lmp

Start the left engine and switch into external view - you'll see the right engine spooling up. Works the other way around as well.

If the autopilot is at the edge of its authority you will not get a uniform response to your stick inputs throughout the whole range of movement - if that makes sense. So yes, you want the autopilot adjusted before landing. Just make sure you ask for it before you leave ETL and flare. You don't want to worry about it when you're trying to slow down to a hover.

The Huey is a post-Korean War aircraft and our specific Huey is in a 1980s configuration IIRC. So that makes Vietnam/Korea rather irrelevant in this discussion. But we're not discussing which GPS would be a good choice for the Huey but rather, which aircraft would be a good choice for the set we already have. A GNS 400 for example would make more sense for the Hip, since the COM/NAV controls and screen real estate of the 430 are effectively wasted. Or a 155XL which was installed on Polish Mi-17-1Vs. And how does this support not putting the NS 430 we have on our Huey? I don't understand. The entirely optional GPS set doesn't prevent you from doing any of that. At the same time, somebody else might find joy in learning the ins and outs of the GPS set in their favourite aircraft. Because using the F10 map is 100x more immersion breaking than having a realistically recreated GPS set that - even if it hasn't been done IRL or not very often - can be realistically installed on a Huey with relative ease. Of course that's a very subjective opinion, but hey, if you don't agree, you don't have to buy the GPS or you can untick the option for the Huey in the Special tab if you want it for another aircraft (all that of course hypothetically, if the set ever makes it into the Huey) and use the F10 map instead. That would be a win-win solution, don't you think? Everybody plays the way he likes. I would agree with the realism concerns if the GPS was forced onto us, but it isn't. We don't have to use them, much like we don't have to use the unrealistic RS-2US missiles or gunpods in the MiG-21bis. Here are some other arguments why Huey specifically: The Huey is rather mediocre in the radionav department. Consider the campaign that came with the Mi-8. It took place almost entirely in South Ossetia, which has no VORs or NDBs. Not a huge problem in the Mi-8 - a pen, some paper and the doppler system will get you where you need to be. But if you flew it in the Huey, you would need to learn the map really well. Possibly the COM and NAV radios could be married to the 430, increasing it's functionality? Development would be in house, no need to coordinate with another 3rd party.

The Huey would be a logical choice.

How about we start posting new bug reports in their own individual threads? This one will get hard to follow soon...

Interesting, I need to try that, thanks!

I don't remember exactly, 30nm maybe?

It seems to be strange. I created a flight plan with three user waypoints (0001,0002,0003). I took off and tried to intercept the first leg (0001 -> 0002) about mid way at a right-ish angle. At some point, before I got to either of the waypoints or the leg connecting them, it switched to the next leg. I switched it back and followed the flight plan to the end, passing the last waypoint. Then I inverted the flight plan (so now it's 0003, 0002, 0001), and it immediately switched to the second leg (0002 -> 0001). I tried to switch it to the first leg, but it kept switching back.

Yeah, I noticed the HEAT S-8s are more accurate than the HE rockets I usually bring. Yesterday I created a Fast Mission to test the new GPS and decided to attack a Grad battery. The mission spawned me with S-8KOM and GUV pods. I figured the KOMs wouldn't perform too well because of their low splash radius and I would have to finish the targets with the machine guns. To my surprise in my first pass I fired two salvos and they went exactly where I aimed them. Then in my second pass I fired another salvo into the last vehicle killing it with a direct hit. Unfortunately soon after I took a 125mm APFSDS round into the APU compartment... long story short, we had to walk it back to the airbase ;).

So if I'm at Batumi and I go to the NRSTaero page, whether I pick Batumi, Kobuleti or Kutaisi, it'll always show me the information for Batumi. The ILS frequencies are being chosen correctly (though they are inserted into the COM standby frequency rather than the NAV standby) and at least the NDB, Intersection and User waypoints pages work correctly. I wasn't able to test the VOR page because it only lists one VOR.

