Wyverex

I've noticed that all the landing tutorials tell you to sweep the wings back fully when entering initial for landing (at 800 ft, 350kts). At this speed the wings wouldn't be fully swept back when in auto mode. Why is that configuration chosen? The only reason I can come up with is that when you trim out afterwards (which requires significant nose up trim due to the loss in lift), you are already closer to the final trim required for on-speed on downwind (when auto mode sweeps forward again). Is that correct?

Hm, so I disabled MSAA which gave me a big perf boost and I'm flying with ~50 fps now. Still happens. I can't really see the refueling lights from my position (and AFAIK they are more used by aircraft that have the receptacle further back?) but judging from other videos I've seen, my height seems to be rather ok. I've made a short video to show the issue. Watching it back again now, I'm wondering if my closing speed was just too high?

Dude, that solved it indeed, thanks! I'm very confused now whether I had this working in any other setting when I last played several years ago. In any case, not a bug it seems, cheers!

Yes the refueling indicator shows Ready. Could this maybe related to low frame rate? I think I had around 28 fps in that scenario and the boom didn't seem to move very smoothly in general, I suppose it's not updated each frame and low frame rate could make it miss the receptacle?

The anti-collision light switch isn't working at the moment. Whenever you try to use it, it behaves like a momentary switch and immediately goes back into "off". Anyone else having that issue?

I've been practicing air refueling a lot the past days. My technique has improved to a point where I can fly pretty stable and slowly creep up to the tanker. Then the boom raises, I keep creeping up and want to make contact. So far, so good. Very often, the boom then tries to connect but it doesn't and instead just clips through my airplane and I have to retry. This happens so often that it's becoming frustrating and I'm not sure if my technique still isn't good enough or if this is a bug. At first I thought I might be closing too fast. But even if closing very slowly, the issue occurs. Does anyone else have this problem?

Hey Greg, I was also thinking of going the WSP Warthog + T-50 route. Do you have a side shot of your assembly? I'm not entirely sure how this all holds together.

It's been a while since I disassembled my Hog but this looks like the the ground connector. AFAIR, it should connect either to some part of the PCB or the metal frame, just pick the one where it's not already connected to. The cable end is very blurry in the picture, does it have a hole where a screw could go into?

AFAIR, should be about the same as the TM Warthog Throttle. It was mentioned somewhere in the beginning of the thread

Hey guys, once I've upgraded my controls and sorted out their mounting, I was thinking about going VR and also getting a motion simulator. I'm currently very interested in both the GS-105 Geko and the Gametrix KW-908. As far as I understand, they do different things. The Geko is a motion simulator, providing forces you have to resist which gives the impression of actually experiencing G-forces, while the KW-908 provides vibration feedback for different events in the game (engine operation, guns etc.). So from my point of view, it should be possible to combine both. But I was wondering if they would be compatible? Or would the KW-908 lessen the Geko's forces since it's lying on top of it and thus lessen the overall force simulation? Has someone sucessfully combined both?

Awesome, thank you! I already started thinking about all kinds of L-shaped brackets. Your solution is so simple!

I was also considering buying a Wheel Stand Pro Super Warthog since desk mounting is not a good option for me (thin glass table and there's only a very slim mounting area due to a crossbeam of the frame). Has anyone tried to mount the T-50 with the Wheel Stand? I guess you'd need some kind of adapter plate. At least there is no mention on compatibility on the website .

Thank you! If I use my Warthog grip with the T-50 base, will it also identify as a Warthog stick, i.e. can I use it with TARGET then? I guess not, though. If not, what do you guys use as a TARGET replacement? Home Fries' TARGET profiles are just so terribly convenient, I'd hate to lose those...

I'm currently considering to buy the T50 base as a replacement for my Warthog base. I have mounted my Warthog at a slight angle which gives me a very ergonomic grip but it also makes it hard to e.g. just give aileron input without also giving elevator input and vice versa in some situations. E.g., when rolling left, it's hard to not pull at the same time. I believe this is largely due to the ball gimbal design. What I would like to have is that each axis "feels" a certain way so that I just give the input I want without any parasitic input on the other axis. The way the T50 base seems to work with different cams and springs this seems to fit my needs. Can anyone confirm that the axes indeed feel different (or can be made that way)?

I wonder why the traffic pattern in this campaign is different from the one in the manual (200m vs. 600m, short vs. long approach). What are the advantages or disadvantages of either one or are there situations where I would prefer one pattern over the other?

True, that's also a point handled in that book. I find the analogy very fitting. Imagine you're in a train and cannot look outside. If the train moves at a constant speed you cannot know in which direction the train is moving (~ A/C movement WITH the wind). You can only feel your own movement inside the train (~ A/C movement THROUGH the wind). (Ofc you can feel the bumps in the road but they still don't tell you direction (~ sudden gusts of wind))

Thank you all for your comments. After a lot of fiddling with my input curves and giving myself exercises (e.g. increase speed to X or change altitude to Y while keeping the other parameters constant) I can stabilize my VVI more or less around 0 with a reasonable amount of required pull on the stick. It's more difficult when flying low because there's not much room for error and level turns are still quite difficult but I think I'll get there eventually. :)

I could indeed advance when trying it again. I'm not sure, though, whether I did something differently now. I suspect my takeoff roll was too long initially and maybe I missed some trigger because I was starting my climb too late. Anyway, seems to work now, thank you.

