Para_Bellum

I think many people post here so that the devs (and other potential devs) understand why this kickstarter project will fail: it's not because there isn't a demand for highly-detailed DCS aircraft or that flightsim fans in general are reluctant to actually finance a project via Kickstarter but rather that the F-35 is an aircraft that few flightsim fans outside the US are really interested in.

It is. And according to kicktraq they won't make it if the current trend continues. I'm not interested in the F-35 myself so I haven't pledged but I wish them they get the project funded nevertheless.

It really depends on the mission designer. Most missions we fly in our group don't have fighter support since the guys prefer to fly the DCS-level A-10Cs, Hueys and Black Sharks. And mission balancing is quite a bit more difficult with enemy air assets. But again, it's up to the mission designer.

This is a very nice decision.

As I've said, I don't expect exact numbers. But it would be nice to hear whether the Huey is considered for example a huge success or a failed experiment.

Start-> Programs-> Eagle Dynamics->DCS World->Documentation

I don't expect any detailed information about how many modules of the Huey have been sold, but I'd be really interested to know how this module did from a commercial perspective. Did it surpass expectations? Was it merely "OK"? I guess quite a few 3rd party developers followed the release of the first 3rd party module for DCS and the financial success (or failure) will most probably influence what and how many projects we'll see in the future. I hope the devs can really make some money with these modules, because I want to see a lot more of them in the future!

Ah, Ok, I can understand that. :smilewink: Looking forward to seeing more from you, the Maus already looks very good.

First, thanks for your efforts in bringing us some WW2 stuff! Much appreciated, really. But why the Maus? It really feels like a wasted effort compared to common vehicles like a StuG, SdKfz 251, or a PzKpfw IV, a Panther or a Tiger. I'm certainly not complaining about "free" stuff, but the choice of the model is rather strange. Attacking a Maus platoon with a P-51 is about as realistic as attacking a platoon of "German" T-55s. IMHO.

I have only very little interest in FC3-level aircraft anymore. I would only buy future FC3-level releases if the aircraft in question would be something I just need to have. Say, like a Tornado. ;)

That's a very nice improvement, just tried the 1024 version and it looks great! No noticeable impact on FPS. Thanks a lot!

I have both the MSFF2 and the TM Warthog. The MSFF2 lends itself a bit better to fly a helicopter due to lesser stick resistance but I have no problems with the Warthog either. I usually play with the Warthog though because I just love the feel of the stick.

The "dark" pic shows just fine on my screen. And I haven't had problems with those missions. I actually enjoy dusk/dawn flights in DCS. Maybe your screen is set a bit too dark?

I have to say that I have very little interest in FC3-level aircraft. The F-15 and Su-27 updated with just an advanced FM will be the 1st modules I won't buy. I'm not angry or disappointed in any way, but I'll keep waiting for DCS stuff.

Owwww... now that's bad luck. :megalol:

Again: thanks guys. Really appreciate all comments. I know the landing's not perfect. I never claimed that. It's just a vid showing the rough parameters I've been using to (more or less) good effect when landing the Huey in a more aggressive style. I'm sure with more practice everything will further improve. :book:

No, I'm happy for any criticism. :thumbup: I didn't do the descent at less than 30kts, i was slowing down from 80 to around 20 and of course I reduced the speed of descent as I got slower. For the most part of the descent I was around 50-60kts. I should've been more clear on that. Actually, I didn't. Right before touching down I put in rudder to correct the sideways skip. Oh well, I still think it was a decent landing... :huh:

Thanks guys, glad you liked it. Why is that?

As I'm slowly getting more comfortable with the Huey I've started to change my landing pattern from deliberately slow and careful to faster, more aggressive approaches better suited to operating in hot LZs. So far what works best for me is: 1.) approach LZ at ~80kts, 300ft AGL 2.) at ~500m from landing point I lower collective, raise the nose and step on the right rudder to enter a 500ft/min descent while slowing down 3.) I try to maintain a stable glidepath of around 500-1000ft-min descent with the speed slowing down to ~ 20kts 4.) at around 75-100ft AGL I start to pull some more cyclic to to slow down to almost a stop, raise collective and counter the tendency to swing right with quite a bit of left rudder and settle her down Small vid "landing air cav style": :happy:

I've put around 16 hrs of flight time into the Huey so far and I tend to agree. :thumbup:

Practice, practice, practice. ;) Using curves for cyclic inputs helps, too.

Thanks, guys! Hehe... yeah, that's my checklist after touchdown, too. :megalol:

I've captured one of my better attempts at an autorotation landing on video: Still need to improve a lot with synchronizing rudder, cyclic and collective inputs, but I'm slooowly getting there. The actual touchdown was surprisingly smooth, looks worse in the vid. Oh, and to the guys at Belsimtek/DCS: awesome job! :thumbup:

I can taxi the Huey without much problems. Of course not (yet) as precise as the pilot in the vid, but then he has probably a lot more time in Hueys than I do. ;) And yes, taxiing requires only very little cyclic input.

For those who think the Huey is "too jittery": read Robert Mason's memories (Chickenhawk) about his 1st time in a Huey. ;)