Supernova-III

Yeah, I'm aware of their position and I'm basically hopelessly trying to win something. This is my fav aircraft. What else can I do? Maybe build my own sim with Su-25, but you know... There are little to no options, so I'm trying to push my position. I'm fine if ED are not gonna make FF module because of possible conflict with RF. But what I don't understand, is how is that freaking possible to ignore obviously obvious flaws in the existing module, and why they don't have any plans to fix this. Why no plans?

There's a lot can be done just based on public sources, mainly books about Su-25. For example: 1. Wheel brake axes 2. Navigation system: manual control over steerpoints for every programmed airfield 3. Weapon control: set the amount of unguided rockets to fire, at least It doesn't require to get access to secret documents.

There are many other (former) operators of Su-25, Czechia for example. Many people mentioned this, but developers tend to not respond to this. Could you please clarify what do you mean by "still very protected by the Russian government"? Why this makes ED avoiding Su-25?

In reality, this upper left button on the stick is used to dispense flares, or even both chaffs and flares (it's configurable). In some specific exemplars, this button is signed at the top as "Сброс ЛТЦ", which means "Dispense flares". Another way to employ countermeasures in the real Su-25 is a weapon release button, both of them (yes, there are actually two weapon release buttons...), the sources are in Russian, specifically the following books: 1. Ильдар Бедретдинов. Штурмовик Су-25 и его модификации 2. Бурдин С. Штурмовик Су-25 3. Кожемякин А. Ю. Штурмовик Су-25. 30 лет в строю I believe there can be more additional button(s) for countermeasures on one of the vertical panels.

I stuck watching 360deg cockpit videos... @sirrah just unlocked it for me. So yeah, for people who say that pilot don't adapt their view during roll maneuvers, you have to watch these videos.

could you please give me the time code? At least most of the footage captured from the camera that is likely mounted in front of the HUD glass

at least, there could be key binding for moving the cursor back to the center

you made my day man

Anyway, pilot's head has inertia. It means that the aircraft rotates first, the head comes next after some delay. It's not entirely implemented in DCS

Thank you for finding ED's answer for me, I really appreciate this. I would never find this myself. If I put Su-25 in the search, I expect to see it at least on the first page of the search results. Otherwise it's nonsense. If I don't see it on the first page, I'm not going to check the second, third, ..., 40th. I expect most relevant results on the first page most of the time. When it comes to people that I don't know, it's hard for me to recognize between these: good reasoning based on the official response from ED -- I'm fine with it good reasoning but it's not based on official information from ED -- there is always some space for the opposite opinions that can be even more valuable fatalism -- nonsense

I'd prefer to hear "No"/"Yes"/"Maybe" from ED. I don't care about anything else. There are multiple reasons why it can be implemented and why it can't. This is always the case, for every module. It's ED implementing the modules, not me, not you, not most of our community. All we can do is to ask ED to make FF Su-25. Another option is to be unhappy about absence of FF Su-25, but keep silence (which is weird). I was surprised when realized that there's no FF Su-25 in the wish list. It's a shame.

I was just tried to explain what I see in multiple cockpit footage videos and other simulators. It's fine if it's not an explanation. If you get the idea what I'm talking about but my explanation is not exact/wrong, please provide the correct one. makes sense, but I still see the videos I see and know the opinion from the real pilot. I may explain this wrong, but it anyway exists in some form. So we could have this as an option in DCS. We already have movement under G-force as an option, so why not having another one...

Let them (I mean Eagle Dynamics) tell us "no". If you don't wanna have super hornet, just feel free to skip this topic...

yes. Still doesn't prevent us to have it FF in DCS

I want to have full-fidelity Su-25 in DCS. Why: I love Su-25 It's soooo relevant these days (ofc a way more relevant than MiG-29) It's legendary (even more legendary than MiG-29 IMHO) We have Afganistan map, but don't have FF Su-25, please tell me that it's not a joke Su-25 from FC2024 is playable and flyable. But it lacks system modelling (especially weapons system and navigation system) and some flight model improvements. P.S. Please

The idea is simple: I want to have full fidelity F/A-18E (maybe also F and G). It's a very cool jet. Is there any chance for this?

