stuart666

I posted my thoughts about GEE in the other thread. I can appreciate the technical challenges (and it might as a result be better left till we have a 'wider world' so you can simulate curvature of the earth). Nonetheless, I think that warrants doing. There is a really nice video of drift sights here, which gives some overview of how they work. Id love to see this in the sim. But to be honest, how useful is it right now? You either look at your kneepad and follow the line, or look at where you are on the F10 map. Its cool, but functionally useless unless there is a reboot of how navigation is doing. The ONLY way I can see this being useful if navigation in the sim, at least for WW2 pre digital aircraft, is completely rethought. You need a nav that has a route, whom tries to follow it, but may drift over time. The best example I can think of that has been in a sim (gameified though it was) was in the Nav screen in B17. You look out the window, observe where you are, and adjust your position on the map, and the pilot reacts to get back on the created track. You could either do that via some form of 'jester' (Charruthers?), or via a multiplayer nav. Which over a decent sized map would actually give the poor fella something worthwhile to do. Thats big work. But as more and more twin engined aircraft, particularly bombers, get made by ED, I think its something that needs doing. And TBH, its something that is going to have to be implimented for all kinds of aircraft up to the mid 60's, before computers were introduced into combat aircraft. You idly wonder if they did ever make a change like that, it would make sense to split DCS into two sims. The modern digital pilots simply arent going to appreciate that kind of baggage, just for the WW2 audience.

Yes, agreed. Im sure the IRIAF jock that killed 3 mirages with one missile would perhaps disagree with the idea it wasnt to be used on fighters.... Didnt I read somewhere that by the mid to late 1980's, they were hanging at least one Phoenix on Tomcats on some CAPs, so they could in the face any Su27 or Mig29 they met?

Some of them took part in air raids on Tokyo. The British contribution to the pacific war is usually overshadowed, and it would be good to have something to put it right. My money is on the MkIII, it fits in more places.

Typhoon isnt extinct. There is an intact example sitting in RAF Hendon for example. Its barely been flown, it was loaned to the Americans to test, and they put it in store with a couple of hours on it. As far as flight modelling, it surely can be much harder than the FW190, which other than a few a few replicas has only one single example in the world flying witht he original engine. You use the flight test data, and fill in the blanks using interviews with veterans (im sure there must still be a few out there) or written accounts. Yes, Id bag a tiffie as well, it would be a good choice. Id prefer a Tempest, but a Typhoon fits better with Normandy and the Channel maps. Perhaps its just finger trouble on my part, but it seems to work better on the B than on the A?

I had difficulty setting it up too. It DOES work. However, the light remains on when you move outside the parameters of the autopilot, and previously that would turn it and the system off. Ok, so we have the paddle, but that means you have to turn back on your stab channels as well. TBH, I was cheating and using the autopilot to trim around the boat. Much as I hate its adjustment to this level, its undoubtedly the right thing to do. It was something of an exploit.

Yes, thats exactly the problem. I think their flight model is right, the control mapping for moving trim is wrong. It needs to be much finer. Or, and here is a crazy idea. Have a rough trim to move it quick, and another key to fine adjust. Thats all.

Can someone please tell me what has to be deleted to clear the redded out keybindings? Ive removed the folder in saved game, and there is still a few in the controls. Do I have to remove the one in the main directory as well?

Ive found adjusting this to 0.20 (thanks to the original fella for posting that up) and you can trim it out quite nicely. Dont forget to use aileron trim as well. Its not perfect, but to be honest, im far from certain its not supposed to be like this.

OK so I tried a few times today, and yes, it did catch me out several times. Something has changed. Im far from convinced its not realistic though (although the pitch to the right is strange, it probably should be to the left, unless thats a result of the trim right). How ive been doing it. Ease the throttle in slowly. Make sure you have it trimmed forward before you start. Dont try and lift the tail by pushing forward and rushing it, let the aircraft build up speed and decide when it wants it to lift the tail. At that point you might get a very slight pull to the right. Just use slight left rudder to level up. And by and large it should get itself airborne, or at least, be fairly evident when it feels ready to fly. If im desperate yes I would use the brake, but dont overdo it. You find you can get into a left right brake cycle. And after all, you want speed, using the brakes that this point seems a bit counter intuitive.

I think it depends on the site. In the After the Battle book 'The V Weapons then and now' there is a target map of Flers, just to the south of Bapaume, that was identified as a V1 site. And right on the edge of the village is a platoon of Flak guns.Ive also found a source for a battalion of light AA Guns at Watten, which is a stones throw away from some V1 launch sites and an O2 bunker for the V2's. Generally though, im finding it next to impossible to find sources for defences of these places. It would be nice to find a lot more target maps.