Oh, you'd be surprised how many older machines get upgraded this way - and not as private initiative of their crews, but as a part of serious modernization programs. For example Polish AF MiG-29s are equipped with a Trimble 2101AP set, while Army Mi-24s and Mi-17s fly with a Garmin 155XL. The MiGs were part of Baltic Air Policing and the helicopters fought in Afghanistan that way. Putting an off the shelf, civilian GPS on your 1980s machine is great bang for the buck so this happens everywhere. Some air forces try even cheaper solutions ;) No, I meant over the radio. Sure, it's not as nice as being able to send your position with a few clicks, but "41° 49' 12'' N, 44° 3' 49'' E" is a lot more precise then "20ish km south of gori I think" ;).

Knock-Knock, if you know anything about OTHER planned expansions for the Mi-8, please point me further. I can't seem to find anything about them in the NS 430 section.

From today's news: Wonder what's that all about?

In Open Beta I see only the option for Mi-8. I believe the L-39 is available in stable.

The ABRIS cannot be used to correct the PVI-800.

I'm using my twcs throttle HAT to control the right knobs and while this works well for moving the cursor on the map, switching pages is nearly impossible. A single short press of the button will move the knob several clicks.

It's no ABRIS for sure, but it'll get you where you need to be without you having to worry about line of sight to a beacon or fiddling with the DISS coordinate calculator. At the same time you can have accurate range and bearing to your bullseye, create anchor points on the fly and be able to exchange position information with other pilots easily. I don't understand why you're so dismissive of the value of even a civilian satnav in a military aircraft.

Just so you know, I had the issue yesterday but today it worked fine. Some elements of the map scrolled, others didn't. I'm not sure 100% it's related to the track up setting, but switching back to north up fixed it yesterday. Anyway, thanks in advance for looking into this.

Well, I see plenty of tactical uses for the new GPS despite being able to navigate fine without one.

If you change the map display from north up to track up, moving the cursor towards the display border won't scroll the map correctly.

Sooo... can we count on the module being released today? :music_whistling:

The L-39 is good for perfecting your flying. There's no SAS to correct for sloppy, ham fisted manoeuvring, no CCIP to aim your weapons for you, no autopilot to lessen the workload etc. If you want to fly and fight in it well, you will need to be attentive and precise. On top of that, the radio navigation suite is pretty good. You can practice precision and non-precision approaches, point to point flying... will it directly help you learn the Hornet? Not really, you might improve your "virtual airmanship" a bit, but you can do that in the A-10 as well. The Albatros just tends to make any deficiencies more apparent.

I asked because, to the best of my knowledge, emergency locator transmitters generally operate on either 121.5 MHz (standard international emergency frequency for civilian aviation), 243 MHz (military) or 406 MHz (modern digital transmitters). Your ARK-UD is meant specifically to home on ELTs and it has the first two frequencies preset. If your server host insists on using 460 kHz (probably because that means more DCS aircraft can home on it) then yes, you could use the ARK-9 radio compass.

Why did you choose those particular frequencies?

Mind you, I'm no air combat expert, but here's what I learned flying the MiG-21: The AI is not all seeing. Its situational awareness is perhaps a little too good but it won't see what it can't see and you can sneak up on it. I did offline GCI intercepts against F-4s and F-5s and they didn't know I was there until my missiles connected. The trick is to not trigger their RWR (the "old" F-5E - not the BST F-5E3 - doesn't even have an RWR so you can paint it with radar with impunity) and to fly against the ground when in front of them, since their radars don't have lookdown capability. Attack from behind and below - they'll be easier to spot against the sky and you'll be harder to spot since they'll have their own aircraft in the way ;). Limit the use of your radar (unless it's the old F-5E you're fighting against). Either turn it on at the last moment or not at all. The above "tactics" worked in a MiG-21 against American fighters but I don't see why they wouldn't work in reverse. If you can't sneak up on the enemy, be prepared to dodge those missiles. Get low, break his lock. Beam the missile and launch chaff (you did remember to turn on your chaff launcher, didn't you?). You'll be at a disadvantage initially but the R-3R isn't that hard to fool. Just don't let it surprise you - if you fly into it, sure enough it'll kill you. Try to make it to the merge and regain the initiative.