Focha

You're welcome! :thumbup: The idea of not overloading the map is important of course. But that also have to do with the scale you choose for the icons and alphanumeric characters. Rough numbers so you can make a figure, in a 1:500.000 scale map 30' of latitude measures more or less 11 cm an NDB icon should measure more or less 0,5 cm of diameter (this must depend on the time of map of course) and each character 0,1 cm in length and 0,2 cm in height. This are just rough figures and not a rule. And from what I saw from your map they are fine as they are. Maybe just using a lighter blue so it can be seen more easily. About the roads, I forgot to tell you that the major roads are in fact red and the secondary ones are dark yellow. You can use only MEF, it will work fine for the purpose it has. About the coordinates of the highest peak, I mean the highest peak of the whole map and not of a lat-long graticule. That would not overload much the map. About the quantities of bridges icons there are, in my humble opinion I would just put the major or larger ones (I don't know if they are different in the simulation). This is because if you have a blue line that is a river and a red/yellow line which is a road over the first we could presume that should be a bridge there. And that way you would finish up with a cleaner map. Another thing is the fact that city/town areas are all there. To make a VFR navigation good you have some principles for selecting the best features of the ground; It as to be large, but not so large that you could not pin point an accurate navigation point, i.e., you can have a large city or large lake, but you have to pin point an intersection for example or a large road. It has to be unique so you would not mistaken that for a similar feature on the map. If it has some vertical extend it's better and towers, masts, mountains make perfect visual checkpoints. You said that you will include TV towers, COM towers, sea oil rigs, I think that is perfectly enough. You already have the NDBs there, those also help in VFR flight, let's hope ED will put a VOR/DME or VORTAC. And contrast, but this one is always changing, even with clouds. This tips are to be used by the pilot when planning and plotting the mission but the map should also help the pilot on this one. The low resolution map you release it's great for the purpose it will have. You just need to retouch some aspects of it. About the frequencies, don't forget that in Black Shark it's possible to select the tower frequencies. Also in BS it's possible to ident the radio transmitter thence the need for the morse code. Ok mate, anything you need, I'll do my best to help you. Regards.

The shortest is more restrictive than the longest. In real aviation it's always best to know the more restrictive than the least for obvious reasons. Also I forgot to say on my post, the map can be Lambert, Mercator or Polar Stereographic. They all have different properties and projections. The most used for medium latitudes is the Lambert Conformal, it looks like the projection you have in the low resolution map. You may ask, what is the importance of this? Well, maybe it's not so important when you plot a route with small distances, but if you plot a straight route from an extreme of the map to the other one you would notice that the track heading that you start with is not the same when you finish. This have to do with the meridians convergence. Plus, this track it's not a great circle, meaning that it's not the smallest distance you would travel. But again that can be disregarded for small routes. As long as the lat-long graticule is correctly scaled that shouldn't pose a problem. Anyway if you have anymore doubt be sure to ask and I'll try the best I can do. Best regards.

