Buznee

How did you get a hot start going? I tried starting the engine with the throttle set to full and the exhaust temperature stayed in the green the entire time.

Regarding the rotor dynamics. If DCS is supposed to model aircraft/component dynamics it would be a great addition to the sim. It seems currently the rotor is for the most part a visual representation. The visual rotor model has not, from what I can tell, been modeled as a physics model with constraints and degrees of freedom. I believe the KA-50 has because you can actually see the affect of wind on the blades when the rotor is not in motion. The blades will flex and flap along the flapping hinge based of lift and drag forces produced by local angle of attack. I did try holding right or left mouse button and there is definitely an improvement regarding the stutter issue!

Looks like the poor performance is being documented here and is a known issue. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=117840&page=5

It seems the master caution stays illuminated though even though the IFF light goes away.

Thank you thank you thank you!!

You now have to introduce fuel into the engine by rolling the throttle during startup. Everything is the same until you get to the point where you engage the starter switch. place your mouse over the throttle and scroll until you reach the idle position. You can see where that is on the control position indicator display on the top left of your screen. Most manuals call out for "throttle - set to start". I don't know what that actually is but I set it to idle and it seems to start okay there. Now just hold the start button, now it is the trigger on the collective, and hold until you reach 40% gas producer. It will then be self sustaining. Also monitor EGT while starting and make sure it doesn't get too hot. For shutdown bring the throttle to idle which is as far as you can go. Let the engine idle for a couple minutes to cool down and then click the idle detent switch which will allow you to continue to roll the throttle to off. That will cut the fuel. Hopefully someone with more real UH-1H insight can provide us with more detailed info.

My findings on 1.2.7 Beta After an evening of playing the 1.2.7 patch I wanted to discuss some of my findings. 1. rotor imbalance has been reduced to a more realistic level during startup. 2. During transition into forward flight while in ground effect the skipping and jumping glitch is no longer present. Aircraft as a whole is much smoother during accell and decell into hover. Thank you Belsimtek! 3. Panel vibes during ETL transition have also been reduced to a more nominal level. 4. Clickable door handles for opening and closing doors. I have an issue though where I have to click and hold and it still sticks in 1 direction. Once I use the rightctrl c command it closes. Anyone else having issues with the clickable door handles? 5. While rotor is stopped and moving cyclic around, the rotor dynamics are much more representative of the real aircraft. flapping hinge is no longer tied to the movement of the cyclic while the rotor is stationary. I still would like the teetering of the rotor to be completely free in terms of sim physics so that if there is wind while the aircraft is parked and rotor stopped the rotor should teeter freely. 6. While rotors are turning it seems that belsimtek has changed the phasing of the rotor disc with respect to the control input by 90 degrees. I don't believe this is correct. For example, when applying forward cyclic, the rotor tip path plane tilts to the left. Do not confuse this with rotor control phasing, that is a different matter. With a teetering rotor, like the huey, the pilot controls the thrust vector of the rotor plane. If you want to go forward, you push the cyclic forward, the rotor should tilt forward even though the blade angle change is happening 90 degrees off which is the control phasing discussion. Also the amount of flapping occurring on the ground when applying a full stick input does not seem enough. Check this video, there is great footage there of the pilot applying cyclic on the ground and showing the change in rotor plane angle. It's quite sporty. See time 4:15 on the video. Great mast bumping discussion too which I have no explored yet on the dcs uh-1h. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVxUAAwajSE. Let me know what you guys think, maybe I'm missing something here? Maybe with regards to the stabilizer bar? 7. Startup ignitor sound is no longer present in the cockpit. Only outside. Is this accurate? 8. Throttle does not respond with axis until after you have pushed out of idle detent by click the idle dentent button and scrolling the throttle with the mouse, is this the intent or is the intent to really have the throttle always controlled on axis and just get "Sticky" when reaching the idle detent if the detent has not yet been pushed? 9. Throttle proportionality is still not there. You roll the throttle from idle to full and only when the throttle reaches full does the engine respond to accelerate. Not sure how the real aircraft is but I would have anticipated there being some proportionality there, maybe not linear, but still. 10. What are the thoughts regarding the IFF function? I would like to either have it deactivated or implemented so that the master caution isn't always on due to the IFF warning. 11. This may be a DCS issue and not a UH-1H issue but is anyone finding that the sim is not as smooth as it was in 1.2.6? I am using the same graphic settings. The fps counter shows very similar FPS between 1.2.6 and 1.2.7 but 1.2.7 shows more variation in FPS in a steady rendering condition. About +/- 10 FPS. vs +/-3 FPS. I can tell when I am also yawing the aircraft, the scenery seems to jump a bit and not move at a smooth constant rate. Not sure where this issue may lie but it is an observation of mine. I'd like to graph FPS to more concretely capture this phenomenon. It is a bit distracting. As a whole I am happy with the progress although we still have some work to do =). If I can pick one thing out of the list above to address it would probably be the smoothness issue on the sim which may not be a belsimtek issue at all. Still have not played with the AI gunners so I'll be back to post more comments, I'll try not to repeat what everyone else has commented on so far. I'll also be exploring the campaign again to see what fixes have been implemented.

