability to implement the systems that actually makes those unique (FLIR, radar, ASW systems, hoists, firefighting systems etc.) I don't really see any point. We are bringing some of the smaller changes as options to the core mod such as the Refuel Probe and later on, Tacan navigation. 6) Please can you do insert-helicopter-here mod next? Eh, probably not. I've got enough on my hands with this mod, and I'm at a point where I am limited more by ED than anything else, which rather puts me off. I'd love to create more content for DCS, I do genuinely enjoy it (having worked 20-30hrs a week for 14 months to build this...), but I can't see myself doing it again unless I have more/better tools to work with. It might sound arrogant to some, but I know what I'm capable of, and I feel very much 'boxed in' by the limitations imposed on modders. I truly want to make more awesome content for you guys to enjoy, especially after the incredible response to this mod, but it's going to have to be as part of an official third party team or in some way that gives me more access to the full SDK, where I have the access and tools to build full and well developed features.

Hey folks, we're focused on bug fixes and FM improvements for the upcoming 1.1 update, but we will be looking into optimizing the mesh in the future - I'm aware that its polycount far exceeds what is normal in DCS. In truth, I honestly never expected the mod to be this popular and so I made some shortcuts in the development in that area. Nevertheless, we are starting to make longer term planning for work on the mod and fixing this will be high on the list.

Took me 5 minutes to mod it in. Physics are a bit janky but it works. I'll add it to the next Black Hawk patch

Join the Discord server, read the FAQ.

You can join the Discord here. Thanks for the positive feedback

Of the four HELIPAD type statics, when checking for the category (as documented here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/1263/) three will return type 'SHIP' instead of 'HELIPAD'. These are: FARP T Helipad Single Invisible Farp I believe they also have the 'IsShip' property set to true. The 'standard' FARP (i.e. the one with four pads) returns 'HELIPAD' correctly.