Zimmerdylan

Umm....mods??? Can we change this back to it's original title please??? "X52 assignment sheet" Thx........ Never mind guys. Was my mistake from the start.

THX...took some time but I finally got it.

Whew....there

Hey folks. A while back I got a sheet from someone here to document key assignments for the X52 pro. And while I was very thankful and grateful to whoever posted it. I found that there were a few things that I would have liked to have added to it. So....I am using a standard X52 right now and decided to create a sheet for it. I added all of the button numbers in this version for quick reference while assigning in game. I hope that some of you can get some use from this. I find it to be a great tool for me.

Here: Maybe this can help a little. I get where you are coming from. Lots of times, when I have to do evasive action or something, I feel the same way. [ame] [/ame]

Thanks so much to the folks who posted this video on YouTube. I knew that I was spending quite a bit of time fighting the autopilot. It seemed counter intuitive to me and in fact it can be if you don't understand how it works.:megalol: This video helped me to understand and hopefully others who don't quite know why their heli is sliding and slipping around sometimes. Again....Thanks Teach Yourself DCS! [ame] [/ame] Sorry if this vid has been posted at some point. It's worth posting again in my book. :smartass:

I do know that if you are running Windows10, it can (some people don't seem to suffer this fate) be problematic for the SST software. I was using the X52 pro and could not set up anything in the profile editor, but I also have the regular X52 and the profile editor seems to work ok with it. Saitek told me that it may have something to do with the fact that they have not set up Win10 driver support yet. So I just use the X52 and not the pro. Other than a few control surfaces, I see no big difference in the two.

Oh....and I'm in Tucson, where abouts are you??

+1:doh::pilotfly::joystick:

OK, so I had a short chat with my A10 pilot student this morning. We talked a little about Flight planning, Weapons training, and flying over Korea. I was a little surprised to learn that A10's do not rely all that heavily on programmed flight plans loaded into their AC. Otherwise, for most training (range) missions, and routine patrol missions, they do not follow specific waypoints on their H.U.D. Unless there is a very specific target, and a mission is planned for a very specific purpose. For the most part they are left to use standard navigational info to complete their task. They do rely on forward observers who mark specific points or targets quite a bit ,but they usually rely on visual sightings and a generalized, predetermined route that they are at liberty to deviate from at their discretion. They do a fair amount of target spotting with no aid from SPI's or forward observers also. I asked him if ground targets were difficult to spot. His answer was kind of a yes and no. It's not like they see something and just go attack it (on the battlefield and range). They have to get confirmation if they spot a potential target, and then get a "weapons free" response from ATC. He said that at times it can take a while to get some kind of confirmation on a potential target, and more often than not, it's a pass it over situation. I guess it makes perfect sense but I had this illusion that everything you did in a modern war plane was predetermined, hashed over, and planned to the meter. Goes to show ya........ This guy came to Davis Monthan from Korea. He told me some pretty funny stories about the lousy ATC methods of the N. Koreans. Told me that he almost went head on with a N. Korean 747 because no one said anything about it being in the area. He said that he could see the two pilot's faces as he banked up. He also told me that the N. Koreans are very quick to warn American pilots that they're getting too close to their air space. Said that it was pretty hard to understand them when they gave warnings that they were going to fire on you for being too close. Although he said that these warnings were a daily occurrence, no one that he had ever heard of has been fired upon. He also told me to get use to knots as the unit of measure for the sim. It's pretty much all the military uses any more (for aircraft anyway). I posted a thread about how confusing knots, MPH, and KPH was. He said that knots was much easier for pilots to convert to Imperial than metric, and that most pilots don't learn the conversions. They just go off of whatever the standard is for the application. I feel kind of weird asking questions so I just take what he gives me. I know that there are some classified aspects of the A10 and it's missions and I don't want to press the guy too much.