Hi there, Just passing by to say that you are doing a great work and I am glad to hear that ED is supporting your project. You asked a few posts above what we would like to see in the map. Well I presume this map is for VFR navigation. I don't have any knowledge on specific military VFR maps apart from topographic ones used by the helo guys sometimes but I have some knowledge on civil VFR navigation maps. I download you low resolution map and I already saw that you have quite a few characteristics that should be in a VFR navigation map. You already have some maximum elevation figures there what you should do and I think this was already said is to have grid minimum off-route altitude (grid MORA), i.e., the height of the greatest obstacle in a lat-long grid plus 1000 feet below or 5000 feet (non mountainous area) or plus 2000 feet above or 5001 feet (mountainous area). Those are two numeric figures MORA = 9400 feet in the chart should read 94 with 9 being bigger than the 4. You also should put the biggest elevation with a square box with bold numbers inside it and the coordinates of it. Map should be with a correct scale and with a graduated scale line which you already have. Don't forget that latitude should be accurately graduated because 1º of lat is equal to 60' of lat and 60' of lat is 60 NM. Map should have generally the following colors; Water - Blue Woods - Green Roads - Red lines Railways - Black lines Large cities - Area of the city in yellow Small cities/town - Sometimes a circle in yellow and the circle diameter representing the relative size of the city/town (at least on Jeppesen VFR map) Other colors you should put in the legend. I saw on your map that you already made a legend. For the obstacles figures there are a bunch of them, you should try to see a VFR navigation map to see them, some are; Unlighted, lighted, group unlighted, ground lighted, radio/tv tower, oil rig, wind power plant, water tower, cooling tower, etc. There is also waypoints and routes on a VFR map, although I don't think this is of importance on a map like you are doing, those are; compulsory report points, non-compulsory report points, reference point, VFR transit route (with magnetic bearings and distance in NM). Then you should also put there airport information and navigation information. I saw on your map that you put the name of the airport plus the elevation. To be a little more complete you should put the following; ICAO Location Indicator Location name Airport name Elevation and shortest LDA (Landing Distance Available (m)) Callsing with communication frequency For the sake of simplicity I would say that you should put the following; Airport name Elevation Tower frequency For navaid you should put the icons of the navaid (NDB (Locators if they are used for navigation, VOR, ILS, etc) plus the frequency, identification and morse code. Also very important is the isogonic line, this is the line with the magnetic variation, although I don't know if this is modeled within the simulation. If it's not, then it's not necessary or if the true North is different from the magnetic one at least putting an arrow with the variation. Some maps also come with a few tools, in the case of your map I see you integrate a height conversion scale. You can also put there speed conversion with time marks, morse code table, cruising levels, etc. Also there is a place with all the airports, navaids, relevant obstacles and all contain lat-long coordinates. I don't know if this helps you or you already knew all of this but this are only my 2 euro cents on this one. I don't recommend you putting anything on the map that can vary with mission, that's why the maps are laminated for and you use markers pens to make bullseye etc. I hope I helped you. Best regards. EDIT: Maybe this helps you, http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083495/VFR-Chart-Symbols http://www.scribd.com/doc/2083488/VFR-Chart-Guide http://www.avn.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/aero_guide

Hi there guys, I've been flying with SU-25 but it's extremely hard to spot ground targets, specially those that are inside cities, even if they fire at me it's hard to see them with full zoom, it's odd because in FC1 I could spot them more easily. Is there any graphic settings that turns spotting easier? In SU-25T is easier and in A10 it's just pretty simple if you carry some mavs. Best regards and thank you for the help. :pilotfly:

Are there any latest news on the A-10C? What is the status on that one? Regards.

This would be a great detail to be part of the FC2. Regards.

When you say limited, are they limited how? Limited by times you can install and remove the simulation/program? I believe that when you run out of activation you can contact ED and you will have more activations, at least I think that for FC was that way, I run out of activations and just sent an email, they gave me another number of activations. So I don't understand the limit you are talking about. It's a bit of a pain when you want to install the program and you see you run out of activations and have to wait for it. Other than that it's OK.

No it is not, so you are right. It is in the "DCS-BS_Key_Commands_Ka-50_real_eng.pdf" that is on "Doc" folder in the main Ka-50 folder. That was what I was talking about. And yes, read all the documentation or learn how to do a proper search on the forums. And don't laugh... It's not my problem but some day we'll see 15 topics about the same thing in this forum. Regards.

I am sorry, I am not here to be hard on you but it sounds like a good excuse to not search a bit and loose some time searching. Learn this for life, in every complex simulation you should always read the keys and what they do and even print the layout if you can. And using the search function took me about half a minute searching for it. I just choose "Search Titles Only" and used "pilot" in this forum. The 5th result was what you needed. Regards.

Mmm... Yes that's interesting. With all that system simulation, one little detail, like the OAT gauge, shouldn't be to hard to do... I like to think that it's INOP and the MMEL says "time to repair indefinitely". lol

For me, by priority, rotaries all the way, don't mind being attack or utility, I voted for the utility because that would bring new interesting missions on CO-OP, UH-1, UH-60, Mi-17, CH-46, etc. For the attackers, AH-1W or T, AH-64A, Mi-24, Mi-28. Then I would go for fixed wing attackers or multi role fighters, A-10, Su-25, F-16, F18, etc. Finally I would go for superiority fighters, F-15C, Su-27, etc. Regards.

I am reading the "Low Level Hell" and it's really great so far. A different era from the "Apache" one. If you read the "Apache" before you read "Low Level Hell" it makes you think how far we came in helicopter technology. Read "Chickenhawk" too. About A-10 ones I don't really know. Regards.