I know that there's been some work on the uh-1h regarding some fixes during transition in ETL, as well incorporation of the throttle and idle detent for engine starts, improved modeling of the engine and EGT, torque relation, correct indications and modeling of the electrical system, reduction in main rotor imbalance vibes during startup, and the list goes on... Any news on any if this stuff being incorporated into 1.2.7?

Thanks for the interest. It has been sold

AFM discussion? Fantastic job so far. I was curious if there has been any discussion regarding the implementation of rigid rotor system that this aircraft has. Will the AFM approximate the rigid rotor dynamics with a equivalent large hinge offset? Or is there a plan to model rotor elasticity dynamics? Flight gear actually includes a bo105 although I'm not sure how intricate the rotor dynamics were modeled. Here's the link to the development thread. http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=9647 Again! Great work! I'm so excited the bolkow is going into Dcs. Now who's going to make the little bird?? :)

Now that's a great idea!

Just wait until the Oculus comes out ;)

OBO?

Update with picture.

Excellent Shape. Barely use it. I'll let someone else enjoy it. Includes the trackIR sensor and the hat clip for use with a baseball cap. Hat not included. I'll have a picture up shortly. $110 shipped within the continental US. Paypal accepted.

I was curious what the real aircraft has for stick travel in the pitch and roll in terms of distance. Is it something like 10 inches total travel? ±5 inches on each side? I would be measuring this from the top of the stick. Reason I'm asking is I'd like to figure out what extension I need for the warthog to get similar travel as the real stick. It seems that if you mount the stick on the floor it will be too much travel to the stops and I'd like to take as much advantage of the resolution without placing artificial stops and I'd like to avoid having to put stiffer springs to get the feel back if I don't need to in the first place.

Average_Pilot, I noticed in your other thread where you post information regarding your glovepie script, there is a discussion of different ways to achieve this feature. One is to subtract out the delta position vector of the mouse due to the view movement. Honestly I don't exactly know how this would work. Another way is to project the mouse onto a sphere that surrounds the pilot's vision. There may be issues with this method with 6 DOF. The final way is to project the pointer onto the actual cockpit mesh. This is probably the safest method but may be difficult to implement. I was curious which one you believe is the probably the best way? :smartass:

Fantastic! What can we do to provide some of these ideas to ED? I'd like to know what they think of this feature. Should we set up a poll to see if there is enough interest within the community?

I had a great thought, maybe it's already in the works? Alright hear me out here guys. I was doing a little thinking. Regarding the implementation of Oculus into DCS I had an interesting idea. One of the issues I always had with track IR for example was the fact that I had to steady the view in order to click switches with the mouse in the cockpit effectively. This gave me quite a strain in my neck after a while. You have to hold your head as steady as you can. I was thinking Oculus is going to run into the same issue although maybe not quite pronounced since the view sensitivity will be 1:1 as opposed to the higher gains with trackIR. But still here's an idea that is more inline with reality. Instead of the mouse pointer position being defined by the view frame of reference that the player is looking at it should be "attached to the cockpit" or be part of the cockpit/world frame of reference. Another words, if you are flying the warthog and you want to tune radios on the left lower panel, you would turn your head to look at it and lets say the pointer is on that panel, when you move your head, the pointer does not move with your view, it stays wherever on that panel that you left it. You can therefore move the pointer using the mouse and it will not be affected by your view steadiness. Therefore you don't have to keep your head as steady because the pointer will not move with the view. There's any issue that will arise with the solution. Lets say now you want to adjust the interior lighting on the right panel, you would therefore move your head to look at the right panel but since the mouse is fixed to the panel/cockpit frame of reference system instead of the view frame of reference, your mouse pointer will stay on the left side and disappear, you would have to move the mouse until you brought it over to the right panel. Here's a solution for this though. The view itself is rectangular parameter and the upper, lower, left and right parameters of the view can be boundaries, therefore you decide to move your head to look at panel on the other side, there can be logic that if you move the view so that the pointer touches the edge of the view screen it will drag the pointer with you so that you don't lose it. I think this will complement well to oculus as well as improve the current functionality of track IR. Less stiff necks please! It also would be more natural, kinda like your hands and fingers feeling and touching parts of the panel independent of your neck and head movement. Let me know what you guys think. I can draw a picture if it isn't clear. I hope you guys agree that this would be an improvement and a good feature. It could even be switchable on and off depending on the preference of the player and what view device he is using. (hat switch, vs trackIR, vs oculus).

Do you think there's ever a chance that DCS would be willing to release an aerobatic prop plane such as a extra 300, edge 540, sbach or a sukhoi? This would be great way to show off the AFM and create lots of fun multiplayer sessions and virtual airshows! I know there was once a chance that an aerobatic airplane was going to be released with IL2 BOB, but no longer.

Is there any way currently to buy a gift for someone else through the DCS store? For example, pay for it myself and have the key attached to another email?

Shame on me, there is a checkbox in the mission editor labeled "random system failures". Any details on this feature and how it works?

I understand... Any reason though why the campaign missions were not developed with cold start in mind? I would think going through aircraft training to learn to start the aircraft would then be something the player would be implementing in the campaign for every mission. It should be part of the overall DCS immersion should it not?

Currently I don't believe the aircraft center of gravity shown during the weapon and fuel setup before a mission. Showing the CG limits which I believe can vary depending on the gross weight would more realistically allow the player to appropriately load the aircraft and confidently know that he is within limits. Also having the information to load the aircraft appropriately with the correct quantity of fuel for the mission is normally the job of the pilot. Range and Cruise charts with fuel burn could be provided as a button in the brief screen. This could also be the same place where the pilot can check that his loading is within the center of gravity limits. Right now either you have to pull open a flight manual or you just "wing it". Having these features easily accessible to the pilot during the brief portion would be awesome and immersive. A more thorough weather briefing wouldn't be bad either, especially with dynamic weather, including recommendations for use of de-ice anti-ice system and avoidance of storms. Are microbursts and wind shear currently being modeled?

A feature I believe will add quite a bit more immersion to this sim would be to add component and systems reliability. This could be as simple as a probability based model for things like the electrical, avionics, hydraulics, fuel etc. Some of the items done on the start up checklist includes component checks like the built in tests on the A-10C and the fuel quantity gauge check on the black shark. To me these checks don't currently feel very important because I know that the system is 100% okay unless someone shoots at me or I damage the aircraft myself. It would be great to have component reliability modeling put in place because then you feel like these checks are actually somewhat necessary to provide you feedback on whether the systems function correctly. Other systems I think can benefit from this include engine health (hot starts, flameouts, fire suppression system tests). Because system failures can already be set as an option within the mission, I don't believe adding a realistic probability based reliability feature to be a large task to implement. Not only could components fail from the start but they can also fail during the flight therefore keeping an eye on everything becomes more important, even when on a peaceful flight back to base. Of course this mode could be a simple checkbox "Realistic Component Reliability" that you can disable if you prefer not having. This can also tie into the crew chief functionality. If you find something wrong with the aircraft you can then tell him what system is pertains to and he can repair it before you fly out, or you can maybe get the option of getting in another aircraft. Other features that can later be added but would take more effort for implementation include aircraft use and component life on campaigns. If you fly the aircraft in an abusive manner, aka hard landings, running the engines in emergency power, overspeeding the rotor, over G the aircraft, this can affect the component performance and reliability for the next mission. A crew chief briefing could even provide you a status of repairs and state of the aircraft before mission. Richard Burns Rally, the rally racing sim does a great job in implementing repairs between races and adds quite a bit of immersion to the racing series events. The crew chief could tell you that certain components are inop for the mission and requires you to think creatively of what alternative means you have to complete the mission, or you can choose to delay your mission and have him fix the aircraft which can impact other things within the mission and the campaign. I'll admit, these are far fetched but I believe things like this could add quite a bit more immersion to DCS. Let me know what you guys think.