Weta43

Well worry if you really want to, but they just said this week that : Which is 'non-screenshot' news, and tells us that : - The model's not finished, and - The animations aren't finished either. If they're not finished, they're certainly not optimised. If they're not finished, and they're not optimised - why would the give performance figures on the carrier as it stands ?

Interesting way to ask the question. (The first half of which is already answered over and over and over in so many threads, and the second half of which is really only a rhetorical question so you can complain about E.D., which again has been done over and over and over in so many threads that surely it's getting tiresome to type ?) I guess the answer will be what it is every time the question is asked: That you're still getting what they've said you'll get all along, which is a free update that brings the model & textures up to current standards, and the option to buy an 'upgraded*' version of the aircraft if you think the extra features warrant the spend. I'd say though, that you sound so wound up and ready to complain even before the module is released, maybe you'd do your health a favour if you stop checking this thread till the module is released and you can read what people write about it ? & Want to see me beat a dead horse ? Watch: * & by 'upgraded', I mean imaginary ;-)

They said they'd get the Huey going first, then the Mi-8. I guess that means they intend to get the Huey going first, then the Mi-8, and I guess after that the Mi-24P

Like these ? …

There has to be something the matter with your controls set up.

Interesting, but not really very insightful into the actual WVR combat qualities of the two aircraft, given that the , and the Malaysians say that:

You need a flat bit to land on, but even if they just made it that the functional part of the FARP was just the metal covered bit shown in the image - because it's so much smaller it wouldn't end up as a massive hill, just a bit of level ground. You could then make the base any shape you wanted by adding multiple pads. (eg laid out as a strip of terraces on the side of a hill, or in a grid on the flat) You could avoid the multiple ATC that would happen currently by making it that the FARPS are a simple spawn/de-spawn point, and putting the ATC logic in the mobile ATC unit that's available, then linking the mobile ATC to a pad/pads in the ME

This is not true. It's quite possible to fly the helicopters (& fight, or land on chimneys and trains) just using the twist grip. The thing that will catch you out is the number of available buttons and rotaries, not the twist grip.

It can be tracking something moving & still work

Auto turn on target should work regardless of speed - if you're feeling like playing, you can fly the plane by turning on Auto Turn On Target, enabling the HMS, Looking where you want to fly to and clicking the lock button - works at any speed (& would make a good template of an operating mode for the AI auto pilot for the Huey and Mi-8 :-)

Make sure you're not in route following mode too.

As QuiGon said, I wrote "E.D. will have released..."

& as you were told, it never was, that's not your problem.

It's the best way to get a few thousand testers checking features as they're added. If you think you might be one of those people that buy an E.A. module having been told it's not feature complete, has bugs & will continue to have bugs appear as features are added, then be unhappy that it's not feature complete, still has bugs and that new ones appear as features are added, and are likely to spend the next however many months clogging up the forums complaining that the early access module isn't feature complete and has bugs, or isn't progressing as fast as they expected, please do yourself and the rest of us a favour and wait till you read it's feature complete.

Think of it this way: When we do get the Mi-24 E.D. will have released 3 Russian helicopters, of which 2 are attack helicopters, and only 1 Western helicopter and zero Western attack helicopters

Twist stick is fine - that's all I used for years (& that was with the Mi-8 and Huey) until the twist started getting spikey

They may be flying, but do they have original engines / weight distribution, and is someone prepared to let E.D. put one in a wind tunnel / fly one hard to get some performance data. If not - it makes the model & textures easy, but not much more...

What (I think) he means is : You put enough forward cyclic in to get the aircraft 10 degrees down, and as it passes through 5 degrees you let go of the trimmer. The joystick stays where it's trimmed, and the control authority of the AP takes the aircraft back to 5 degrees (the nose rises after you let go of the trim). But although the aircraft is flying at 5 degrees, the stick's deflection would generate 10 degrees if the AP weren't countering it. At the point that you push the trimmer in, the AP stops fighting the stick, and the aircraft moves from 5 degrees nose down to 10. To make sure that this isn't part of the problem, you'd have to make sure that the aircraft was stable in both pitch and airspeed before releasing the trimmer. I use an FFB stick and the FFB trimming method, and if I do make sure the aircraft is stable before releasing the trimmer, I get the result I mentioned above.

& to date, they have been doing that, and they haven't said they won't continue to. They have said they're having trouble getting detailed enough data to work with - that's a good reason. Also - personally - I wouldn't expect them to put the highest possible priority developing modules that a significant part of the full price early adopters market will get for free...

Maybe - it doesn't drop with a jerk though, it just slowly starts to drift down if I hold the trim in for more than a second. No curves - Good (in that at least it eliminates something), but using curves does make a difference if you're actually using FFB, as the FFB is set to always assume no curves for providing the FFB for the trimmed position (the FFB assumes a linear relationship between real stick position and SIM stick position, but with curves that doesn't exist), and so the trimmed position & reported position of the stick end up misaligned if FFB is on and there are curves set on the pitch and roll axis. That would mean there was a tension between the point the aircraft's AP was trying to align to and where the stick was trying to fly the aircraft to, and one side of that tension would be relaxed every time the trimmer was pushed... There are threads about it and E.D.'s advice is no curves with FFB sticks...

Just tried it with the MSFFBII - no pitchup at all. At a stable altitude and 240km/h, actually a very slow slight nose drop if the trimmer's held in, nothing else. Do you have curves set on your controllers ?

Paid money for - but to a company that no longer exists, not to E.D...

No, because it's people not understanding what they are doing when they use the OB that causes so much angst in the community. People don't read what they're signing up for, then complain endlessly when what they signed up for comes to pass. Rather than pretending the OB is not an OB, what they should do is put in f*ck off big letters on the OB splash screen a message reminding people that it is an OB, will have bugs, may occasionally introduce bugs with new features, and make them click an "OK, I understand" button every time the OB launches. A message to the effect of: "If I find a bug, I agree to report it, not complain about it" wouldn't be a bad idea either.

As you said - they need them "when occupying a side door Gunner (and hopefully in future the rear gunner) and you can't be in controls". An autopilot that could fly an indicated path & maybe jink / avoid fire / use CM would make behind the Kord a reasonable place to sit...

In my bizarre alternate universe, I thought there might be people that were interested in either the AH-1, or the F-4, but not both, and so might not read both threads (personally I could care less about the AH-1 (waiting eagerly for the Hind ;-), and only posted in this thread by accident, but there you go...). Ridiculous thought I know - obviously every reader of the Forums reads every post in every thread....