kgillers3

I'm sorry, were they asking about a dry technical manual that may or may not apply depending on if they have the right -10. Or were they looking for things that the platform has done? Good comment though.

Dude… I want fuzzy dice now, I was thinking about a bobble head but I think my bottles and snacks would get in the way especially in the front seat. But fuzzy dice hell yeah.

Don't have helios. Sorry Toni. This weekend I'll look into it and try and throw something together if it helps you.

To be clear, I'm not saying you can't just buy the apache and fly it around, by all means, there's nothing wrong with that. Just saying if you were gonna use an aircraft prior to help the uh-1 I think is a really good one, just because of how basic it is. Yeah.... me to. Every time I mess around with it I get sad. Just a prolonged cycle of hurt.

Yeah, it’s not, but even the army doesn’t just throw you in. They used to use the th67 then advanced platform. Now they use the Lakota then advanced platform. It’s why I think the Huey is a good trainer, learn how to fly, then you get all of the assists and you can start learning systems. Which is what it sounds like they’re doing.

Alot harder to do cockpit management if you can't fly worth a darn.

There is a version of the tads that will have that ability, but the version they are emulating in game does not, and the version that does have that ability was not installed on the d model. The izlid for all points and purposes is a high powered ir laser pointer. The tads can do laser range finding and laser designating

Just realized the uh1 suggestion came from @MstrCmdr, so I guess I’m with both those peeps. Don’t know about the a10 suggestion though, but it’s well into opinions on what is better vs the other.

Yes, the tads has a laser designator I think he was referring to the izlid and not an actual laser designator

I’m with @MAXsenna I think the uh-1, no assists and you can learn most of the helicopter aerodynamics and control inputs. The uh60 mod is a good cheap alternative, it does have some weird things but if you can fly that you can do anything. after you understand the basics the Apache should be easier than the Huey to control. I think in general people coming from fix wing too rotary they run into issues with going too fast especially for approaches, so just try to keep things slow and controlled, good luck

You get used to focusing between the two eyes, when I get tired with a lot of cultural lighting I find myself having to close the left eye sometimes while under nvs, but it also depends on what eye is your dominant eye. Idk if that’ll transition the same in vr or not. Day I don’t notice it as much.

Let me ask you this, if I were to land at whatever airport is near you, and you walked up too me, would you lead off with telling me about the aircraft? Or would you ask and expand your knowledge? Then if you were to ask a question and I said sorry, I'm not going to talk about that. Would you start trying to teach me about it? The SME's are here they're willing to help. Even if you don't know who they are. AH64 pilots who haven't flown this period are also here, they're willing to help. Wait and see what's released, make a comparison on your understanding. Ask if its supposed to be this way. Or what's missing. If this is coming or not. That's my recommendation. My common theme throughout all of this. Open sourced information > should give you some questions > Ask those questions > If they're non sensitive they can be answered. If it's something wrong I'm sure in time it'll be remedied. My original statement stands. "3) I read, think, heard it's supposed to do this. Why doesn't it do this!" All they had to do was ask, and accept the answer even if it was an answer they didn't want or hoped for. I mean don't get it twisted there are things I think woulda been cool but aren't being incorporated. But you think I'm pulling up manuals going "You're wrong because of x,y,z!" Even though I had no idea what was incorporated or not. Nope. I acknowledge it and move on. I'm like everyone else just patiently waiting for the release to play around with it. I can only recommend to you, but since being apart of this forum I've heard people with no experience with the aircraft tell me that I would or wouldn't do things because of their perception. Like I fly the 64. How are you going to tell me I would or wouldn't do things, or what it looks like in x example. Choose your own road.

I'm also no exception, I've been wrong before, and I'm sure I'll be wrong in the future too. Perfect example is the 0 having a dash or not having a dash on the ku. I was at home when the discussion was taking place, my -10 shows no dash, I looked at my procedure trainer program, it has no dash. I woulda bet money that there was no dash. But I still went to the aircraft and just like @Raptor9 said, it has a dash. We all get things wrong sometimes. I had two sources that said no dash, but behold the aircraft has a dash in it's ku 0. So that's a perfect example of tm saying / doing something that isn't exactly right.

