AlphaOneSix

Wow, I really appreciate it...I always wondered what happened to her after I left. As an A-model, she was mine from 1990-1995 (C/1-3AVN at Hood then C/2-101AVN at Campbell).

I dunno, if you look at the tail wheel before he hits the pedals, it really looks like they have some inadvertent "extra" left pedal in there, and at 3:31, they take that pedal out and straighten it up. Also, re: 5088, did Rucker also have a 5086 that you remember? 5086 was mine for almost 6 years, before it became a D-model (it was 84-24234 as an A-model previously).

Not possible to damage the engine if the governor (EEC) is on and operating properly. I don't think the game models EEC malfunctions, so unless you have the EEC off, you can't hurt the engine. EDIT: I am assuming that your heavy engine demands are transient. That is, if you fly for an hour at max power, then yes, you will damage the engine.

Thanks for that. Of course, the "demo" is not a bounce at all, no matter how many sound effects the TV show adds to make it seem so. And of course, there are no "springs" in the skids and there is also no "springiness" to the skids and they will absolutely not help you take off if over weight. I have no doubt that the pilot who made that statement fully believes that he bounced a Huey off the ground to get it into the air, but I can assure you that it just didn't happen, at least not in the way that he describes.

I've heard this before, can you cite a source, please?

Minigun, since the AH-1G never had a nose-mounted 20mm. The 20mm cannon that is sometimes mentioned will be a fixed gun pod that goes on one of the wing stores.

Very nice! Under the PVI-800 panel, the switch labeled "INU" and "UPDATE" is misleading. I know it's this way in the English cockpit, but it's wrong and has just never been corrected. It is the INU update switch, but it should be labeled "I-251V" or "SHKVAL" on top, and on the bottom it should say "OVERFLY" or "FLY OVER" or some made up abbreviation that means the same thing. On the gearbox oil temperature gauge, the slanted red line should be a straight line that matches -15C. It's only like that in-game because that's what the cockpit picture looked like when they photographed it. In reality, it is suposed to show the lower limit of gearbox oil temperature, and shuld be straigh just like the other red lines on those gauges, and at the -15 mark.

Besides the normal navigation lights (red on left wing, green on right wing, white on tail), does the (real, not in-game) Su-25 have any flashing or rotating lights or beacons or strobes? And if it does, can someone tell me how they are configured? (e.g. one white strobe on each wingtip, or maybe one red rotating beacon somewhere) And finally, in the case of strobes, what's the pattern? (e.g. blink-pause-blink-pause or blink-blink-pause, etc.) I have a feeling that someone who reads this forum would know this, and it would help me a lot. :) Thanks!

You can make a bookmark for the New Posts link that excludes every forum that you don't want to see. It's kind of a pain to set up, but after that it is easy to maintain. Mine looks like this, for example: http://forums.eagle.ru/search.php?do=getnew&exclude=20,24,25,26,27,28,30,31,33,35,37,39,42,43,44,45,49,50,52,54,61,62,64,73,74,79,81,84,85,98,99,100,109,112,152,172,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,144,145,172,199,257,275,295 It will require you to click on every single forum and sub-forum and make a list of all the forum id's (the number after the "f=" in the URL).

Mi-8, as mentioned, is immune to mast bumping, as are all helicopters with fully-articulated rotor systems.

Mi-8MTV-2 is armed (typically). Mi-8MTV-1 is unarmed (typically). Otherwise they are identical.

Same. Those charts will work. An Mi-171 is an Mi-8MTV1.

While I think it would be more secure to not send the key in an e-mail, I also think that the security threat is being FAR overstated. Nothing is lost when you have a key stolen, unless you count the time it takes to receive a new key when you are out of activations. ED has been quite good about replacing keys up to this point, I don't see a reason to expect that to change.

The range wasn't set right, or at least I believe that was the problem. I'm actually not sure, but I've seen other videos where the same thing happens and it's a range issue. They might not have missed by much...just enough to be out of the field of view, for all we know.

On the AH-64, there are two glass windshields...the one in front of the front seater, and the one above the front seater. These are made of safety glass and are similar to what you would find on an airliner, for example. Thicker than a car's windshield, but not designed to be ballistically tolerant. All of the other windscreens (the four on the sides and the one above the back seater) are simple acrylic panels like you find on a typical helicopter or light airplane. As mentioned above, it relies on armored panels and an armored seat to protect the aircrew. Not perfect by any means, but a lot lighter than having armored windows. Oh, and here is a video where the back seater gets shot...although it doesn't happen until about 13:00 into the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BArp6RVgZ9k Somewhere earlier in the video (from the other Apache's perspective) you can hear the radio call saying he's been shot.

Yeah. No ballistic protection whatsoever.