Before I start: sorry for my english, it's not even my second language, the idea is complex to explain it in a simple way with my skills for people who get the idea, if you have something to add/clarify/correct, please don't hesitate to do this We have an amazing feature "Head movement by G-forces", I really can't fly without it! However, I think we could get even further with head movement modeling. In reality the head can be also roll-stabilized on purpose. During the roll maneuver, pilot usually tries to keep the head orientation stable relative to the horizon line, or to some reference line on the ground/airspace, gaining smoother feeling of roll. It's the case for roll angles somewhere between 0-60 deg and of course limited by individual capabilities of the pilot. Maybe it's not really clear, but let me draw it There are two lines of pictures. Currently DCS implements something close to the first line, i.e. pilot's head orientation is generally static relative to the aircraft during the roll. I propose to add what I've demonstrated on the second line -- pilot tries to keep the head orientation static relative to the horizon line or any other line, when performing the roll. It will create such feeling that aircraft kinda rotates around you at some part of the roll. I see many cockpit footage that seem to tell that the second line (roll angle -> some value, head -> close to 0) is the case in reality. Let me provide some example: https://youtu.be/3M4WBhqhcyE?t=115 with time code. As per description, "A front seat view of BFM filmed using Oho Sunshine video glasses.", which means that we see the picture on the eyes-level + there's no self-stabilized camera (maybe...). Just look at these small roll movements, it really looks like the aircraft rotates around the pilot, pilot's head is not "attached" to the aircraft, in contrast to DCS. Another good example is how pilot's head behaves in MSFS, say, if you fly super hornet -- same thing. Rationale: it will give more stable view during the roll. Of course, you can still stabilize your head yourself, especially in VR, but it's also not impossible with trackIR, but it's very hard. In real airplane you have some force to counter-act to, doing the opposite roll with your head and thus you easily understand the right amount of counter-roll giving more stabilized view it may help some people to tolerate rolls better it feels good. It's already implemented in other sims like MSFS (try super hornet to get my point), and even WarThunder it looks like on real footages it's the case in reality -- combat pilots really rotate the head in the opposite direction to the roll Why avoid implementing this: because you can perform such counter-roll yourself, even with trackIR. But as I said, it's hard to get the right amount of counter rotation msfs is an arcade game war thunder is not sim we don't understand your idea, it looks weird UPD: this explanation might be wrong/inexact/whatever. I just wanted to explain the effect I see in cockpit footage videos and some other simulator games. I don't pretend to be an expert in what I'm saying here. UPD1: pilot head inertia may also be the case. It's not entirely implemented in DCS, especially at fast rolls

haha congrats, you got your chance

Hey guys, is it still as playable as it was before the conflict?

было бы очень супер-круто, если бы вы рассказали подробнее. Тут очень много любителей Су-25, в том числе и я.

The price difference is small. But: FFBeast is built of metal, which is anyway more solid than plastic thing FFBeast can give you same exact force that VPForce does At the same time, you can use FFBeast with a long extension, which will increase your precision while having forces that VPForce could generate only without extension For me, that's basically it. I really appreciate the work done for making VPForce available, but for me it would be viable option only if it were significantly cheaper than it costs. Otherwise I prefer solidness and flexibility (in terms of force range) of FFBeast. P.S. More force will give you more understanding of an aircraft actual limits, and your limits as a pilot. Some maneuvers you could easily perform on a regular spring stick or VPForce at low settings, are not actually that easy (or not easy at all), and it must be like that from point of view of simulation. **added** P.P.S. Adding FFB with high forces to your rig doesn't necessarily mean that you should immediately start performing better. Not at all. But there's no shame! Just because there are two more dimensions: you have to react on effects + you have to handle the force. It's naturally that you start flying worse. But it's only a matter of time

Здравствуйте, я начал изучать самолет Л-39. При чтении мануала был очень озадачен описанием проверки и настройки радиокомпаса РКЛ-41. Написано: переключатель управления ставим в положение "на свою кабину". В руководстве я так и не нашел, что это значит. Выше есть легкий намек на то, что это и есть тот самый переключатель: Предположим, что это тот самый переключатель. Далее написано: подключен тот пульт, на котором горят лампы подсвета. Что за лампы подсвета и где они? Нигде в мануале ни о каких лампах не говорится. Визуально их не видно. Дальше. Позже я навелся мышкой на этот переключатель УПР и там написано TAKE CONTROL: Т.е. судя по всему это и есть тот самый перключатель, который нужно перевести в положение "на свою кабину", а вот это самое "на свою кабину" -- это текст возникающий при наведении мыши на переключатель. Теперь те, кто всего этого не знал, будут знать. Я тоже буду знать. Позволю себе покритиковать мануал, все таки я купил этот модуль. Многое в мануале DCS: L-39 скопировано из реального РЛЭ без адаптации под аудиторию. Сам по себе факт копирования РЛЭ ничем меня не смущает, но в моем представлении мануал по модулю Л-39 в ДКС должен быть самодостаточным, ссылаться на себя или на другие доступные источники. Студенты летных училищ наверное знали, что значит "перевести в положение "на свою кабину"", но я откуда это должен знать? В мануале этого нет, других материалов у меня нет. Можно как-то исправить эту часть мануала?

Тем не менее, никаких упоминаний летной модели. Она будет такая же как и в МиГ-29 из ГС3?

yes, thank you!