Baltic Pirate

Soviet and warpac pilots got around 90-120 hours a year maximum.

Try a few different versions of autorotation. Do a low one say landing on a pad between buildings. Land on rooftops. One engine U/S landings. Overweight take off to from hover, rolling take off, nosewheel take off and list continues. There is actually tons of stuff one can do without even getting to shooting. Low level stuff with bad visibility. Then do all of that again in the dark. If you are bored with just firing unguided munitions at easy targets. Make a fast mission with experienced enemy and lots of these. That should give you something to think about. I cannot say that I am bored with it. On the contrary. I am finding new ways to work with the Hind and so far I am very happy having the module.

With 16000 hours on fixed wing aircraft and a late starter with rotary wings, I can attest to the relative ease one can move make the move. While not easy, I would describe it a challenge, albeit an interesting and a nice one it is still a challenge. VR makes the difference. Using VR takes the experience to a totally different level with flight simulators. DCS is realistic and VR adds to that. Now the discussion has been around for ever if a sim pilot can fly a real aircraft. With the modern flight simulator platforms, I have no doubt many if not most certainly can. I myself learned instrument flying basics and VOR tracking with FSII about 3 decades ago. It is a different story if one can manage a whole flight and everything involved be it civilian and or military flying. Certainly flying itself is not a hugely difficult maneuver, but if it was easy as many seem to suggest, then everyone could do it with no selections, in-depth training costing hundreds of thousands or getting paid 5 figures a month to fly one of those big civvie things.

Yes. Now that has some serious geopolitical dimensions even today and during WW2 Eastern Baltic saw some really heavy fighting. There are some interesting historical mission possibilities for WW2, Cold War period with Viggen and or F5 as well as Mig's. Modern day, well you see all the types in the area from Finnish Hornets, Polish Mig-29's to F16's and USAF F15's. Lots and lots of possibilities and a very varied and interesting terrain. This would be a 300km circle.

F5 did come with an ILS receiver. Most of the newer ones have it, especially the model we have. It would be a nice addition to DCS. ADI had FD needles making flying an actual approach a lot easier.

Try unticking the option 'Hear like in helmet'. That changes sounds a bit.

Not impossible, but hard and would take years to really master an aircraft as complex as what DCS offers. Then again mastering as a definition is relative. Most military and complex (Transport category or one requiring a type rating) civilian types require extensive training with weeks of ground school, theoretical testing, paper tiger, fixed base sim, sim training program and then aircraft training under supervision. Whole process with total immersion until release takes several months. Now on top of that military then makes a pilot on a new type go through squadron specific training and combat training. Depending on type, weapons, equipment etc. 3 months to a year. Yes the more complex weapon systems available for type, more sensor the longer the training is. I took on a module. Wrote myself a training program based on IRL training I've done in the past. Basically a type rating program. Does not cover weapons or combat use. Just a program to learn systems and actually to fly the type. I'll get to the weapons stuff a bit later.

I'd say the prices are ok. Certainly not too high.

Seemed to be like the IRL counterpart now. Just checked it.

Thanks. I had the same experience. Same map. I put the visibility at 100m and fog thickness at same 100m. Does not work as as it should.

No. FD is not required for CAT I approach by regulator on certain civilian ops (For us it is mandatory when flown with AP), but it is really nice to have. You don't need the NDB either but it is useful. Come to think of it, neither do you really need the TACAN receiver, but again it is useful. I find the addition of an ILS receiver also a useful addition. ILS is something many or most later F5's came with as standard including our current model. Funny enough some models like the F-16 and Jf-17 got it as well as the ICLS on F-18, Av-8B AWLS etc. So why not add the feature. As for NAV's well as they say, you can place NAV's around. However you can place these where you want on the map. Thread was about what people want for the F5 if that there would be mods. ILS is what I would like to see regardless oh how much you like it or dislike the idea. Otherwise perhaps the improved radar display allowing it to be used as a TV for AGM-65's.

