FSKRipper

Maybe you have no real experience with EA but this is a modern fighter with complex weapon systems and developing this stuff takes time, years to say it clearly. The other way would be not to have a flying plane with at least "dumb" munitions at all and wait another year. Maybe a solution for you, but not for me. Since I'm going straight for my 40th birthday I prefer learning step by step instead of a 700 pages manual hammer like the A-10C when I was younger :smilewink: Edit: If I remember correctly, Heatblur took 4 years to get their F-14 from an idea to Early Access...

I don't get the sense of this thread. You want more updates in the list? No problem, remember the good old times when we had no announcement of features to come and patches every 3-6 weeks. Will be a nice changelog at least. Btw nobody has fun with a new hornet feature while DCS core is crashing or MP is broken so updating the framework is more important then some individual module issues.

As I said earlier there are issues with nearly every module and the Gazelle is no exception. I also think that discussion without proper documents is simply of no value. The reason for my citation was that a whole bunch of people especially in FM threads use it to point to potential bugs which are of no matter at all. I recommend a look in the FC3 Forums. If you would have told such an expert in the 60's of the last century that (specific) helicopters can do a Looping they would have put out their pitchforks and torches. Today you find them complaining about nearly every aspect of a module and the best is, they are mostly RL pilots, aviation engineers, Software programmers ("such a code change takes only minutes") or maintainers according to their personal statement. The good thing about is that I'm pretty sure most of them are simply guys with some kind of lack of attention syndrom, otherwise we would have no planes and helicopters flying around according to their napkin math and expertise. The problem is you never know it until they show their incompetence and some of them would be great poker players... To answer the buying question, you should know it on your own, nobody can help you because it's like asking for the right religion. You will find two seperate sides and something in between.

Nothing personal dahlgren and my comment is not specific to you but exactly this statement is the biggest issue on these boards, for all modules and from all developers!

Even about that you can argue. Some of the FM topics which were brought up for the Gazelle as bugs also happen in the Huey (haven't tested the Mi-8 during the last year)… I would agree in the point that you can enjoy this module anyway. The point is if you buy it, would you know if something isn't correct and why? For me there will be always the discrepancy between some forum guys complaining around and the devs with some actual Gazelle pilots on the other side. It's you choice who you would like to thrust more :)

So you just want some references from the classified manual of the military version? Sure :thumbup: I wont comment on the other stuff. Its up to the devs if they like to explain all this stuff another time...

Or maybe right cockpit and right model because you saw two different jets in the stream? I think everybody should calm down a bit and stop bumping like crazy or create double posts for a WiP plane which is at least 2 months out. I'm pretty sure the RL pilots & RIOs in Heatblurs advisor team would have seen such an issue.

Maybe you should check some reports of the Wild Weasel missions in Vietnam. Sometimes they passed numerous times above a site without knowing it because these guys on the ground were masters of camouflage even when keeping the basic layout. Not everybody tried to style his landscape up with stars which can be seen from space :) EIDT: Here also a layout for some more stuff: http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-SAM-Site-Configs-A.html

Zeus from Razbam also confirmed some time ago that the other modules will benefit from the new radar technology developed for the F-18. I'm pretty sure he doesn't meant the others excluding the Mirage :music_whistling:

-1 This weapon, together with biological and chemical weapons is military completely pointless until you are out for total destruction. Apart from the silly ideas of some old men in the SAC there won't be some kind of limited war with this stuff. In caves of Afghanistan it won't achieve anything more than the MOAB, thermobaric bombs or small diameter bombs. Do you expect you could use such a weapon in Syria with Israel just standing beside and watching? No nuclear armed country will tolerate the use of these weapons in their neighborhood. These weapons were always build as deterrence and won't fulfill any other military use since you poison the whole area of use.

Danke dir. :thumbup: Werd ich mal ausprobieren.

Darf ich kurz Zwischenfragen welchen Mod ihr nutzt? Ich hatte im Original noch nirgendwo Crew gesehen oder ist mir was entgangen?

Reminds me of an official white house twitter account :angel:

For me, moving them from idle to off directly after mission start works great. Since on most other modules I don't do shut downs it's the best way to handle it IMO.

No

Yeah, and look at the frequency display and PCA fields not readable from reflections. I'm really looking foward to this :huh: The devs will be cursed by dozens of virtual pilots, go and look at the former Mig 15 scratches, the Mig 21 reflections and so on and on

Hello team, I had two recent crashes of DCS while playing in single player, Operation Piercing Fury (Operation Bagdati). In one case the Programm created a full log which you can find attached. Best regards, Ripper dcs.log-20180822-081038.zip

+1 Time to close this growing mountain of sh**. The question was answered on page 1.

Yes, may be a misunderstanding from my side. It's long ago that I touched the UH-1. I only remember that all the power consuming systems of the Gazelle (Nadir, Viviane, RWR...) only come to life when exceeding a given engine rpm. I assumed this is the rpm at which the engine supplies the electrical systems. That given, I expected the battery to only power minor systems. According to the actual power draw a 24Ah battery should be able to supply the instruments for hours (like in your car). I have to admit I'm lacking the enthusiasm to test this :lol:

Just out of curiosity, what do you expect after 10 minutes (you only power the intruments right?) ? At least the R22 batteries reach from 20-24Ah so plenty of juice...

Yeah, who are you guys who never have seen a Gazelle from the cockpit or flying it... So we have to choose to trust strangers claiming they know the thruth because they are flying other helos or even better, have fundamental FM knowledge, or strangers who are ALAT pilots with at least some hundred hours sticktime on EXACTLY this helicopter. Let me think :music_whistling: Let everybody choose for himself, I made my decision.

Oh I'm not offended by such a statement. And if you tell me I have no idea abour helo flight dynamics I'm fine with it. Telling the same the developer is an insult, no matter which language you use since he for sure spent more time coding the FM than you on a real stick. We had a lot of these experts even telling Yoyo that he has no idea of Flight modeling...It's simply a lack of respect and respect is a two sided street. I agree that the physics on a 727 and a A380 are the same, but transition courses are not only there to teach you where the instruments are. You will learn how the plane reacts under given conditions which can vary a lot between different models. I also know that this is also a game and like it was said earlier I'm happy that the FM "feels" fine for real Gaz M pilots than to get a model strictly by the book (maybe like Jester told of the Flight safety sims). Look in the other forums and at least for the UH-1 you will find comments from RL pilots saying it feels too artificial. Funny how people flying different models are happy with it... Just my two cents here. Since this will not be the end of this thread I wanted to thank Polychop for their work. I hope you other guys find some fun with the module at last.

Shi* happens sometimes… http://www.ejectionsite.com/F-14%20SHOOTDOWN.pdf EDIT: SNIPED :pilotfly:

What do you call this stupid product of language instead? So listen, I'm seeing that you guys are bashing each other for months. Just for my personal interest. How do you want to implement stick travel for us non ffb pilots? A moving virtual stick but our Joystick doesn't move? If our stick would produce inputs we could not fly hands off which is possible as it was told before. And sorry guys, I suspect at least most of you claiming RL experience have some but not all of you. This is best seen by people who are always hammering on their physics book. This is exactly the same shi** we had with the M2000 FM discussion where FBW rules over the simple schoolbook physics. And in the direction of all the RL pilots, I respect your experience but since flying a 727 is not the same as flying an A380 I stay on the side of the Gazelle M pilots. This is not meant as bashing or to harm anybody!

And here is the problem, you dont care for 90+x % of the customers. Who you wan't to see happy from the salesman side? Btw, great INS implementation Razbam :thumbup: Looking foward.