Vitry En Artois airfield. This is slightly north of the present day one, and is clearly defined by its surviving perimeter track and runways, the latter supposedly still with bomb craters in them. It was widely used by the Luftwaffe up to 1944, including use against daytime raids by the Eighth Air Force, and latterly used by the USAAF and RAF 50°20'34.56"N 2°58'41.39"E https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitry-en-Artois_Airfield http://luftwaffeinprofile.se/Bf 109 G-6 Karch.html http://www.luftwaffeinprofile.se/Pitt Brown.html https://falkeeins.blogspot.com/2011/10/more-jg-26-in-west.html https://ncap.org.uk/frame/24-1-6-143-18?pos=5

Ah so you did, my apologies I clearly missed that one. Yes, it clearly warrants inclusion. Indeed its difficult to see how its going to be possible to navigate effectively over water without some kind of location equipment. Id personally pay extra for its inclusion, such as they have already done with that flight management computer they have fitted to a number of aircraft. Perhaps its rather niche, but it does seem to be among the start of the electronic revolution in combat aircraft. Incidentally, if you liked that site, there is a guy whom has been restoring WW2 bombsights, including a Sperry T1, as used by the RAF in various aircraft.

Much to my surprise, I was reading today that the aircraft used on the Amien raid were using Gee as a navigational aid to make landfall where there was no flak guns, and that Coastal Command (Perhaps entirely understandably) were also using it. I think this would make an interesting option for the sim, particularly with a working AI Navigator giving your position. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycE3U8sGpW0

Yes, exactly. I could create that right now, but they are still going to be in British camo and with British crews. If you are strafing them with a Mosquito you are probably going to notice a some point.

Im presently trying to do a representation of the German air defences on the channel map, and whilst going through the sources noted something. There was a quite a lot of guns used by the Germans acquired from armies they defeated. Ive just found 2 flak positions near Ostend that were used by 4cm Flak 28. Or the Bofors gun as we prefer to call it. There were on the Normandy area references to use of the British 3.7 Inch gun. Seems to have been quite a few left behind at Dunkirk we didnt effectively dispose So I was thinking, how about ED considering including those guns among the german kit? I accept the crew figures need changing, but of all the things that could be done, this would be reasonably low hanging fruit I would have thought? Some Vehicles also so quite a lot of use, so its worth considering vehicles that could perhaps fulfill 2 different owners with just a different skin. Just a respectful suggestion to ED.

Been looking into making a layout of projected German defences in Northern France, as I did for the Normandy map, and ive noticed that most radar sites had more than one Freya. So im guessing, depending on how many they had operational at one time, they would move the radar to cover a 120 degree slice of sky. Two of them would be able to cover something like 240 degrees, more than enough to cover a particular slice of sky, particularly considering how many they seem to have had on the Atlantic wall. Im not sure classing Wurzburg Reise as a fire control radar is right. Reise seems to have been used in conjunction with Freya to discover height, and be used for nightfighter intercepts. The fire control one I most seem to identify with 88mm gun battery's would be the smaller Wurzburg D. We badly need one of these among the assets if at all possible ED, hint hint.

Then I would respectfully encourage you to either add to my bug report, or put up your own.

I notice I actually have that one on Kindle, but Id completely missed that reference! The Yefim Gordon book certainly does relate the Mil designers were surprised at what Pilots in Afghanistan were doing with the airframe. Annoyingly it doesnt say precisely WHAT they were doing with it. Hmm. Ok, Ill buy rolls then, thank you for sharing that. It still doesnt feel like the airframe has the weight it once did, but maybe it was overdone before. Annoyingly I rather liked the tub of lard feel. Ive upped the bug file here. Id be curious to know what people think of the track file.

Ok, I uploaded it to my dropbox account, I hope you dont mind. It was 8.5 megs and wouldnt fit in your file limit. https://www.dropbox.com/s/uru5tvgvmd0qzfz/Hind track.trk?dl=0 I do several victory rolls. I notice they seem easier to do when the stab was on, the airframe seems much slower to roll when the stab is off for some reason. I also attempted to do a loop. Its not particularly successful, althought the aircraft does go inverted and recover fairly easily. Im annoyed, my over the shoulder one I did the other day and did not record was much better. On at least one occasion when I did this, there was a tail boom strike and the boom detached, although it does seem to be very patchy. Once it does, usually it does not. Re P vs the HindD, particularly export, but ive read nothing that suggests that in manoeuvrablity there should be any difference. The V and P have more power than the D and that should be about it. Indeed, if the wings didnt cause any maneuvarablity or hover problems in Soviet or Russian service, it seems odd in the later variants they trimmed them. Basically, the aircraft seems far more manoeuvrable, almost like a Mil 8, than it was on initial release. IMHO, it doesnt seem to have the intertia that it once had which seemed fitting for an aircraft of its size and weight. It seems much more nimble. If it can indeed do this in real life then fair enough, but it doesnt seem to quite fit with written accounts. I hope some of this helps. All the best to the team, ive utmost respect on what they are trying to do here and no disrespect intended.

