DaveRindner

Regretting to digress from USMC USN A-10, A-4 was small, cheap, simple, flexible, rugged, and survivable. Everything Marines love about their weapons, is in A-4. They stuck with Cobra for almost 40 years. Lockheed recently converted old A-4s for Argentina, by putting F-16C avionics, in them. Did they really shoehorn APG-68 into A-4's nose? Seems unlikely. Some old time retired USMC aviators still talk of A-4 as A4EVER.

I think that Dept. OF Navy really missied an oppurtunity in 1970's to Navalise A-10. A-10 shares many handling characterstics, and components with S-3 Viking. Two share same engines, occupy similar space, and have similar low speed handling characteristics. What would be reuired is to strengthen landing gear. Develop folding wing with midwing pivot. The arrestor geat would be mid fuselage. A-10 could fly slow, and do approach at safer lower speed. It has great internal fuel storage. It would be deployed in similar manner as A-1 Skyraider attack squadrons. Mainly as embarked USMC VMFA attack squadrons, and shore based aircraft for CAS. But USMC wanted Harrier for CAS , so they could use it on LHA's. I love the Harrier, but not impressed by it. It actually carries very little stores. Usually just two pylons worth. Harrier take 2 pylons for self -defense Sidewinders. Two pylons for ext tanks. One pylon for Litening or Sniper pod. Center belly pylons for 25mm cannon and ammo. That leaves just two pylons for ordinance. Either two AGM-65(X), or two CBU's, or two JDAM's, or two MK, or two small LGB's. Marines love it beocuse it is a VTOL, and can operate from LHA's. I think this is an unnecessary requirement. I was U.S. Army, not Marine. But I think USMC would have been better served with more shore based CTOL attack aircraft, then with fewer VTOL. Using that space for more helicopter assets. Well thats just my opinion.

What I understand is that C-130 could it, becouse with 2 pairs of hand, the crew could apply wheel breaks, and reverse proppelers at the same time. The approach was deemed too risky for normal operations, because it required long axis of the deck. Required clearing the deck of aircraft, and equipment. Too risky to land, becouse once props were reversed, simutaneously with application of wheel breaks, there was no margin of safety. If either failed to be applied the airctaft was too fast to stop , and too slow to touch and go. But thats what I understand from Navy pubs. The ship was required to sail at flank speed into the wind. Normal arrested recovery require 30 knots steaming with angled deck into the wind. Helicopters and C-2 Greyhound operations were deemed sufficient.

I saw that. That looked wrong. First he had wind way up. Second, how did he fire the gun with gear down? In my version DCS 1.2.5 A-10C, ground safety turns on when gear is down, or aircraft is on ground. That is how it is in reality. Third , using gun recoil, as somekind of brake, is absurd, to say the least. I wanted to see if A-10 can land in the same manner as C-130, and not have the gear collapse, and not run out of deck.

So I saw YT old footage of Navy landing C-130 on Forrestal, using long axis of the deck for run. I wanted to do the same, but without cheating of super high wind setting. I set wind to be 14 m/s with 7 turbulence. Set the CVN to steam into wind at 50 kph, its flank speed being 55. So we end up with 64 kph, that we can use. I did , more or less, Navy 3/4 mile turn to align with deck. Except using long axis , instead of angled approach. Speed at ramp was about 110 knots (about 205 kph) - 64 speed of deck+wind. Gave me airspeed at ramp of about 140 kph (75 knots) more or less. I did bounce, but managed to stop. The aircraft was light and clean. No ammo, no pods, no weapons, and 60% fuel. Aircraft was 68% of max gross weight. Track included. carrierAproach.trk

My bad! I have version 1.2.5b. The L-39A Albatross loads into sim using SU-25 cockpit. I would like to remedy it, as on YT, L-39 in DCS is flown with correct L-39 cockpit. Trolling?

For some reason my L-39A uses SU-25 cockpit. Installation did not report errors. MY DCS is 1.2.6.

I like GBU-31/38 for tank processing more then AGM-65X. I recall a visiting USAF instructor, when I was a 2LT in Artillery School, telling how USAF B-52, F-16, F-15E, and A-10A, were 'tank plinking' during Desert Storm. That is engaging stationary Iraqi tanks with laser guided 500lb GBU's from high altitude where Iraqi AAA was useless. After Iraqi's bagged an F-15E with AAA (or an SA-3), no one was allowed below Angels 10. A-10s also used Mav's seeker as poorman's pod. I feel that search-targeting-release is more efficient and quicker with JDAMs then with Mavs. That is for stationary targets. You need 65D to take care of moving tgts, and 65G to process naval targets. Engaging naval tgts with JDAM is difficult. You have select a point where ship will be. 65G , once you get IR lock, can take down small vessels. I have yet to hit a ship with JDAM with CCRP. Now 2XMK84 with CCIP, on a large naval target. Not that hard, provided there is no SAM/AAA threat. 2X65G for Molniya and Grisha. Rockets and gun for Elnya tanker. I am not sure how realistic damage is modeled. Seems to me, two 65G would not be enough to sink a corvette or a small frigate. Rockets and guns to sink Elnya , is a stretch, but I will give DCS benefit of doubt.