Well maybe this is the exception but I promise you that they’re here and are active, I don’t know a single person who’s involved or has experience who doesn’t want to help people with the module. My go to is if I landed at an airport and were showing people around the aircraft (yes we do that) if I wouldn’t tell you there I won’t tell you here. If I or they won’t expand on a subject shouldn’t that be pretty explanatory that it’s sensitive? Like I’m active on here and I’m happy to divulge down any really open non sensitive area, so the information I conclude you’re looking for is the sensitive stuff. The excuse of well what’s it really hurt? It could be nothing or it could be everything. Do you really need to know to accomplish a good time in dcs? The answer is no. I have yet to see an official site with a downloadable tm that’s accessible for the general public. So to me it’s not been officially released, maybe I’m wrong. In addition transferring real life to a sim is almost impossible to generate 1-1, because a computer is taking data to simulate something say that a hydraulics system would do etc. that’s an example. So because there’s not an actual hydraulic line with fluid, the computer replicates that. It doesnt all transfer over 1-1. There needs to be an understanding about that. Which is why I would recommending waiting for the ed manual. Referencing true open source info is great and I think it should give you the ammo for what questions to ask, but you should recognize you also don’t have all the pertinent data even with a tm or old gunnery manual so it doesn’t give an individual an excuse to demand something they don’t fully understand. The issue becomes when people familiar with the platform explain something and the people who are not willingly remain ignorant or naive. Which is fine, and by all means call me toxic if I give you an answer you don’t want. But we still call it the tads, regardless of what you read or the cool promotion video. I’m not pointing the finger at you @WobblyFlops, more of a statement for the masses. My hope is people will read this, be able to ask questions to help Ed and the smes improve the module, but also have realistic expectations so that they have a great time and not worry on why the delta doesn’t have space engines or something. Im personally very excited for the module, to share portions of my world with peeps. I hope everyone who messes with it finds it enjoyable. I’m sure the smes feel the same.

People are going to complain anyways. So hopefully you have the correctly dated TM. But the TM isn't the end all be all. I'd suggest if you have question of a difference between whatever documentation you're sourcing to ask. There quite a few SME's who have flown this specific version and model as their daily job. There are people who can help with other things like myself who haven't flown this specific model (I feel like I've been pretty open about that) but alot of the things are similar enough that I can explain. With access to supplemental information. Just because you don't get the answer you want doesn't make it wrong. I can read a book on carpentry but I 100% don't know more than a 15 year carpenter. So if I had a carpentry question regardless of the book I read, I'd probably lead off with a question. But I'd still bet that people are going to complain. Argue with the SME's, or people who actually fly helicopters, or maybe perhaps one of those people who fly 64's but not this specific version. TL,DR: If you have a presumption that something might be off, just ask the question rather than demand.

I’m a little unsure what you mean by this.

3) I read, think, heard it's supposed to do this. Why doesn't it do this!

People are going to complain no matter what.

That’s one thing it does I guess.

TBH with exception of a few, most of our maneuvers are very simple and extensions of basic maneuvers. Taking advantage of things that aerodynamically occur in a helicopter. I like your idea, you're gonna have to practice the basics though, then understand how to correlate them too your maneuvering flight if that makes sense. It's not all yanking and banking

I had opportunity to hear about the mission in person from Gen Cody and a few of the pilots who were apart of TF Normandy and flew it from their point of view, one of the things interesting was how they got the aircraft approved for non standard configuration and them taking off well over max gross. Where there's a will there's a way. Now I could be mucking some of the details, it's been a while and a lot has happened so I might be combining missions. If there's something I said that's grossly off lemme know, but regardless I still think that mission is definitely one I'd like to see.

I'm gonna pick a little bit at your ruins immersion part. So they used GPS nav to get to the release point via 53's. 53's dropped a chemlight marking a predetermined point where the 64's could realign their INU's. Due to the nature of the target and the amount of rehearsals, each crewmember knew exactly what they were going to strike, in fact 95% if not all of the mission was done with 0 comms. The only way they were able to accomplish this was due to the rehearsals, so that rules datalink out because you would have all the targets already, and you wouldn't want to transmit. Now IDK if they had the function at the time if they would have used it or not. It's half of one dozen of the other, but I think you could have just as an immersive experience if you wanted to. Drop the 53's, put the appropriate targets in the mission editor if that's a thing IDK, and don't use datalink. Just my opinion.

Everyone has different goals and intents, maybe the AH isn't for him, and that's ok.

That's the book

That sucks if that's true, still enjoyed the book though.