Fully loaded? I struggle to believe it can do an over the shoulder loop either, again fully loaded.

Since a recent patch, the aircraft seems considerably more maneuvrable, and lacks the weight or Inertia it previously did.Its a well documented feature of the real aircraft that the faster it goes, seeminglythe harder it is to turn, but in turn and roll, it seems to lack inertia. This also seems to be noticeable in pitch, as its now possible to do an over the shoulder loop, which was seemingly impossible before. Also, roll at high speed seems like a figher aircraft. There is also a feature of the hind that when you reach a certain bank, it wants to keep going, as noticed in this online account. This feature is also missing. https://verticalmag.com/features/getting-front-mi-24-hind/ When turning off the pitch and roll stab, the controls seem slightly heavier, but not as much as before.

Ok, well im going to flag this is as a bug. I actually managed to throw the aircraft over its right shoulder in a bank a real hind would never have done. It was practically a Blue Thunderesqe loop. Seems to me that it gets worse if you turn the pitch and roll stab on. Turn it off its a little heavier, but much. There is nothing like the account above where you hit a particular bank and it wants to keep going. It just keeps going with left or right stick as long as you want it with no ill effects.

From the photographs ive seen, when the Nightstalkers lifted it out, it already had the markings painted out on it, or never had any. In US Army service it didnt seem to have markings, other than some nose art. You would be surprised how easy it is to create a new skin. All you need to do is delete the external markings in the template in gimp, export, then copy and alter the description in Notepad. Its fiddily, but I wouldnt say its difficult.

In pitch I dont doubt you are right. But it just doesnt seem to be there in roll anymore. Yes, thank you for that. I read that and a few other accounts of people flying the Bulgarian Hind. The really kicker is this. 'However, the wings, which are prone to stalling, also limit the aircraft’s maneuverability. Rolling into a turn, the wings tend to continue the banking action and must be counteracted with lateral cyclic; beyond a certain angle of bank, that cyclic authority simply runs out. “From an agility standpoint, Western helicopters have an advantage,” Totty said. “A turning fight is not where the Hind pilot wants to be.” In the Mi-24D, the aircraft’s low-pressure hydraulics also impose constraints on maneuverability (a shortcoming that has been remedied in the latest Mi-24 models).' That certainly was present in the first model. You could, If I remember rightly, go into a turn, and it would want to keep going, presumably why the Soviets put a limit of a 30 degree bank on it. It was also hard to get it into a turn, particularly when fast. Yes, it was perhaps overdone (not helped by the tail rotor stabilizer problems we all saw), but it was certainly present. You could also see these wide turns in footage of the Hind in Syria. Ill be honest, Ive never flown a 'real' rotary wing aircraft, so I dont wish to appear I am in a really good place to offer an opinion. But ive spent a lot of time on the Huey, and a fair amount of time on the Hip. How it feels now is remarkably like the Hip when its unloaded. The Hip, Ironically, everyone on the forum there is saying how aged the Hip flight model felt compared to the Hind! I think whats thrown me, we had a model, yes it clearly needed some modification. But it felt, broadly, like a solid base to build on. And now it just feels like something completely different. That heaviness in the turn in particular is what sold it to me when I got it. It clearly felt like an aircraft with some weight behind it, and relucant to turn, particularly when heavily loaded. And now it just feels like that has all been turned off. So they clearly were wrong at least once, the question is, was it wrong then, or wrong now? It certainly does not fit the written accounts as we can see. I dont think they would twist it to make it more popular. They clearly had at least one Hind crewman on the dev team, I cant see them taking 'Turn on the arcade model!' as a insturction lightly. Ah, I dont know. I know I hear people on here all the time saying 'I dont like this, why isnt it more maneuvrable', particularly on the F14 forum. I dont want to be like that and offer a Warthunder opinion. But to me, it feels far stranger now than it did when it was released. Thats an opinion offered on flying all the other rotory wing aircraft in DCS. Yes, including the Gazelle. It would be good to hear form the devs and hear their take on this. Was there anything left out, is there any more work going to be done on this?

It feels to me there is no inertia. Before it felt like a big tub of armour, now it just fleets incredibly light, so you can throw it around with abandon. Im surprised that so few others have noticed it.