Hey folks, I'm trying to understand how to properly trim the L-39C so that it keeps level flight without much interaction required by the pilot. I'm aware that the trim system is not an auto pilot and trimming doesn't necessarily mean that you can go AFK for some minutes and find the plane still in level flight and on course. The main reason for my question is that I find the L-39C to wildly oscillate in pitch which makes the plane very hard to control. This is enormously annoying when flying, e.g., mission 2 of the Kursant campaign, where you have your hands full with referencing visuals with your kneeboard, calculating ETA etc. I find it nearly impossible to have enough time for those things while trying to keep the aircraft level and not having the instructor yell "Altitude 200" at me all the time. And due to me yanking on the stick all the time, I easily get off course and speed as well. And due to the low level flight at 200m, the pitch oscillation quickly brings me down to uncomfortable levels which is why I HAVE to constantly watch the VVI. I'm very confused now because I have all those different concepts in my mind. AFAIK you trim for a certain angle of attack (translating to a certain speed). I read the awesome book "Stick and Rudder" a while ago and I had many "AHA!" moments. Armed with all that (half-absorbed) knowledge, I tried to apply it to DCS... and failed miserably. According to the book (IF I understood it correctly), if left to its own devices, i.e. no control input, the plane will always try to fly at a given AoA (~ speed) determined by trim. If it's too slow, it will pitch down until it reaches its designated speed, if it's too fast, it will pitch up. Also, the book goes a long way to hammer into your head that the stick is an AoA/speed control and not a height control and the throttle vice versa. Still, the L-39C throttle has certain markings, e.g. Cruise Speed which suggests to just leave it there and do everything else with the stick and trim. Where's the missing link between the book and practical application in DCS? I highly doubt that the principles in that book have become obsolete since they are so fundamental. I tried to find out if the plane really stabilizes on a certain speed when left to its own with the Free Flight instant action. Setting throttle to Cruise Speed, neutral elevator trim and leaving the stick alone (except for an occasional small aileron correction to keep the plane level), the plane oscillates wildly. It climbs and dives with huge spikes until it finally somewhat settles after around 10 minutes. It still oscillates but the frequency is so low that each cycle takes a very long time now. Also the amplitude decreases with every cycle. During all that time, on average, the plane climbs. After 10 minutes it has climbed from ~2000m to 5700m. Speed at this point oscillates somewhere around 460km/h. So I guess it does indeed try to attain a certain speed but without any help from the pilot it just takes a very long (maybe even asymptotic?) time to actually reach it? Incidentally, in the flight manual, it says that the plane is balanced at 380km/h with neutral elevator trim and no stick input. How does this relate? How do those observations help me in keeping the plane straight and level without constant attention? Or better asked: Given a certain speed and altitude, what are the specific steps to take to attain those parameters and trim the plane to keep it straigt and level with only an occasional small correction? Thank you! :)

Hi, after taking off, I get the message "Airborne. Okay, clean up the jet and fly current heading fly at an airspeed of 350kph". I guess "cleaning up" means just retracting the landing gear and the flaps, right? But no matter what I do, the message never changes and the training mission doesn't continue. I tried flying at 350 km/h, 350 kph (after switching to imperial gauges), at 600 m, 600 feet, basically all combinations I could think of. The mission never continues. Any idea? :unsure:

This bug has nothing to do with trim at all. Seriously, you'd know if you had seen it. The ailerons start fluttering up and down like crazy. The airplane oscillates around the longitudinal axis multiple times per second. I highly doubt that this would be physically possible in real life. With my workaround this fluttering is gone and then, yes, you have to deal with the actual situation of inversed trim and the generally harder handling of the aircraft in manual reversion mode. But that's totally fine.

I had the same problem with BFQ#8, where the ailerons started oscillating uncontrollably and the aircraft was basically unflyable. No amount of trim helped against that. It feels like a bug. There is a workaround though: At the beginning of the mission when still on the ramp, change your loadout so that your wings are not completely empty. I'm not sure if all combinations work, I picked some Mavericks and Sidewinders. And then the plane does not start to shake once you activate manual reversion. Just don't jettison your stores when the instructor tells you to :)

I had the same problem with BFQ#8, where the ailerons started oscillating uncontrollably and the aircraft was basically unflyable. There is a workaround though: At the beginning of the mission when still on the ramp, change your loadout so that your wings are not completely empty. I'm not sure if all combinations work, I picked some Mavericks and Sidewinders. And then the plane does not start to shake once you activate manual reversion. Just don't jettison your stores when the instructor tells you to :)

As already written above, the G940 is an FFB joystick, so I do not have to release the joystick in that timeframe because it stays where it is (more or less, that's part of the problem). I DID take my hand from it in the track though to show what happens afterwards. Anyone watched the track yet? I'm still very curious about that jump in the input window.

I happen to be a game developer myself so I have a particular interest in this topic :) Did some more testing with various settings. Even when setting everything as low as it can be, the frame rate is only between 35 and 54 frames per second. At the same time, GPU usage still goes down (40%) so we can definitely rule out that BS2 is GPU-bound (which can be expected since sims generally don't put that much stress on the GFX card). Resolution also doesn't have a noticeable impact, so no fill-rate problems. It rather looks like being somewhat CPU-bound. At least one of the CPUs goes up to about 85-90% usage which is probably the main thread. Still no explanation why it doesn't utilize 100%. Might be that BS2 is cache-unfriendly and sends large chunks of memory around, so that the CPU spends a considerable time waiting for memory transfers. Or there's just a hidden sleep() somewhere :lol: Bottom line is we'll probably never know but this is definitely something that should be addressed. Getting only 20-30 frames on a quad core that isn't fully utilized is... improvable, to put it mildly :smartass: