Buznee

I confirmed, the latest patch addresses this issue.

There is another issue with this mission. The fact that you are way overweight and forced to over perform at that weight. This causes you to redline the engines to the point that you would begin to cook them in order to keep up with the wingman. I would recommend toning down the speeds and climb rates that the wingman can achieve in order to keep the operations more realistic for the operating weight. Also the action of increasing the governor speed for takeoff, is that a normal thing? That also cooks the engine I noticed. Speaking of cooking engines, is there any engine damaged modeled here yet?

Thanks for the replies guys. I did confirm the bug regarding the rotor head movement when the rotor is stationary and moving the cyclic. This should not happen. If you go in the sim with rotor stationary and move the cyclic, look carefully at the pitch links (pushrods) between the stabilizer bar and the main rotor horn you will see that it changes length (Stretches) in order for the main rotor head to tilt. Since the rotor is set to tilt in the sim with cyclic movement and the stabilizer bar is not moving, therefore the pushrods have to change length for that work. In reality the pushrods should not change length therefore constraining the rotor head from moving unless the stabilizer bar itself also tilts. I believe in the real helicopter if the pilot moves the cyclic when the rotor is stationary only the blades change angle but the rotor is not constrained to tilt or teeter from cyclic control input. You can see in this UH-1N start up video, the stabilizer bar is actually free to tilt and starts in a tilted angle until the rotor begins to turn and straighten the stabilizer bar out.

Regarding the settling with power / vrs discussion, I also concur. It seems too easy to get into vrs and when it occurs it happens rather quickly and abruptly, making it extremely dangerous and not at all forgiving. The only time I've crashed in the campaign is from falling into vrs during approach. It may just be that my approach procedure is not ideal but I find myself a little high when approaching a point to land and therefore have to finish the approach very slow during the descent to avoid overshooting the landing site. The aircraft becomes very unsettled in this state and I try to avoid descent rates greater than 500-1000 fpm. Difficult to maintain visual reference at the higher heights above the ground and I tend to go in and out of translational lift requiring large changes in collective inputs to maintain the safe rates of descent. Very difficult and as soon as I momentarily exceed 1000 fpm the aircraft quickly enters vrs and exceeds 2500 fpm. At that point I push forward on the stick to attempt to exit the condition with no room to recover and therefore crash at high sink rate. I don't recall this being a huge deal on the Huey and have always heard the Huey being a forgiving and stable platform. On another note, I'm curious if the developers modeled the bell flybar mechanical stability system. It should function as a pitch and roll damper. I find that the aircraft is quite unstable in hover and during the takeoff and climb out, questioning if the stabilizing functionality of the flybar has been modeled or if it has, whether its effect needs to be with greater authority. Can some Huey pilots weigh in regarding this discussion? Finally one little thing I found that did not seem correct. With the rotor stopped and the rotor blades aligned in the fore-aft position it seem that when you put in fore-aft cyclic input the teetering head tilts forward and aft. This does not seem correct because if you follow the pitch links up to the flybar from the swashplate and down to rotor blade pitch horns there's no moment arm that would permit that movement to occur. Assuming the 90 degree phasing there should be no cyclic pitch input from the swashplate or movement of the teetering head when the blades are in the fore-aft clocked position. The head should be free to teeter as well. Even when the rotor is not turning. This is why the blades are tied down when the helicopter is parked, to avoid the wind blowing the rotor to teeter back and forth. During high winds some crew are instructed to hold the tip of the blade during engine start to prevent the rotor from teetering wildly at the initial rotor turn. You can see how in this picture the rotor is tied down. If not tied down and if there are winds, it may teeter around back and forth like a seesaw, hence why they tend to be tied down. Other than that I wanted to congratulate the development team on an amazing product. By far the best conventional heli sim out there. Very well done guys. Autorotations are a joy to fly.

