Jump to content

Wychmaster

Members
  • Posts

    432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wychmaster

  1. I think most of the "complicated stuff" comes from the fact, that you can raise and lower the pods as needed. In other choppers, where they are fixed , you can simply display the CCIP. But with the system of the Apache, you basically have a line of possible impact points that depend on the pod angle. To avoid fiddling around with the pod elevation yourself, you just tell the system the direction and distance of the target you want to hit and it does the pod elevation for you. In the end, all that is required is to bring the I-beam over the aiming cross. Not complicated at all. Only thing that makes it hard is that you need to focus on two things at once when using the HMD as sight: Keeping the cross on target and align the I-beam by steering the helicopter. But that just requires a bit of practice. In the coop mode, it is for the pilot even easier than CCIP in other helos. You just need to correct direction until the I-beam gets over the cross. Since the CPG feeds direction and distance to the computer you can move your head without any effect onto the relation between target cross and I beam. The relation is only affected by the direction you are flying. This means, you don't even have to look onto the target. You can look anywhere, even in a totally different direction than your target. If you steer the helicopter and the I-beam aligns with the target cross, you can fire and will hit the correct area without ever looking at the target. How cool is that? The biggest mystery about the I-beam system is probably, that it seems to move around randomly, but once you know why it moves to which location, it isn't complicated at all. The quick start guide explains it very well. So I suggest anybody who does not understand it, to read the rocket employment section. Or if you can wait a few days: I am currently preparing a step-by-step video tutorial where you are not overwhelmed by everything happening at once.
  2. I was also wondering why I couldn't find tanks or vehicles inside forests during the day on the Syria map using the FLIR. So I did some testing on the Caucasus and on the Syria map. I created basically an identical setup on both maps (3000 ft distance, 20 degrees Celsius, look to the north, 8:00 AM) on both maps and tried to get a good contrast. You can see the results on the first two images below. It seems that the ground textures on the syria map (first picture) are much brighter through the FLIR than the ones of the caucasus map, which makes it hard to get a good image setup where you can spot vehicles easier. It also seems that forest areas have much brighter ground textures than open fields (maybe forest stores heat? see third picture [Caucasus]). As you can see on the fourth picture (Caucasus), the T-72B3 (tank in the middle) has a solid contrast against the background on an open field while it is almost black on the forest pictures. I have no real clue how it looks IRL, and whether the effects shown in the pictures are correctly simulated effects or if it is simply just WIP inaccuracies. It would be nice if someone of the ED team or someone who has experience with FLIR systems can shed some light on what we see here: - Why are the ground textures on the Syria map brighter? - Why is the ground in and around forests brighter? - Is the contrast close to reality for the chosen setup or still WIP? I also included tracks of the test missions that I used to create 3 of the 4 images. The image with multiple tanks in the open was taken in a different mission. If needed, I can create a track of it too. By the way, at night, the FLIR works as expected and all vehicles are more or less easy to detect. FLIR Caucasus.trk FLIR Syria.trk
  3. Almost, I figured out that the alarm state was the option I was looking for. Green state=engines off, red state = engines on. However, the vehicles still start in a cold state and need some warmup time.
  4. With the new FLIR tech it now matters if vehicles have their engines on or off. If you place one that does not move, the engines are turned off automatically and the vehicles are cold. I would like to have an additional option to set the engine state manually and also if the vehicle should be considered "hot" or "cold" at mission start. For example, a tank regiment that expects an enemy assault might have their engines already running to be able to move when getting under fire. So they would already have a thermal signature. To my knowledge, this is currently not possible.