I know all of this, but it's after 1988, so I use the new lettering. Everyone hated calling them Mods, Prods, ECAS, and MCs. Nobody called them by "Step" names, at least not in the military. AH-1S (MOD) --> AH-1S AH-1S (PROD) --> AH-1P AH-1S (ECAS) --> AH-1E AH-1S (MC) --> AH-1F

You and me both!

Well, an S model would certainly save time over making the F model, since the G and the S have a lot more in common, and if all people want are anti tank missiles, then sure, an S model is the way to go. But you do get a lot of things along the way... After the S, the P model added another engine upgrade, plus radar altimeter, radar warning receiver (a biggie for DCS fans), "flat plate" canopy, and composite rotor blades. The E model improved the sighting system and the rocket system, and the big one for DCS fans, the M197 20mm gun. Finally, the F model adds in a laser rangefinder, HUD for the back seater, ALQ-144 IR jammer, and a better exhaust heat suppressor. So like I say, if all you're looking for is the TOW missile, then the S model is all you need, but going up to the F model gives a rather large number of really great features that make it actually worthwhile on a more or less modern battlefield.

The lettering system of the AH-1 modifications is weird, but the F is the most modernized single engine AH-1. The S model still had miniguns in the chin and the rounded canopy. The E and F models had the M197 20mm gun. The only mods the S model really has over the G is the TOW system (with the new sight unit) and an upgraded engine.

Those are just the control heads. The transceivers are elsewhere. Either pilot can talk and listen on all three radios. The only catch is that, for example, only the pilot in front can change the VHF frequency, as he is the only one with access to the control head.

That is correct. I don't know how the Ka-50 hydraulics work specifically. On the Mi-8, all the hydraulic equipment is colocated, so in the event of a mechanical failure, the other system takes over, no problem. However, it is not very resistant to battle damage. In other words, for the Mi-8, battle damage that causes one hydraulic system to fail has a decent chance of causing them both to fail. Maybe the Ka-50 suffers from a similar issue? I don't know. I will point out that lots of helicopters with dual (or even triple) hydraulic systems have several places where damage could cause all of them to fail. It really just depends on the nature of the damage. It would be nice, however, if on occasion one of the hydraulic systems would continue to work on the Ka-50. ;)

If the hydraulics fail, the autopilot system shuts off. It requires hydraulic system pressure to operate (in the case of the Mi-8, it must be the primary system, the backup system cannot operate the autopilot). Also, the actuator goes into "manual" mode and, in theory at least, is able to be manipulated without hydraulic power. In practice, this requires so much force that it's not practical. In the Mi-8, the emergency procedure for a dual hydraulic system failure is to prepare the crew for bailout. For example, I am able to operate the pedals on an Mi-8 without hydraulic pressure, but it's not easy. I can also operate the cyclic if I brace myself and use both arms. Of course, I cannot operate either fast enough to effectively fly the aircraft (note that I've never tried in the air, obviously, just on the ground). I'll try to find a digram I have of the actuators, although my diagrams are for a KAU-115 model booster from the Mi-8MTV-5 and newer aircraft. I believe that the Ka-50 uses a KAU-100, but I'm not positive. I don't know the specific differences between the Mi-8 actuators and the Ka-50 actuators.

With hydraulic pressure applied to the hydraulic booster, it is, for all intents and purposes, in a permanent state of hydraulic lock and can't move at all. When the control rod from the pilot's controls move, a shuttle valve inside the booster is displaced. Depending on the direction of this displacement, hydraulic fluid under pressure is allowed to enter one of two chambers within the booster, while simultaneously, fluid from the other chamber is allowed to return to the hydraulic fluid reservoir. The autopilot has its own shuttle valve, but acts in a similar fashion.

The stick does not move with autopilot input. Or at least, it should not. The flight controls in the Ka-50 cockpit will not move unless the pilot moves them. This is different from some AP systems on other aircraft where SAS/SCAS only has a very small amount of control authority (2-5%) and acts without any feedback to the pilot's controls in the cockpit, while trim servos have full control authority (100%) and when they move the controls, it DOES move the controls in the cockpit. The Ka-50 and Mi-8 don't have this (well, older Mi-8's with the RA-60B directional control servo does, but that's only in the yaw channel). In the Ka-50 and Mi-8, the autopilot system for SAS (stability augmentation) and the system for attitude, heading, and altitude hold all go through the servo, which has only 20% control authority. Some newer Mi-8 versions (only special-built ones, I don't think they are standard) do have trim servos and an autopilot with 100% control authority, but those trim servos are drop-in replacements for the magnetic brake and trim feel spring assemblies, and are completely separate from the hydraulic boosters, which still have their 20% control authority for SAS functions.