ericinexile

I'm not sure where I read that but in hindsight it doesn't make much sense. Smaller rotor diameter usually does mean higher disc loading and higher RPM. It also means faster TAS before retreating blade stall and mach problems. Furthermore, high RPM would probably reduce flapping lowering the chance of an ugly blade intersection. Thanks for the correction.

After getting my butt handed to me on a platter on 159th's King of the Hill mission (awsome!), I decided to practice locking airborn targets using Jetrangers as drones (poor saps). I'm improving but I haven't really given myself a good grasp of the criteria for a skhval lock. I find that if I designate a piece of sky close to my adversary and then move the HMS over him, there is a fair chance of a lock. (This is with the laser off, just to keep the discussion simple.) My question is, how long after tapping "designate" will the target gates "look" for a target to acquire? Also, what target gate size results in the best chance of getting an easy lock? Personally, I find that a gate size 1 step below the dashed box works well for a medium distance/sized target.

You know, I think I've confused you with EvilBivol, who I argued with a few months back about this. On the forum you two look like twins :D. Anyway, isn't it easy enough to find a Ka27 pilot/mechanic/manual to get a definitive answer on Kamov FCS philosophy? Whatever happened to AirTito, btw?

Helo pilots who've posted elsewhere have said that VRS is easier to encounter in DCS than in their experience. They've gone on to say that even when instructors are trying to demonstrate vrs, it is sometimes difficult to feel the effect enough to be meaningful to the student. But with the Ka50, who knows? It does have a smaller rotor diameter which could make it more prone to vrs. Rotor RPM is slightly lower than other designs, Does that make a difference? It might incorporate significant blade twist which could be a factor. In my reading, (Prouty's Helicopter Aerodynamics), the writer is more focused on tailrotor VRS which poses more of a problem with attack helicopters which must demonstrate hover capability over a wide range of wind speed and direction. Personally I like the vrs model, even if it later proves to be too aggressive. It enforces a little discipline in the way I fly.

AHHH! A16, I've been waiting months for you to say this! (Perhaps you previously did and I missed it. If so, apologies...)

I've had it happen a few times particularly when autohover drifts low (below 1 meter). I'm sure there is a logical cause but, because it happens so rarely, I personally haven't pondered it further.

I tend to use the ABRIS Arc or HSI modes and pay little attention to the T-panel HSI. Should be easy enough to compare.

Funnel. Practice on a fixed point, let's say a tree. get close, get low. Apply cyclic, let's say left. Apply right rudder to keep your nose on the point. You will also need to apply nose down cyclic once centrifugal forces begin. use collective to maintain height. If nose tracks left with full right rudder you are either: 1-going left because you are applying too much cyclic, or 2-going left because the radius of your circle is too large. This maneuver has NO practical application. But it looks cool and is lots of fun with practice.

The FD allows you to keep dampening in all axis AND simplifies the trim button to one function: TRIM <<----THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF THE FD---<<<. The moment you are satisfied that the autopilot will do what you wish it to do, then you click the FD off (hopefully mapped on your hotas) and the autopilot does your bidding.

The Trim and Emergency AP disengage are two separate buttons. The Emergency Disengage will not only disengage the AP but also kills all axis dampening. Hit that button and you better be prepared to fly.:)

Here's how autopilots work in my experience (which is considerable but never in large helicopters): ---When pilot and autopilot agree on desired attitude and flight path then it usually helps to have the autopilot on. (explanation to follow) ---When they disagree then the autopilot should be off. Put to practical use: Lift off to a 3 foot skid-height hover with FD off (AP on). Now, unless the trim is depressed, the instant you begin to apply inputs that do not agree with the helicoptor's current attitude, you are FIGHTING the autopilot. Let's say you now wish to translate (fly) sideways. Your choices are 1) fight the autopilot which is trying to maintain level flight, 2) Hold trim while you maneuver, effectively temporarily disengaging the autopilot, or 3) Push and release the trim to command the autopilot to hold the new attitude--which, as with "2", you will need to trim out once the sidewards manuever is complete. These are all cumbersome choices when all you really wish to do is apply slight sideward cyclic and relocate to your new desired hover position. Again, any time the pilot is applying a control force with the autopilot on he is FIGHTING the autopilot or he his applying trim when he doesn't really desire it. Let's not forget that trim isn't always desired. There are times where the pilot is perfectly happy with the current neutral positions of the stick and rudder but wishes to make a tiny temporary input only to have the helo settle back to its original trimmed position when the input is removed. With the autopilot on (FD off), this freedom isn't really possible without FIGHTING the autopilot. Where the autopilot works perfectly (in game) is: Route mode, Autohover, and turn-to-target. I LOVE the autopilot in these situations because the autopilot and I are in perfect agreement and I have no need to counter the autopilot with a control input (unless I wish to "trim" the autopilot to a new speed or heading). The above observation obviously only applies to the game. I am convinced that the real Ka-50 senses pilot control input in a way that makes manuevering with the autopilot engaged a much more natural experience. In DCS, the AP works and most players do fine without ever feeling a need to use the FD. But if you ever do find yourself either constantly applying stick forces against the AP input OR holding trim, the FD is a godsend.