Why is the F86's speed measured in knots of all things?? I'm not sure that I understand the whole knot measuring system any way. [ame] [/ame] So friggin strange!!! Knots per what???????????? Who made up that system anyway??

What's the time difference between Arizona and your location???

Ah......got my A10 skills back up a little so I'll be ready for the servers now. I'll start looking you guys up....

Wow...and I thought the hour and a half was too long. I'll never complain again. I did ACCIDENTALLY cancel the download and discover the http option. It was a he!! of a lot faster.

I am just a casual DCS user. I do not spend hours every day learning everything there is to know about the inner workings of planes, and I just don't have tons of time to learn a lot of this stuff. I have most of the modules, and as all of you are well aware, some measure in Metric, some nautical, and some in Imperial. Honestly (may sound dumb) I find having to go back and forth between all 3 to be confusing and frankly, pretty hard. I have been using the imperial standard for most of my life and the only time I ever use metric is when I'm fixing my car or something. I was wondering, do most people just learn all of the specs for each plane without converting in their heads? Otherwise, the ME 109 lands (according to the German pilots interview) at 200 KPH. I have a tendency to try and convert that to MPH in order to effectively fly. When I'm trying to dogfight in a Mig, or other plane that uses knots or Kilometers, my brain just seems to try and relate it all back to Imperial. Is this a common problem? DO Europeans go through this trying to go from a metric plane to an imperial plane or is this just me? What is the most effective way to deal with the different units of measure. Altitude is the big one for me. I have no clue what my altitude is in metric planes unless I use the external view in the sim. And the KNots conversion is beyond me. I do have conversion charts taped up but there must be a better way. I suppose that just learning the 3 would be the most effective thing to do.......:smartass: Oh...and in the MI8. I love to fly it bit I am completely clueless as to my alt, or air speed in it. I know that when it's at 0, I'm hovering (LOL), and I just determine my alt by looking out the window. Although I can fly and land it just fine, I really would like to know how fast and how high I am.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPOWfXhCWkI[/ame] Lots of great info here!!!! Yet more reasons why so many were lost during the Korean conflict.

[ame] [/ame] This is my take on the uncaged sight. It works, but for all the rockets he released and as many vehicles were there........ For me, I get better results caged.

Some guys in YouTube vids were going all the way up to 50 on angle, even if they were diving shallow to get it to work for them. Like I said, I have never had luck with it and find it quite effective set as a fixed sight. Using the bomb sight the way they tell you to is pretty silly too IMO. Again....better as a fixed sight. I remember forum threads where people were asking about it early on and everyone just kept telling them that the system itself was just not accurate. Whether this was true in reality, I cannot say. I'm just conveying what was always talked about on the forums. :huh: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=127519 [ame] [/ame] Here...this should be of great help.

So far as I and many others who posted similar vids on Ebay who set the angle to all different settings to get it to work correctly (myself included), the thing just didn't work well. Then people started posting vids of using the fixed sight and getting good results because they had a solid reference as to there the rocket would actually go. And again, everything here is subject to the poster's personal opinion and experience. And I agree that they did change something in the trajectory because it changed after the update. Also in the Mustang. It took a few tries but I got use to it pretty quickly.

LOL.....Now I have to go find out.....

[ame] [/ame] Not sure if it still works like this these days. When it first came out this method was so unreliable that you may as well just closed your eyes and fired. As far as I know, most people I have talked to just leave it caged and use it like the Mustang. It's more accurate that way. They may have changed it in 1.5 but I'm use to using it caged now and it works fine for me.

Hmm. I didn't know this ( Landing on ships)was an issue. In 1.2 I was landing Hueys on Air Craft carriers in servers. I noticed the chopper sliding a little from time to time but I don't think that any ever just fell off. You know....I don't exactly remember if the ships were moving or not. I thought that they were. I'll have to try it again.

I have to concede in that. You are completely correct on this.

Thank you so very much!!! This is exactly what I am getting at without sounding like I'm going after anyone. :D

I'll look you guys up