So is it gonna be any video of A-10C soon as there was with Ka-50? Thanks. Regards.

AH-64A with stingers and cannon. I am sure that would kill some 29s and 27s drivers... XD

Hi there guys, Is there any reason for the lack of Ka50 multiplayer servers? Where is the 159th server, is it still working? Why there are so many servers passworded? So basically where one can have online fan destroying some tanks and flying with some mates? I was a bit away but I remember that 159 was the best one! Best regards to all.

Being not familiar with night vision equipments, why do you guys say this is the best NVG effects that you have seen in a game? I saw the ArmA and ArmA II NVG effects and by comparing it to some photos of the real one it's pretty credible. What do you guys say that it is a good effect if not the best one comparing it to that game and reality? Best regards.

Oh man... you just show us who is the noob... Respect it and if he is annoying there are other ways of telling people instead of starting to shoot at it. Or try to explain the "noob" that he is locking into you and it's annoying. Starting to make FF and TK it's not nice and you sure deserve the kick. Plus this is not the kind of software where you would say noob. I bet you do not know the 4th item on the Before Start Engine checklist or what to do in a main hydraulics failure, so that makes you a noob right? Or there is some standard for being a noob at this? Just my two cents trying to tell you to respect other people so they can respect you, someone said that you know how to deal with noobs, I say that you probably learn the lesson, guess you ruin your fun session on 159th server just because of that noob, guess you didn't know what was coming in your way. Kick! Regards. :smartass:

That is debatable IMHO... At least the part, "(...)you have to make do just like the real pilots must, and execute similar types of missions. "

Yeh... You are right but I guess there is more people on the fighters than on the helos. You will see that there will be more people and servers on A-10C than on Ka-50. But yes comparing it to games in general both are a niche market compared to what it was some years ago. Regards.

Hey... Well I already talked about the Lynx and BO-105. But the fact, or am I really off, is that ED will never do it. But if they release the tools needed for the work we never know if people will make those kind of helicopters. I think ED after the AH-64A will try to reach the fighter community, and I think they should do it because that way they will remain active. Helicopter community in my point of view is a niche. And that is not true with the fighter community. A-10C will bring more people too. I think ED it's in the right direction but those tools available for the public would be awesome and the promise of some high quality third party add-on being release in behalf of ED I think it's a great motivation to do top quality add-ons. So let's hope that ED still want to deliver the tools so people can make AH-1's, Lynx, UH's, Mi's, weapons, cockpits, etc. Regards.

Yes I would like to see transport helicopters. Some examples; UH-1N UH-60A CH-46D CH-47A Mi-8T Mi-14PS Mi-17MD Mi-17V5 Mi-26 (why not? Should be fun enough! LOL) Another thing I would like to see is recon helicopters. Some examples of those; OH-58A (that would be really good with the AH-64A!) ANSAT prototype (LOL!) It would be great if ED would release DCS tools. Then people could make really good material because there are a lot of talent out there. Regards.

I guess the new A-10C module will go well along with this new setup; http://www.simw.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_product_details&pid=2185

I'm not a Black Shark expert, but it makes sense if the APU is like a turbine. When starting up a turbine you have a peak of temperature when you increase the fuel and the RPM is still low and then decrease when the air and fuel start to mix in the proper scale with the increase of RPM, so when the turbine is stable or at it's optimum RPM there should be a lower temperature than at the start. If there were a maximum at the end of the start, then something was wrong. Regards.

Why not? The best path in my humble opinion it so try to make both pits coop and implement a system of invitation, then if you are a pilot who wish to fly alone with AI you will not have your pit open, but if you want some human as CP/G you would invite someone, or vice versa, if you want to become someone CP/G you would place a request and the pilot would accept or reject. Something if you what a pilot to fly you. I think that would be the way. AI can be pretty stupid, even the most unscripted advanced one, so it's always welcome to have a human CP/G with you if he really want to do that. For me that way it would be great, and switching sides each mission. You are right, I forgot about that. What I mean in general is that the pilots workload is a lot more than in the D version (I guess, although the workload in D is heavy too). Regards to all.

Mmm... I don't care about the anti ice on the rotor blades and that extra power... AH-64A is able to carry hellfires and thirty mike mike anyway. :joystick: Plus it must be more challenging that D, pilot don't have those MFDs that shows him what CP/G is seeing. Ah... it will be cool for sure if they ever make it.