PFunk1606688187

Holy drag index batman. :surprise:

My simming life began on this plane in IL-2. I read it had good control and was a good newbie plane. Hopped in, flew some circuits, and gaming was never the same for me.

I wouldn't recommend binding any of the rotaries or the slider to an axis. Those pots are not of a particularly good quality and will have jumpy response even when left stationary depending on your X52's age and your luck of the draw. Another reason is that since its such a low precision axis its hard to return to the same spot you were at before consistently. I set my slider to "Bands" then set 80-100% input to '*', and 0-20% input to '/'. This way whenever you push the slider to the forward position and aft position it replicates the act of zooming in and out with the default numpad keys. I find that that is more consistent and controllable than the zoom axis.

If this were ever to be completed, will it be possible to tell which of the Hotels don't have lobbies in them?

That'd probably be really good training because skidding in DCS is not like it is in real life. There's almost no penalty, even in terms of controllability. I'd definitely recommend practicing with Ctrl-Enter open. Practice both increasing/decreasing on one foot as well as simultaneously adding to one while letting up on another. Then try it with anti-skid turned on and see how far you can apply brakes before it starts to activate. It really screwed with me too, the asymmetry of brake pressure, but I'm slowly getting better at coordinating it for keeping the centre line. I haven't done testing but I feel like if I apply braking to just before anti-skid activates that the plane actually slows down faster. Maybe its in my head but thats how it feels and there's still all this question surrounding anti-skid and whether it works properly or not in sim.

To be honest I don't think that the DCS A-10 is underpowered to the degree you cannot replicate the behavior of the demo performance. What you need to understand is that flying an airframe to near its fullest potential means as near as can be perfect technique and execution. The fact that with no stores and low fuel you feel like you can't get off the runway with enough gettupandgo tells me maybe your stick or your style is wrong. Firstly, I used to use a modest curvature on my stick axes and after removing it suddenly I could roll so much faster and pitch so much more aggressively and then I suddenly said "Oh, so I can roll like that guy in the Air Show demo of the A-10". There is a document freely available on the internet that contains all the maneuvers and parameters for their execution for every authorized airshow by the USAF. This includes the A-10. It has entry airspeed and altitude parameters and the same for exit. EDIT. mvsgas just ninja'd me with this exact doc. Most of the aggressive maneuvers are done at at least 325 IAS. This airspeed is extremely important. If you were to try and do an immelman at even 315 knots you might stall whereas at 325 you're good. The real A-10 is really thrust poor and thats something a real A-10 pilot would tell you. What you also need to understand is that the demo pilots are pros in their airframe and as such can get every bit of energy out of them to make the plane do what they want it to do. Whether there are limitations to what the DCS plane can do is not something I can speak to, but what I can say is that the human behind the computer screen has to overcome a lot to even begin to fly like a real one so trying to imitate the actions of a top pilot doing advanced maneuvers isn't something that should be easily done and even then is subject to overcoming all the limitations of computer simming. Check your gear, check your axis settings, and check yourself. I only usually get better once I realize how awful I have been doing something I previously felt really really confident and comfortable with. If you can get Tacview that would be an immense benefit to your practice. What is your stick and rudder set up btw? Do you use a curve on any of your axes? EDIT #2. Btw, this video is somewhat related I think and is interesting to boot.

Actually on commercial airliners the autobrake setting chosen commands a fixed deceleration rate which is unchanged by the use of thrust reversers. Only thing thrust reversers do is piss off the locals and slightly reduce the brake wear. With or without anti-skid kicking in? As I stated above, I believe that it really screws with differential braking.

I was under the impression that in DCS this was not the case, at least in the past.

Are people also remembering to pay attention to the anti-skid while they're braking as well? I find that anti-skid can throw off centreline retention because any asymmetry of braking in either pedal is magnified by the way that the anti-skid system works. My solution was to fly with Ctrl-Enter open on landings and carefully apply maximum brake pressure up to the point that anti-skid activates, ease off, then use differential to maintain centreline. In my experience anti-skid severely diminishes differential braking to the point of near uselessness. It feels like it also locks in any asymmetry you've applied to the brakes the moment it kicks into its mad On/Off cycle. My best success with braking control in the rollout is generally to brake with the intention of avoiding anti-skid activation like the plague.

You don't even need to LSS as long as long as you're sure your buddy is both dropping onto the correct target and is dropping within parameters that would allow the bomb to follow the laser to said target. You could just as easily send him a SPI via the datalink or verbally give him coordinates to input as a new waypoint and he would be able to drop on the target without even having to look through his TGP, provided his bomb is set to the same laser code as your TGP.

Would love to know what your mod soup consists of, especially the terrain.