Disregard. Figured it out. Thank you all for help.

Ehhh. I am not checking! I do not understand what to do. My HUD is SOI, it is in AA mode, and I switch to DSMS on left screen. No funnell. What am I missing. I suspect this is a of A-10 with my video card. Quaddro 4000

I am not certain, what I am doing wrong. But my A-10C is refusing to display EEGS funnell in Air-Air HUD mode. Both main arm and gun arm are on. AIM-9M's work fine, the gun fires, but becouse there is no funnel, I can't aim gun. LASTE and EAC work fine. I am thinking its a bug.

I noticed that A-10C GPS munitions engagement is a little off, in regards to release zone. Manual Release zone is much tighter then real world. First CCRP for GPS should be able to be released sooner then is available, and should be available for longer. Specifically GPS munitions can be released when launch platform is on a large off-aspect to the target. Including being able to release when target is behind the launch aircraft. Same goes for glide CBU 103 and 105. Those Wind Corrected kits have wings, allowing the weapon to maneuver. Perhaps, DCS got it right, A-10 is a lot slower at altitude then say F-15E or F-16C Block 52+. Then there is an effectiveness issue of GBU-31 (2000lb). I placed 4 of them on ammunition bunker target. Two on the roof near vent, and one at each of the doors. No effect. Target took the hits without damage. Drop was from angels 15 +300.

The ViartualStore has no EagleDynamics folder. The problem still persists, no matter where I install. Running the original 1.0.0 instalation from distribution CD does not solve anything. The application does not run. No error messages, no activation screens, nothing, the executable simply does not run. Forget 1.0.2 patch, 1.0.0 won't run. I can see in the Processes, when I try to launch BlackShark. the Launcher.exe process is created but nothing happens. My machine is a laptop with GeForce 9800M. It has not been changed. Original BS 1.0.0 ran. Until I tried to update it to 1.0.2. Now neither 1.0.2 nor original 1.0.0 will run. Even when freshly installed from disto CD.

1.0.2 patch is correct English version, and reports successful update. The problem is that it completely broke BS so that it won't run at all, not even when cleanly re-installed. What is UAC and where is it? What I need is someone from the developers to troubleshoot this. Why is this so complicated, its just a game/sim.

I don't know what happened. I installed 1.0.2 patch and BS stopped working. Won't even start. I get command prompt window stating; "Error getting table field 'command' PANIC: unprotected error in call to Lua API <attempt to index a nil value." That's all she wrote. I uninstalled 1.0.2. using 1.0.2. uninstalled. The rolled back 1.0.1 still won't run. No error message, just won't start. Period. Uninstalled BS completely from system using build in uninstaller. Reinstalled original 1.0 from CD. The original won't start either. Reinstalled 1.0.2. patch. BS still won't start, but it does re-issue the above error. Can I fairly conclude that beta testing wasn't quite up to snuff. At this point I don't know how to proceed. Uninstalling and reinstalling is not doing. Seems like 1.0.2 patch did something to my OS (Vista 64) that has made running BS impossible.

After patching BS to 1.0.2 BS issues LUA error messages in many of the lua scripts in ...\blackshark\modules Additinally I am unable to go into options portion of BS. With same problems. Running 1.0.2 installation does not solve the issue. Clearing BS and clean installing, then running 1.0.2 patch, likewise, does not resolve. Is 1.0.2. a buggy patch? Is this common.

I use X52 Pro. Stick is working right , as far as I can tell. Its calibrated and centered. It works great in LockOn:FC and F4:AF. I have pinky switxh mapped to the trimmer. I hear it engage and disengage. So I disengage and re-center the stick, as instructed, except from that point, the I am locked out of cyclic control until trimmer is canceled. So am I experiencing a stick malfunction is does BS have a problem with X52 Pro? My suspicion is that BS trimmer function is buggy and does not work as described. At least not with my equipment.

Yea. I read the 1.0.1c trim update. Reread it. Try and try using it. It simply does not work as advertised. As soon as I release the trimmer and re-center the stick I am locked out. Period. Util I either disengage the trim or I crash. Deadzones don't matter. No matter how big I make them, the result is the same. I can't use the new trimmer function. It lock me out of control until disengaged. So from my POV it does not work right.