Why is everyone so sure its going to be a WWII plane? legend might mean WW1, Korean conflict, or Vietnam conflict as well. WW1 I'm not sure if they should bother since rise of flight is doing a fantastic job already. Korean conflict, it would be fantastic if they did both the Mig-15 and F-86 so that we can have some epic duals. Vietnam would have to be A-4, or F-4 and the Mig-21 or for rotary wing we need the UH-1 That is all. :)

Very annoying bug that makes the demo unplayable. Going into the joystick settings to set and calibrate axes causes the game to crash. Seems to be a common problem. Very unfortunate since I am eager to check out the new features. :mad:

DCS Seahawk DCS Seahawk would also be interesting. From wiki, "Seahawk can handle anti-submarine warfare (ASW), anti-surface warfare (ASUW), naval special warfare (NSW) insertion, search and rescue (SAR), combat search and rescue (CSAR), vertical replenishment (VERTREP), and medical evacuation (MEDEVAC). " Other interesting things that would merit a DCS Seahawk would be landing on destroyers using the RAST system, this would include communicating with the ship to get the ship pointed into the wind, approaching on an angle to reduce the turbulence from the ship super structure, lowering the messenger cable from the RAST and then the RAST probe. Finally reeling down, timing the landing with the sea state conditions and shutting down promptly and applying rotorbrake to reduce the chance of blade strike. This video does not show the RAST system but gives you an idea of the landing approach and pilot workload. Doing SAR ops for downed navy pilots. Sub hunting using the sonar boeys and dropping the torpedo once the sub has been located. Ship to aircraft refueling challenges Automated blade and tail fold and storage in hangar through RAST system rail.

Agreed... DCS Blackhawk DCS Blackhawk would be epic. I think it would provide quite a ton of variation in missions and definitely keep things interesting, enhancing replayability. Medivac, Troop Transport, External Cargo, CSAR, and Gunship/Long range capabilities with the external wing attachments. It would definitely challenge eagle dynamics with the aspects with flight crew, including door gunners, jump master and troops. It would also provide a great training tool for ingress egress in and out of a combat area for pickup and dropoff of troops. Especially dealing with brown outs in unprepared surfaces where dust would kick and blow all over the place as you approach the LZ. CSAR operations would be intensily fun. Trying to enter the combat zone to rescue a downed pilot with the help a-10c providing close combat support. Communicating with the pilot and asking him to pop smoke. Then getting a hover accounting for wind and turbulence all while positioning the aircraft in the correct azimuth to provide the onboard gunners with a good firing angle. Who knows, maybe the gunners can provide that kind of feedback to you, "turn as 90 to the right , we need a better angle". Meanwhile the SAR operators/jump master is giving you position feedback. "hold your hover, hold your hover, left 2, forward 2, hold your hover. We've got the pilot on the jungle penetrator, reeling in, hold your hover. 4, 3, 2, 1,.... he's in go go go... get out of here. The pilot is hurt, we need to get him back pronto." Meanwhile if you don't get back to base on time the pilot dies from injuries. External Load missions would be fun and challenging as well. This aircraft would work well with the a-10c module since the a-10 can provide attack and close support.

It is a bit confusing though since in the manual the button description under page 6-47, "DLINK automatic ingress to target. This button activates functionality to automatically point the aircraft in the direction of the assigned data linked target. " Sounds more like the autoturn feature since it says that the aircraft and not the shkval will be pointed to the target.

ahhhhh... the holy grail! :smartass:

what is the purpose of hitting the ingress button?

Okay, so you know how if you go to the PVI and select Nav target and then uncage the shkval the shkval will automatically home in and point to that nav target waypoint from the PVI? Well if you find a armored target with the shkval and then put it into the datalink memory, then move the shkval around or you fly around and lose the target, can you then select the target through the datalink panel and have the shkval home back into the target similar to the first example? This would be verrrrry useful. If not you have to pretty much use the Abris and the yellow vector line on the Abris from the shkval to iterate unitl you find the target... correct? ::breaths::

Well the whole deal was that I thought I picked them all out and must have not spotted one behind some trees or somethin. So basically my issue is spotting targets. Do you guys do a thorough scan and how do you deal with vegetation if the target might be behind it. Do you fly up higher to get ontop of it? Do you find another angle? Or do you have the wingman do the recon for you? :)

This frustrates me. I'm playing the second mission of the Georgian Oil Campaign, I cleared out the southern tank division (or so I thought) I cruise along forward and my RWR goes off letting me know something is locking on to me just ahead, I do an abrupt turn to get out of range and right as I initate the turn, I get blown out of the sky by a T-80 AP round. Can those tanks really fire a round at a helicopter? They have ways of calculating round trajectory for airborne targets? What are ways to reduce the likeliness of this scenerio from occuring?

does it require the laser to be pointed at the SAM's optical sensor?