The only way to improve your pace of learning is to have someone work with you. Self study is very limited because you cannot ask ad hoc questions as they come to you, instead you need to search for answers and this can be very exhausting, unlike when you say to your friend "Whats this button do?" and he just says "Words". Closest to getting help without having an actual person is to watch those youtube videos, especially the indepth 20+ minute ones about individual topics because you get a lot of personal "tips and tricks" type of stuff. Also the forums have text versions of the "whats this button do?" conversation so if you wanna know something try a search and see what shows up. Also, the DCS manual is limited almost exclusively to technical operation of the aircraft, no tactics or procedures. To learn that stuff you do need to look beyond. Thats when the self study thing really starts to choke off your progress. Depending on your general flight sim experience, you may wish to look for more general aviation related materials online to help you understand correct stick flying of your A-10. Fighting your airframe while trying to operate avionics is fruitless.

Thats pretty narrow minded. Most Arma players up to the DayZ period were committed to playing generally online coop and many being interested in realism via heavily modding the game. Its not perfect, but DayZ is not the core identity of the typical Arma player. Also, realism is in the eye of the beholder. For infantry there really is no better sandbox for realism gameplay, not in the civilian market anyway. For flying... meh yea its pretty much a joke. However, you'll find it much more realistic to provide CAS in an A-10 in Arma than you will in DCS. Realism isn't just about systems fidelity, its also about human interaction and when it comes to that Arma is miles ahead of DCS on certain levels. For all the ground attack aircraft you have in DCS, none of them gets to do their jobs like they can in Arma.

I find the Ka-50 to be harder because, #1 the flight dynamics of a helicopter are much more complex to come to grips with initially compared to a fixed wing aircraft, especially compared to the A-10 which is very forgiving. That said the coaxial set up on the Black Shark makes for some nice benefits. #2 its my opinion that the avionics in the Black Shark are rather crap compared to the A-10. In particular the system for selecting and designating targets to your wingman is... just weird. The systems on the A-10 might be complex but in my opinion they're far better designed and easier to use on the fly, but some Shark pilot will no doubt contradict me.

So is this instrument supposed to simply slide all the way to one side to do a rate 1 turn? I'm a little confused with what its supposed to look like for a correct Rate 1 and Rate 2 turn.

Whats interesting is the formula I have produces the exact same figure as yours but is done as follows: TAS divided by 10 then added to 1/2 of that divided figure, ie. 230/10=23 23/2=11.5 23+11.5=34.5 Same as yours: 230/10=23 230/20=11.5 23+11.5=34.5

Mach 0.13

Something that cost you just a bit more than an X52, but still makes you wish you had a TMWH?

I love watching old guys talk shop. Reminds me of my grandfather talking about the different weapons he used in WW2.

He definitely closes them right before the cut, or he's commanding right aileron.

Did you change the mouse control to either a directional axis or a bands set up? I've never had any problems really with using DCS instead of the Saitek software for controls. If anything I've always had issues with saitek drivers becoming twitchy and failing to produce key emulation at random moments and it would require a restart to fix it.

Actually thats the result of a cut. If you look closely you can see that they are being closed once he stops aerobraking and brings the nose down then there's a faded cut to where his brakes are full open and he's about to turn off. Even if you miss the visual cue, it has to be a cut because otherwise he apparently reached the end of the runway in about 10 seconds because we see as he's turning off that he's past the threshold markers.

Note how the pilot closes rather than further opens his speedbrakes after touchdown. Its almost like he's afraid he'll slow down too much rather than run out of runway or something. :music_whistling:

I always thought of it like this. You're applying force in the direction you want to see the airframe respond. You push the stick to the left to roll left. You pull back on the stick to go up. In a car you turn in the direction you want to the wheels to go. If you think about the rudder twist it remains consistent with this convention. You're twisting in the direction you want the airframe to respond. Also, consider the toe brakes. You press the left toe brake on an airplane to activate only brakes on the left side, and vice versa. In the opposite convention it can get weird though. Imagine taxiing and pushing on your right foot to turn left, then wanting to use differential braking to make the radius tighter you depress your left foot's toe brake.... thats so weird, why would you use your opposite ankle to the one thats actually pushing on the rudder? It can be confusing, but the convention behind it is more consistent than the opposite in my opinion. As for axis curvature, for the A-10C I use I think 40. I set it a long time ago and never bothered to change it. Right now my muscle memory is programmed for blind coordinated turns at that setting and it works. At 0 I find its too jerky for smooth flying because you're almost never going to be using the top 30-40% of the rudder input unless you're badly damaged and can't trim it out for some reason. Even in a strong cross wind I don't need much rudder to line up for the touchdown. However I have the cheaper Saitek Pro Flight pedals and they've come off their track a few times so they're not as good as they used to be. They also require a deadzone of 5 so my setting may not be relevant to you.

His quoted specs state he actually has 4 gigs of DDR3, unless thats a typo on his part. Also, between craigslist and certain kinds of ethical computer part recycling organizations you can actually find old ram for cheaper than what the big boys sell it for. At a place near where I live you can get old DDR2 for $20-30 depending on the stuff they've received recently. Basically what I was getting at. But I despise it when someone lacking knowledge asks for help and gets told something absolute like "you can't play with that machine, buy a new one" when its simply not true. His specific problem was memory related, and as long as he can suffer turning pre load, clutter, and trees down to a minimum level he should easily be able to "make do" with a 2-4 Gig Ram upgrade.