You say TACAN ILS needles. For some reason I've not been able to get the ILS to work, if t has it. They are both distinctly different systems. I'll have to do some research the F5 has something hidden in it. But as far as I know, it has TACAN and ADF and that's it. If it had a VHF NAV (like ILS), that be located on the right side pedestal and the NAVIGATION MODE SELECTOR would have the additional VHF option. One has precision approach system in the Mig-21 that is the one you would most likely face. You could always do a PAR approach if you have a live controller working with you. A TACAN approach procedure is at best comparable to a VOR approach with associated high minima of 800-1000ft and a 2000m visibility requirement. It is also not the weather you launch, it is the weather you recover, be that after take off or after mission. I fly in real life so I tend to take weather into account with DCS flying and with more dynamic weather options available, I would say that it be certainly worth the consideration. Just to add for a CAT1 ILS your minima would be a DH of 200ft and visibility 750m. That is certainly weather one would launch into.

F5 is pretty good as it is. It could however use a VHF NAV and ILS receiver with FD needles on the ADI and or a GPS navigator. I would wager the Brazilian would require extensive work if not a totally new model.

The flight model does leave something to be desired... But it is not really that badly off. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AU3sntZXRbU I used those adjustments suggested in the video and voila, a different experience. Just to add. I have not flown the Gazelle in real life. Helicopters is something I got to a few years back.

Cheat mode. Sorry but that is exactly how the real deal works and flies. Same applies to UH-1 and Mil-8. These are pretty close to the their real world counterparts less the hardware software limitations one would have.

As I said, It is not that easy.

You can turn around with DCS sitting home in front of your computer. Try doing that strapped into a 5 point harness, wearing a helmet, mask and full kit while pulling G's. Not that easy. 180 view is not realistic in that sense. That being said, DCS is a game, albeit a very very realistic one with great graphics, models etc. it is about as close you can get to flying while being home. Having flown since 1987 and professionally since 1996, I find the game a brilliant sim. Does the ability to look back or zoom give an advantage, I do not think it does. If it makes your experience more enjoyable and DCS mechanics provide for that, you should be free to use it as you see fit. For me this is realistic enough. I've flown a few types in DCS in real life and use this game to keep current with excellent results. It is a huge money saver in that sense and also has kept me in the loop on types I have not been able to train on since COVID started. Adding VR (Reverb G2) makes the realism even greater.

Interestingly I was thinking about the same earlier today. F10 map would be brilliant on a tablet. However, I am pretty much only flying on VR when at home, so any companion app on a tablet etc would be pretty much useless for me. But if you are using a monitor or a few, yes, there would be good use for an app that not only displays the map, but approach plates and anything else you can SHIFT + K out.

Not just the low ceilings and bad visibility, but also low freezing level. Icing can kill you very fast, even in transport category aircraft let alone helicopter. While not exact science, the Garmin 430 with it's moving map, when that comes available for the Hind, can work as a jury rigged low level flying tool. What I have done is map waypoint and altitudes with safety margin over terrain on an OFP and entered those waypoints into the Garmin. Not ideal and certainly not NOE, but provided there's no great pressure differences in your route and you respect your own minimum altitudes over a given route segment and waypoint, it does provide for a tool that is better than nothing. Well it seems that with left ALT + left SHIFT + B, you get the 430 even with Hind if you have the NS430 base module purchased. Just trying it out now. Seems only work with missions including fast, but not instant action.

Indeed. I find it quite a handful. Now I admit, I do like the challenge. I decided to experiment a bit. Took axes and tweaks from Chuck"s Mi-8 guide. Seemed to improve handling considerably. Perhaps its just me though. Also I clicked control helper and rudder trimmer off in the specials menu and I make sure the AP yaw channel is green. with that it seems to become a tamer beast. Landing it is still like trying to balance a 2kg egg on a pencil tip, but I am getting better results now. More accurate flying and better control over the whole process. I use Warthog HOTAS stick and throttle with the pendular rudder. No extensions. I've got the virpil collective on the way, wondering how that will perform.

Love the Gazelle. Brilliant. I like the other helicopters as well, but I have to admit that I have a soft spot for the Gazelle. Enjoy.

Yeb. Tried the enemy base mission with Huey. Copi took his sweet time to fire and then at totally irrelevant targets. Oh well, good to know thou.

I'll have to give that try. The difference between a copilot and a duck has been that a duck can fly. Now it seems that a duck fights a better fight too.

More like a Embraer. We didn't have timer function in 737's windshield wipers. Not on any of the models I flew.