  5. If you are more into old soviet tech helos, I can't argue with that. But I would say the marked section is wrong. I mean, you manage to find your way through a jungle of nearly randomly placed switches but as soon as one puts 2 MFDs into a very clean cockpit, it gets to complicated? Yes you can take a real deep dive into the system pages, but if you just want to blow things up the way you do with the Hind, it is extremely simple to do, especially if you consider that you just have 3 weapon types. The complexity only comes from the huge number of things you can do, not from the fact that they are overly complicated. Again, if it's not your taste, that's fine. But don't miss it because it seems to complicated. It's not. Anyways, happy
  6. And now consider that you can fire the Hellfire without seeing the target only exposing yourself for the last 12 seconds. Additionally, someone could simply buddy lase for you, so no need to get out of cover at all. While the first thing might be possible with the Ka-50 doing some trick shooting (not so easy), the second isn't (as far as I know). Also don't forget that we will get the radar guided Hellfire, which will be a fire and forget weapon. On the other hand, as far as I know, the Vikhr has 1 km more range (IIRC), A beam rider should in theory be slightly better when using it against airborne targets since it doesn't require you to keep the laser on target, only in the last few seconds. So you can manually guide it on a more efficient intercept course and it isn't as bad if the target disappears for a few seconds as it is with a spot tracking missile. The proximity fuse on the Vikhr also helps, don't know if the Hellfire has one IRL. However, aircrafts are not the primary target of both missiles. I can't tell which missile is superior in terms of reliability and effectiveness against armor, but the Laser Hellfire wins the flexibility contest against its primary target. I would consider both cannons more or less equally good, just not in the same categories. The Ka-50 gun is more precise, giving you a higher effective range, which is nice for sniping targets. The Apache gun is a better suppression weapon since the turret can cover a larger area. So you can respond much quicker to popup threats. All the other weapons are extremely situational and are seldomly chosen in DCS except for the larger rockets maybe (Can't tell how it's done IRL). 2 missiles instead of 12? Maybe if you want to go against ships or a bunker. Bombs that require you to fly over the target? Hello AAA? And bigger rockets? Well, only makes sense if you are trying to tear down fortifications. For everything else they are to unreliable regarding their accuracy and you pay for the punch by a significant reduction in quantity. Also, rockets are much easier to aim with the Apache. For me, the Apache is the clear winner, even though I enjoyed my time in the Kamov and will definitely buy BS3. I can't really name many things where I think the Kamov is better. System-wise the Apache wins easily. SA is much better in the Apache and you have a much better view outside the cockpit. Maybe the Kamov has better autopilots as a consequence of being a single pilot chopper. It has better protection and it can take more beating (looking at you, tail rotor). In DCS context, maybe the Ka-50 is nicer for single player (for obvious reasons) but if you fly from the front seat and treat George as auto-hover/autopilot stand-in, it shouldn't be too different once the Apache has all it's features on board (missing the contrast lock the most).
  7. All tanks of the Leopard 2 series in DCS are using the same backup sight (ctrl + F). The A6 version got a new gun which increased muzzle velocity, which is also considered in DCS. However, as a result, the bullets have a different trajectory. Using the same secondary sight as for the A5 causes the bullets to end up longer than manually set. Tracks are attached for AP and HE ammo. The effect can be seen better for HE, but it is also noticeable for AP. I did the following: I placed two cones at 3500m and 4000m, which are the maximum ranges you can set on the secondary sights for the 2 ammo types. Then I set the ranges manually and shot a few rounds with the A5 and the A6. The rounds of the A5 impact more or less at the correct range near the cones with some minor random dispersion. The rounds of the A6 are always impacting further behind. The HE rounds almost impact near the second cone even though I aimed close to the first one. Leopard backup sight AP.trk Leopard backup sight HE.trk
  8. Search for "toggle goggles" in the controls.
  9. Waited over 20 years since Janes Longbow 2. Totally worth it. This is my new DCS aircraft of choice. It has so many cool features. RWS+CMWS really help to stay alive. PNVS makes night ops really interesting. Shooting rockets and the gun is really nice in VR... and so much more. Great piece of art by ED and it will only get better if all those little bugs get busted.
  10. I have set the two detents of the laser on separate buttons so that I can go to second detent without going through the first. However, in todays session this seemed to cause the tracking issues of the missiles. After I accidentally hit the first detent, the missiles started tracking. So next time you get this issue, try the first detent first. Maybe that helps.
  11. I also experienced this. I changed the MFD render resolution to something with "every frame" but havn't tested it since then. Maybe I ll check it out today and report back. If it is still a problem I will try to make a video that demonstrates the issue. But for that I have to figure out how to make good VR videos without having a second screen. EDIT: Don't know for sure if setting the MFD rendering to "every frame" solved it, but I no longer experienced the reduced frame rate of the PNVS in yesterdays night flight.
  12. I somewhat got what you meant. If you have AP loaded, and switch to HE, the AP round should still be in the barrel and only hitting ctrl + R or firing the round in the barrel would put an HE round into the barrel, right? My point was just, that this is partially implemented for autocannons with the difference that you can't switch the shell that is already in the barrel, and it isn't as relevant for ACs as for a tanks main gun. However, I didn't realize, that ctrl + R actually triggers an action on main guns. Never tried it I am more opimistic. Look at the recent changelogs. They are working on CA. I think the Apache is a key factor here because it gets more players close to the ground and combined arms operations will get a lot more attention once people realize how much fun it is. The "problem" with airplanes (even the A-10) is that they are to detached from the action on the ground and the interactions between people driving tanks and players flying planes is very limited. Just an occasional: "Can you remove XY for me?". With the Apache we can now have ground units and aircrafts working together as a team, making it so much more interesting. Yes, it was already possible before using other Helos, but they either lacked virtual pilots or the capabilities to provide real good CAS. Something else/offtopic: Would you (and other people) be interested in a special Discord Server for Combined Arms related discussions? Maybe we can also organize some CA community missions there.
