Smokin Hole

Crap! How did that happen? I meant to quote my own post above and instead changed it. Sorry.

I have a G940 and see a huge improvement with trim functionality since the 1.1.1.1 patch. But I still sometimes have to trick it. I generally trim slightly more aft stick than is needed because otherwise the help will pitch down slightly in a hands-off hover. Other than that, it works perfectly. But I can now fly with the AP on (FD off) and this was never the case before.

Don't forget also that where you look is important. My advice, keep the door open and look 45 degrees to your left. Land with the door open, especially when landing on a friget. Small corrections and you'll get it.

Quoting myself so that I don't need multiple quotes (read: lazy). Grimes basically nailed my concerns. A few days after FC2 was online merged with BS1 I went on Teamspeak with the 104th. I had grown a bit tired of "Smokin Hole killed by Building" and grabbed a F-15 with Blue. On comms some guy (née a true gentleman) was giggling like a little girl after having splashed is 20th Ka50 in two days. That very same day, I quit multiplayer. Its not that I don't like PvP because I do. But the mindset is different than co-op. There is really nothing about PvP that will increase the enjoyment for a player flying CAS. There are more than enough threats either on the ground or close to the ground to keep him challenged. Adding F-15s with 28 AIM-120s bolted to the wings canopy and tail adds nothing positive to the experience for the slow-moving player. My reserevations are diminished however because, as others have said, this can all be controlled by the mission designer and the host. I will just avoid servers that are PvP (unless I am in a fighter). Of course, i wasn't talking Vikhrs when I mentioned shared laser codes. The Ka50 has a laser that can be used to designate for another player. That same arrangement could, in theory, be used with an LGB from a Su25. Or maybe not. I havent a clue how Russia does theses things. But otherwise what's the point of more participants on the battlefield if they don't have anything to offer each other but "Nice shot! S!" ?

Sorry but I don't want to read this entire thread. I just wanted to relay an experience I had today. Its been a struggle to go to the WH and BS Multiplayer browsers only to face the low population and the high numbers of locked servers. Today I bit the bullet and wiggled through all the Teamspeak hoops to get a password for the 74th. Well honestly "all the Teamspeak hoops" took a total of 30 seconds. But the result was one of the most enjoyable multiplayer experiences I've had since Flamming Cliffs. I flew no. 3 in a flight of 3 Ka50's. What a feaking blast. In the end we were defeated by 2 Mi28s but the experience was fantastic. The advantage DCS enjoys when compared to other MP flight sims like IL2 is that the population doesn't need to be high. The missions are Co-op, not H2H. Two professional players beats 20 jerkoffs any day of the week. Adding FC3 might well kill what I think is currently a very enjoyable high CAS/low-CAS dynamic. But right now I don't care about the meager online population. The people who do show up do so with a sense of mission. Kudos to the squads and mission designers who keep it fun and professional, whatever the population.

Probably because snowflakes are not objects. If they were, the framerate hit would be immense. I'd call it a limitation, not a bug.

May this thread go wherever it goes. But I have already started whiny autopilot threads. This thread was meant to complement ED on their effort to better implement trim on FFB sticks. By doing so they have made the need to use the FD, for this player at least, a little less necessary. And, A16, for what it's worth, I agree with you. But my knowledge is less than most of you and is based on talking to corporate helicopter guys about how autopilot and SAS works on their western machines. Kamov built a very unique single-seat attack helicopter and there is good reason to accept the possibility of an automation philosophy that is unique to the Ka50..

Understood. To be clear, I never flew with any AP channels off (not intentionally anyway). Only FD on/axis dampening off.

It was meant as a joke referencing the many discussions we've had about this since BS1 came out. I always knew that using the FD was frowned upon. But my real flying experience tells me that you have not just the right, but the responsibility, to disconnect automation when it gets in the way. Outside of Autohover and Turn On Target, the AP always got in the way of my enjoyment of the game. Now, it no longer does.

So I read the change list and, errr well...hohum. Pretty underwhelming compared to 1.1.1.0. But why not try it out? So I put "Battle" on the turntable (Figuratively. "Battle" is the "Stairway to Heaven" of Black Shark quick missions). Now, the very first action I ever do in a running Black Shark is turn on the Flight Director. After three years, that little step is as automatic as breathing. Doing it is absolutely essential to controlled flight. Those who say otherwise are simply WRONG. So I hit Pause and press the joy combo that turns on the Flight Director. DARN!!! I'd forgotten that the patch also dumps the joystick modifier. Forget that. Just try your bes---- But wait! It flies great! It flys like a big helicopter! This...is....HUGE! (Well "Huge" in the sim-geek-who-can't-get-enough sense of the term) Nicely done ED. SALUTE! HATS! CHAPEAUX! and the rest. ^^^^ OK, so that was my overly excited, slightly alcohol impaired initial reaction. To translate, autopilot trim works really well with FFB now. It was mentioned in the changelist but not given then fanfare I think it properly deserves.

I've hit several birds. Once going into Chicago I hit a bird on final. It cracked the outer layer of the windscreen. ...I never squealed though. :-)

True. But I don't mind the textures so much as I do the point above--the streaks providing a sensation of very low speed.

Noc, I can offer nothing regarding your question. But I do have a suggestion for your sig, which currently smacks a tiny bit like self-engrandizement. It would read a little better with: (Strike "OK Folks...")Inquiries and questions at my YouTube channel are welcome but please PM me if you wish to have a reply."

