Razor18

Youtube, but not the best quality though...

Hi Gents, tried to look it up here, but didn’t find too much: any mod or setting that makes the writings around the STEER and PAGE knobs on the AAP more readable? THX

Thx, will try.

Hi Guys, I'm pretty sure I did everything as requested, but time hack just doesn't start for me. Pressing HACK, entering 0-1-0-0 then pressing ENTER puts the value 01:00 in the bottom row framed alright, but I can't return to normal by pressing HACK again. Pressing ENTER again also doesn't do anything, so HACK function seems to be frozen for me from this time on. Anyone else or any advise?

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3321132/

Caring to look back in this topic also had the explanation...

OK, I will proceed then...

Hi, I just bought this, and despite clearance to 21L, Biff keep trying to land on 21R, then always goes missed before flaring, full throttle, turning right downwind 21R, and start all over again. Got tired of it and quit mission after his 6th attempt. I'm on the latest beta. Any chance to fix it?

Page 245 in the manual.

And how much degree you can correct by rolling "diagonal" on a 2-3 km long, 100 m wide runway? 2-4 degrees?...

I rather wait with flaps until 170-180 kts to avoid ballooning...

Speed changes by what? By changing collective?

I am not native in english, but AFAIK "upcoming" refers to the future point in time, so no surpsrise it wasn't implemented yday evening... New features always come out in upcoming updates.

Nothing speaks against that. I would simply try it out in practice.

The more your main rotor is tilted backwards (aerodynamically), the more force is "pulling" your helo backwards. This force decelerates your helo. If you keep it that way all the way until your speed is zero, you are already late to the party, because you will only stop for a second, as with your stick back the main rotor still apply huge decelerating/backward force, so you will immediately transit to backwards flight after stopping. You can see the diretion and strength of this "force" on the Transition (and on the Hover) symbology, when you look at the small circle, that is wandering around the centre. So as you near stopping (I would say around 30 kts, after applying more collective to compensate loss of transitional lift, you should start push the stick forward again to bring the helo back to neutral pitch instead of nose high attituda, so by the time the helo stops, there should be no more backward rotor tilt/stick pull, and the small circle should be in the centrer, or as close to it, as possible.

It allows you to take your hands off the stick, and the helo will hold that attitude (pitch and roll). It is rather speed hold, because you can still increase or decrease altitude with collective, but speed will barely change.

Sure, you can start with continuous.

Gents, I dunno how much anyone ever went just a bit deeper into physics, but once again, if both aircraft with the same load, fuel, same drag and mass, and both has the same throttle setting (let is be full throttle for simplicity's sake, because 100% can not be increased any more, and this was the starting point in my OP yesterday at 3 p.m.), you can. not. gain. on lead. in straight climb. ever. No matter how steep or shallow wingman or lead climbs initially or later on. It's physics. I rather leave it at that, before someone answers a completely different question again. Of course I warmly welcome any honest track proving otherwise. Maybe a TacView file would be even more telling with all the parameters displayable.

Again, if both are to the firewall, only larger changes in heading help wingman to catch up. And if you have a long straight leg, then without lead reducing throttle, wingman will NEVER catch up. BEcause he has just as much thrust as lead. Simple. What you say about wingman climbing less steeply to catch up with lead totally defies basic physical principles. Sum of energy is kinetic (speed) + positional (altitude). If you gain on one of them, you will loose on another (if in full, or at least the same throttle setting for both the whole time of course). If both are in full throttle, but lead climbs more steep, then yes, lead will have slower ground speed for the time of steeper climbing, but will gain altitude obviously quicker, than wingman. So wingman will momentarily gain on him regarding forward position, but will never catch up with his altitude. And if wingman will start to climb after gaining some distance on lead to catch up with altitude, then wingman will slow down just as much as lead slowed down due to climbing, so in best case scenario, he will arrive to the very same (sucked) position relative to lead, where wingman started attempting to gain up on lead. I would rather try it in multiplayer with 2 A-10C same parameters, wingmen being "sucked", full throttle, and try gain on him in climbing. How would you gain in climb any more, if you couldn't even gain in level flight, as described above? Track would say more than thousand words could.

You can gain in turn by cutting corner (not too much in a check turn tough, especially if lead is turning away from wingman), but please explain, how could you gain on lead who is on full throttle and climbing??

So you say you can close on lead in an A-10C (as originally asked) if lead is flying max thrust?...

...with lead firewalling the throttle?

DId you try changing brightness and/or contrast?

To avoid making mistakes as lead, it's a best way to fly wingmen a LOT, so you can experience (and later remember of course) all bad things a good lead shouldn't do. If lead expects his wingman to keep formation, he NEVER should firewall the throttle (except for any emergency/tactical situation), because the wingman obviously has just as much max power as lead has, with no extra margin to catch up in case being sucked or stripped. So lead's firewalling conserves wingman's "misalignment" reg formation. And every change in flight path or speed should be pre-announced, if you want wingman to anticipate and follow your move as lead in a timely fashion. The closer, the more so. Sorry if being off-topic.

I might be wrong, but as far as I can remember, TSE calculates (most importantly?) the lead values, if you shoot "sideways" with your gun, especially if both the target and your helo is moving, and not even necessarily in the same direction. From constant lasing it can determine the target distance, direction of movement relative to the helos movement direction, and speed of movement, all based on distance value changes and the time intervall between those changes. It's like a police speed gun but in a 2D speed and vector calculation environment. So it can predict, where the target will be after the time of flight for the gun rounds, so calculates lead and holdover with the gun barell while CP/G simply keep the crosshair on the moving target. Please correct me if I'm wrong.