I was curious, with the rising popularity and implementation of optically guided missiles both for SAMs and aircraft equipped armament, has there been development and use of new forms of counter measures for this sort of guidance since flares and chaff are no longer relevant. Obviously you can still try to maneuver on the edge of the SAMs range and bleed off the energy of the missile. Also with the new optical tracking is there any way in detecting a launch and warning the pilot of an incoming missile?

There is also an issue with aircraft rendering where there is an light highlight on the textures around the aircraft edges.

yeah it definitely is worth it though. Especially if you want to go over 100" diagonal.

Hey guys, I'm selling my Panasonic PT-AE1000U 1080P (1920x1080) LCD HD Projector with 2 CPS aftermarket warranties. I'm willing to ship within the continental USA. Was using it for both flight simulations and racing simulations but decided to sell since I need some cash. I will let it go for $1600 shipped. Is in great condition with less than 500 hours of use. Has 1 warranty for bulb replacement and 1 warranty for repair. Both are completely transferable. I will also include a DVI to HDMI converter and HDMI cable, as well as a chief RPA series ceiling mount. Let me know if you need more info.

Just wanted to thank everyone for the feedback. If DCS already has failure implementation (not due to battle damage) I was not aware of it. I totally agree. If the system does not need monitoring than the instrumentation there is purely cosmetic.

I know there are many sims that implement mechanical failure of aircraft systems not just due to combat damage, but purely through part failure from quality etc. Would it not be neat if once in a while your engine start would run into trouble (hot starts, flame-outs, eventhough you used the proper engine starting procedure?) How about FOD ingestion? Or how about instrumentation failures, weapon system failures, blade tracking and balancing issues, bugs and birds on your wind screen, wipers not working properly, or how about low tire pressure or alignement issues. I understand the argument could be that realistically you go through a preflight to check many of these things before actually operating the aircraft and if things are not working properly than you don't go up. Just some ideas to throw around. I definately think that things like this add an entirely new immersion to the sim because now you have to anticipate and be "on the ball" for when items go wrong. Currently you start the engines and you don't even think about a high EGT if you do everything properly. Having a little chaotic nature added to the systems would have you eyeballing things a bit more to make sure that items are operating correctly.

what about setting up client for wingman, is it that easy?

I was wondering what the difficulty is to convert the singleplayer campaign missions to multiplayer coop mission so that your wingman is now a fellow simmer rather than an computer controlled comrade. If so, has anyone done this, I would love to grab em. Assuming this can be done would all the simmers in the session be able to hear the scripted voices through the radio (ground controller) from the deployment campaign for example. If not possible it would be a huge improvement to the immersement of this sim to have this capability. Playing the campaign with some fellow simmers by your side through radio communication would be awesome to say the least. Also wondering if a built in communication radio will be implemented as to eliminate the need for team speak, and it would work directly with the onboard radio panels on the aircraft. Also if this has been discussed a million times before hand, I appologize. -Dan

I started with XP Pro 32 bit averaging about 30 fps in the instant action mission, switched to Win7 RC 32 bit and gained 10 fps with the ability to set my affinity for my core2duo. I then installed Win7 RC 64 bit and gained yet another 10 fps, averaging now at 50 fps. I finally did an overclock from 2.4 to 3.4 (with an aftermarket cooler ofcourse) and gained another 10 fps! So now I am at 60 fps on the instant action mission. So I pretty much doubled my frame rates with the only piece of hardware purchased being a high quality cooler for my cpu.

I've heard talk of DCS providing improved support for multicore CPUs but what about 64 bit support? Since it seems that DCS is very CPU intensive due to all the physics calculations does Eagle Dynamics have any plans of producing a 64 bit version of DCS? I could definately see some potential for greater fidelity in flight dynamics and complexities.