I have a slight gripe with the appearance of rain in both WH and BS. When flying at speed the animated rain still streaks at an angle much larger relative to the flight path than it is in reality. At high speeds (100mph +), the angle should appear parallel to the flight path. When I fly a real plane through rain or snow (especially snow) I see what looks like a tunnel. The far end of the tunnel is a distant point directly in front of me. And it is from this point that all streaks of precipitation seem to originate as they pass around my view point or hit the wind screen. This same effect is pretty clear when driving through heavy snow at night, but in that case there is still the appearance of an angle of fall reletive to the horizon (moving the end-point of the "tunnel" up). I am sure that there is a simple formula to calculate the percieved angle based on the velocity of the camera versus the velocity of the precipitation but my math skills suck. EDIT: Actually snow works. The problem is with rain.

I think it might need an update to be compatible. Does the latest WH patch work with TacView?

FD ON.

The best compliment I can give is, it looks just like Nevada!

Uh yeah that's what I'm talking about! Don't know how I missed that one. Nicely done Headspace. BTW, silly question but where is the mic button on the BS? Unlike A10, we use the "\" to start a player to ATC/AI comm session. But I don't even see a button on the stick or collective that would serve as a transmit.

I've been fiddling with Benchmark Sims latest Falcon 4 update--BMS (why not? It's free!). Of all it's coolness, near the top of the list is IVC. This uses the Teamspeak client given freely to BMS by Teamspeak and it allows all radio communications to take place within the game's own radio network. Whatever frequency you transmit on will be heard by players on that frequency. Once you use it, all of this beautiful sim modeling seems a bit wasted by the less than immersive TS3 where "comms" often consists more of boasting, bitching, and whining than practical mission focused verbose communication.

First, I saw 30% figured in this thread as the power lost to the rotor disk due to gearing the tail-rotor. That's high. It might be true on some helicopters at a narrow data point along their speed/altitude/mass range but it is not typical. Second, where is the fabulous yaw rate? The initial hovering yaw rate of the Ka50 (as modeled by ED) is pathetic. That low power in yaw makes the "unlimited sideslip" velocity sort of irrelevant because above 100 kph you run out of yaw authority anyway. Plus, the videos of the Commanche demonstrated what appeared to me to be much better sideslip performance and initial yaw-rate than I have ever managed with the 'Shark. If they want to sell the Ka50 based on the small rotor diameter for ship borne use then I certainly see the value. Same is true for high altitude OGE hover performance. Other than that, I think the coaxial advantages way oversold. None of this has stopped me from enjoying the hell out of BS since its release.

Chapeaux! Beautiful flying. I have all sorts of questions about how you modeled the F16 but I'll do a little searching to get the whole story.

Forget P51s and Bearcats. Plenty of other products currently or will eventually offer those. I want a Su25 with a shared laser code with the Ka50.

No question coax is more stable. If you ever get into RC helicopters there is a very good chance that your first will be a little micro coax. You can chase your cat around the house with it, let it coast to a hover, put the radio down to grab a beer from the fridge and come back to find your cat staring at it within a few feet from where you left it. The US designer Kaman also capitalized on the stability of the (albeit different) twin-rotor design. Back in the 50's he had a little media display where he soloed a simple "housewife" after just one lesson. The Navy found them to be so easy to fly that they refused to use them as trainers. I don't disagree with the Coax Advantages section of the manual. I just think it is a bit skewed. From reading it one wonders why every helicopter isn't configured this way. Regarding tail-boom strikes. These also require violent violations of the flight envelope. They are also usually preceded by mast bumping or other indications that you are headed for trouble.

Oh really? My bad then. The version I used in the comparison was from 2008. [EDIT: I don't know. I do think this session is new. The "old" BS1 manual I was comparing is in my 1.02 installation. That should be the latest.]

OK, I admit there is a bit of a troll quality to the thread title. The flight manual isn't propaganda. In fact it adds 147 pages of (mostly) very informative material to the already good original manual. But I can't help but feel they may have taken some liberties with the Aerodynamic Features of Coaxial Configuration Helicopters section. The section highlights the Coaxial advantage step by step. The most important advantage is gained through the lack of power loss and side slip that is an unavoidable feature of conventional designs with tail mounted anti-torque mechanisms. Well there's no propaganda there. But as you continue reading you are left with the impression that the Ka50 is, through its coaxial configuration, unique in its speed, maneuverability and stability. We learn why the Ka50's unrestricted yaw-rate makes that heavy old turret found in lesser machines completely unnecessary. We learn about the funnel. And here it is viewed as a real battlefield maneuver and not just a very cool airshow element. And we learn about the relative superior safety advantage of coaxial designs over conventional designs. If you didn't know better, you will finish this section of the manual thinking that the Ka50 is Russia's front line attack helicopter and that the Mi28 was dragged back to the hangar in humiliating defeat. But is the Ka50 really that great? The initial yaw rate, in hover at least, isn't spectacular. And the speed isn't really all that fast. And, yes, it is true that there is zero risk of the rotor disk flapping back and shearing off your tail-boom (which I hear is bad). And that's why there are certain things you should not do in a conventional helicopter. But rotor disk intersection is every bit as career ending--and it is never mentioned. The new manual is great in most respects. And, no, it doesn't lie. But...