After three months os DCS training, my experience with trim is nothing as described. Neither in docs nor here. With new trimmer option. When I engage the trimmer, stabilize flight, disengage trimmer, the cyclic stops responding, it locks up. I would move the joystick, but DCS cyclic would be frozen until trimmer is canceled. So when I am reading that trimmer should never be disengaged in flight I scratch my head. If I don't I will crash. So something is just not functioning as advertised.

Well, that has not been so for me. Something is not making sense here. Situation. Helicopter is at near hover speed , heading towards the enemy. I depress the engage trimmer, align the helo, release trimmer, re-center the stick. Immediately the helo banks and yaws (slowly), and pitches up, and begins to drift/fly backwards. Situation: Yaw. SLOW!. I cant say it simpler. At times, I would be at near zero speed, rudder at half deflection to prevent right yaw, and hold heading. Full rudder deflection will not cause left yaw or it would be very very slow yaw. Why? Other strange situation Front gear will , by itself, turn fully to the left, and lock itself in that position. Full right deflection of rudder will not bring it straight. So as soon as wheel break is released the helo will start to want to go in circles, while on the ground.

I am experiencing, some differences, between docs, KA-50 data, and actual in-sim experience. I use X52 Pro, with stick rudder. 1. Common Wisdom. Contra-Rotating rotors are naturally stable requiring no torgue input to hold heading. My exp. Not so. The helicopter cannot hold stable heading, even into wind, by itself. It always wants to rotate counter-clockwise about itself. Requiring significant pedal deflection to hold heading. The stick is centered and working correctly. 2. Common Wisdom. KA-50 has very fast and responsive spot turn performance, and heading change. Fast turn to target. My exp. Not so. Helicopters has very fast pitch and bank but very sluggish rudder. It is very slow to turn to target. Also it is impossible, and I have been trying for 4 months, to do a stable spot turn. The helo will drift right , left, or backwards, or combination of the tree. After completion of the spot turn. 3.Common Wisdom. Cyclic trim helps the pilot. My exp. It is unpredictable. Sometimes it works, othertimes it does not. The slower the speed the more unpredictable it is. Also disengaging trim, cause strong pitch up, before forward cyclic pressure is enough to stabilize pitch. The fact that ED added two types of cyclic pitch just confuses things even more. IMHO poor implementation. Very confusing, and poorly explained. 4. Common Wisdom. Contra-Rotating rotors are resistant to settling with power. My exp. In this sim, settling is very easy to get info. At low altitude, (i.e. shaded area of diagram), there is no solution to prevent crash. The solution is cyclic down, pitch down to get fresh air into the rotors. 5. EEG will keep rotors turning at proper rate. My exp. Is mixed. They work most of the time. EEG and hovering. All to often the governors fail to keep rotors when in stable hover, causing the helicopter to settle without control. I also experience EEG fail to keep rotor rpm when flying backwards, even modestrly. Same for steep banks. Rotor rpm goes below 800 rpm, and EEG limiter lights turn on. 6. Vne. The helicopter is suppoused to be able to go above 300 kph, without RBS, or disk intersection My exp. 250(ish) is the Vne in the sim. Above 250 Vne warning screams at me. Finally. I am not certain which stick is best for BS, but I am certain that Saitek X52 Pro is a poor choice.

No. Thats not it. It s a yaw slug with HDG hold on or off. Actually I don't think that X52 Pro is good with BS. It nearly impossible to control with AP off. It over corrects with tiniest of movements. It is impossible to yaw the helicopter in hover without inducing some cyclic pitch or roll. The stick is centered and properly adjusted. Another odd behavior is that BS tends to starts settling out of hover. I would be in hover. Then after few seconds, the rotor rpm would drop below 8, the helicopter would start shaking and start settling. THis is not settling with power, as I would already be in stable hover to begin with. Its something like a EEG failiure, but there is no EEG fail light.

I am not certain what is going on. My BS is very heavy and slow in yaw. I have X52 Pro, and use its built in stick/rudder as pedals. The helicopter is very responsive in pitch and bank but very slow in yaw and even slower in 'Turn TO Target". The X52 works fine as I have Flaming Cliffs and Falcon4 AF. The stick is centered. DaveR

Please check out new trailer for Avatar. In the movie the helicopters use sheathed rotors. Which are rotors inside narrow duct fans. I don't know how realistic that is. But wouldn't that system prevent RBS and supersonic advancing blade. As the rotor tips are sheathed from incomming air. If so how is lift produced during forward flight?

One of the training subject in real world turbine helicopter syllabuses, is preventing hot starts. That is monitoring the exaust gas temperature during turbine start up to prevent over-temp condition, that results in hot start. Hot starts generally require engine teardown and rebuild. I have not yet experienced a hot start in KA50. Either starting up manually or using start-up cheat. Are hot starts modeled in BlackShark. If so , how is it induced?