"Rhen" is right. But while I can't speak for him, in my civilian world the flight simulators are huge $15 million boxes suspended on hydraulic actuators and stand three stories tall. And they model none of those things Rhen describes. Yet a pilot can be typed in such a simulator and fly fly his new machine for the first time, with paying passengers on board, seeing the real plane for the first time in his/her life. The only thing that is real is reality. But entertainment flight sims can do an able job modeling the flying experience sufficiently to be worth my time. I don't have a response to the f-16 flight envelope modeled by F4. But I know what flight is like, I know what flying formation is like, I know what Fly-by-wire feels like, and I know Falcon 4 isn't it.

With 12000 fight hours and 25 years of flight simming (am I that old?) I have some pretty strong opinions about flight sims. My order is something like this: 1-hands down Flamming Cliffs Su-25. It's the nuances missing in flight sims that separete them so deaply from the experienc of flying the real thing. Few of those nuances are missing from the Sukoi's AFM. I'm still blown away years after it's release. 2-X-plane FOR LIGHT A/C only. Anything with a swept wing is way off, but small straight-wing (mostly non-jet) planes feel very close to real. 3-MSFX. Shows what an unlimited budget will do. Too easy to fly however, particularly the 737-800, which I currently fly for a living. 4-IL2. This is still my favorite sim. The whole package is nearly perfect but it's the joy of multiplayer that keeps me flying. The flight model is fine but somewhat simple. (Uderstandable given the huge number of modeled planes). 4-Falcon 4:AF, RV. As a flight model goes, it's truely pathetic. But the overall package is amazing and with a little tweaking the FM could be made real enough to enjoy.

Here's a marginally educated guess: The INS and IRU systems I've used have been similar in appearance to the PVI and all have a status function with a countdown allignment counter. My W.A.G is that the alignment process can be monitored by one of the right-hand keys on the PVI that currently have no in-game function. I've never heard of an INS that can align in less than seven minutes--but aviation is a big world and there's lots I haven't heard of.

I think they did but you but you have to read the whole manual twice to piece together this simple concept. I've been a flight instructor and A320 check-airman so I try to make things simple insofar as I understand them. I cannot claim to understand the Ka50 but I have tallent for guesses, assumptions and speculation.

I've been using a lot of infantry in a campaign that I am working on. I like the effect of having infantry run towards a goal but it seems that only Russian Paratroopers are able to run. Everyone else hovers along on one knee. (Although I have read that US Infantry run as well.) Just curious if ED has any plans to animate other units

On the ground A/I are murderously stupid as you point out. I find that, once if flight, they do a surprisingly good job of not killing me or each other. One thing that helps is "go combat formation" which forces a kickout formation. Best thing to do is either lift off from the ramp or let them safely taxi ahead.

The Flight Director is the blue button to the right of the 4 blue Autopilot/Axis Dampening buttons.

Hmmm, missed that. They'll pique my interest when they introduce a thorough encyclopedia.

Regarding Trim: It performs TWO completely unrelated functions with a single press: 1) It holds cyclic and rudder in their new trimmed positions, and 2) It tells the autopilot to hold current bank, pitch, and heading It is this duality of purpose that causes confusion. If you desire just the first function for the button then engage the Flight Director.

A question for those who've received their manuals. What exactly is covered? Personally I think the pdf covers the helicopter sufficiently but I would be interested in having a printed reference of vehicles and weopons similar to (but hopefully improving on) the in-game encyclopedia.

The campaign begins in Northern Georgia with Chapter 1 and continues south through victory at the end of Chapter 3. The Grand Campaign groups all three into one campaign. It's a little easier completing one at a time.

We are reading two different Flight Manuals. But in any case if real Ka-50 pilots (of which there are what, twenty?) flies and fights with a Saitek control system they might use the FD differently.

To the Moderators: I appreciate your work at keeping this forum clean and on track. But I want to suggest that dividing the discussion into small areas of a common topic makes the forum less useful. People post on the "General Discussion" area knowing that is the only place where the majority of users will ever participate. For instance, if you have a TrackIr problem and post a question on whatever link ED has dedicated to hardware, you are assured of missing dozens of participants who "reside" in the general discussion area and have just the assistance needed. If posted on the General Discussion area the original poster stands a better chance of drawing attention to his concern. If not, the thread dies and the "forum" concept of free discussion lives through a democratic fertilizing or weeding of discussions based on interest among the group. Of course it is your forum and again I fully respect EDs right to play traffic cop to content. I only suggest decreasing the amount of subject area fractionalization currently forced on participants. Thanks,

I fly the way that best lets me kill things without being killed. Sometimes that means FD off, Autohover ON with Turn on Target engaged. But usually it means FD on which allows me to fly without having to worry about feeding, nurturing, and massaging the AP with the trimmer. Anyway, this "real" "not real" discussion is silly until a Ka50/52 pilot posts on this forum how its really done. Until then, our best guide is the ED supplied FM which states that the FD is usually used.