  13. To what you said about the AP round should stay in the barrel if you switch ammo types to HE with E (or the other way around). As I said, this is already implemented in the autocannons (even though the ammo type selection works differently). Try the Bradley Well lets see, I would say we have provided some ideas. From a minimal version to a full version that gets as close as it can with the current CA mechanics. How much time and effort would be needed is something only ED can answer. If we can choose, than your suggestion is the way to go
  14. I am half-way through the german version, afterwards, I ll do a video tutorial series in english and then I ll translate both to the other language. So still some work to do. Since I am writing in LaTeX, the plan is to publish it on GitHub and let the community keep it up to date. So you will be able to do proofreading and suggest changes using Github pull requests I don't think they mind mentioning old product from the past, that are long gone (correct me if I am wrong). I just played "M1 Tank Platoon II" and loved it. But many things I enjoyed in this game can already be done in DCS CA too. It still needs some adjustments, but I am confident that CA will get some love in the future and that we hopefully will get full-fidelity, multi-crew vehicles .
  15. Interestingly, autocannons "remember" what is inside the barrel. If you change the feedslot, the first round you fire is still from type that was loaded before. You can see that easily because it has a different trajectory and speed than the following bullets. What you describe basically is what needs to be done to get a real in depth simulation of the loading process. However, given the fact that CA is more "light weight" and ED has limited resources, I guess we should aim for a minimal change with maximum effect. That's why I suggested to merge the already existing reloading functionality for missile launchers into the ready rack of tanks. The only change we would see is that if we hit ctrl+R that some numbers are swapped so that we have more of the fast reloadable ammo. Yes, the term reloading might be a bit irritating here, as correctly pointed out by your posts, but I think that we can live with that. This change is probably "easy" to implement, since everything is already implemented in DCS at some place. I don't know how much more effort would be needed to introduce a new keybind plus game mechanics. Of course, if NineLine or any other of EDs officials says: "give me a full, realistic mechanics draft and we will try to implement that", all that you said would be a solid first draft, but I guess it is more like: "Give the most important changes you need and we will see if we find the time". That's why I think we should keep it as simple as possible while getting a maximal benefit If they have additional time, adding the mechanism that already loaded ammo stays in the barrel would be great (like already simulated in autocannons). I wouldn't care too much if I can't replace it manually, since tanks with autoloaders can't do it anyways and in a firefight it is faster to just fire the wrong round instead of taking it out of the barrel first. But if they are willing to give us more, I wouldn't mind either I still hope that ED is already secretly working on a vehicle module, where all the details you mentioned are considered. "I have a dream..."
  16. ^^^ This I have flown the Hind, Huey, Ka-50 and the Mi-8 and can now hover all of them almost perfectly. But every time I get into a new bird I have trouble to get into a stable hover. First attempts with the Apache were really embarrassing. Especially when I tried to use the IHADSS symbology. Now, after a bit of practice, I don't have problems anymore. I think you just need to readjust your muscle memory to this new bird Good luck all to all of you
  17. Hope so too. I think we have to get used to the limited FOV and the missing depth perception in VR. During the day I have no problem flying extremely low maintaining 80 knots and squeeze myself between every gap in a tree line. But at night with the PNVS I have the feeling to fly low but when I look at the altimeter... 50 ft. I also permanently have the feeling that things are closer than they actually are. Maybe I will try it really slow next time This chopper is a true master piece. Really glad ED made this possible.
  18. Okay, I did a quick video on the subject. Hope it helps you to get safe to the ground (The preview image chosen by youtube is awesome )
  19. @Callsign112 Hey, thanks for your detailed posts. I will add some of my thoughts tomorrow. Unfortunately, I got a bit distracted by the Apache release. But I will continue with CA once I did enough crash landings
  20. Wow, this is really great news. Some first consequences of battle damage would be really nice. Especially losing the range finder would be interesting, because it would give all those backup sights finally a purpose. However, the slowdown already happens on player vehicles, if they get damaged.
  21. Did some autorotation training yesterday and thaught I can use the collectives engine chop button to put the engines to idle. So I assigned the keys for the button press and to open the cover, but nothing happened. Since the covers on the cyclic are not animated yet, I can't tell if the cover keybinds are not working or if the keypress itself is not working. Can anyone confirm this to be a problem or am I missing something important?
  22. Did some autorotations today and it works extremely well. However, you need to "catch the nose" before it dives to deep. Otherwise, there isn't any way to get it back up and you kiss the ground with your nose. How I did it: - Power levers off - Lower collective - Pull the stick to prevent the nose from diving (increase collective a bit if necessary) - Once stable autorotation is achieved, try to maintain 80-100 kts - Flare when getting close to the ground and pull collective as much as necessary. If needed, I can make a demo video.
  23. For static targets, you can store its location as a point, make it the acquisition source and then slave the tads to it.
  24. Thank you for reporting this. I also experienced the drift. It also affects the stored points. If you select a target with the TADS, store its location, make it the acquisition source and then slave the TADS to it, you will see how the point is moving. It always happens when I fly the same chopper for longer periods.
×
×
  • Create New...