wernst

absolutely right. Don’t get me wrong, gospadin, I’m not complaining about F10 option. It’s just the opposite. The DCS player may choose his way of authenticity. With NS430 or not, with the aid of moving map or not. The NS430 module and F10 function can easily be switched off and on.

"Why?" Because you have a choice to use or not, it’s not implemented in the original module. It’s an add on. If you don’t like “fiction”, simply forget it. Why must people tell others how to act and play “correctly”, in order to be truly authentic? I know hundreds of real warbirds which have been updated with modern GPS navigation. An extra instrument on the panel doesn’t spoil the fun and joy of flying these authentic birds. Because authenticity is controlling these birds in the air, you’ll feel it on the stick, not when looking at the panel. And: no real warbird has a F10 button with moving map. This is fiction.

nice art, but for what is it good? How can I make use of it?

If you have purchased the NS430 modul have a look to the MI-8 training folder. There are two interactive NS430 trainings. 1. device overview and 2. training FPL Quite helpful to start with.

“tutorials for the new. . .” , “trainer from Garmin” , “GNS430 simulator” Why wander in the distance when the good is so close? Look what is in the TRAINING folder of the Mi-8MTV2 after NS430 installation: - NS430 decvice overview - NS430 training FPL Truly helpful to start with.

yes, it would be great to have the NS430 on a second screen. I was disappointed seeing the small size of the NS430 as it appears on the front panel (of the Mi-8MTV2). It’s way too small to be operated safely.

same here

Good that you letting us know how you did it. I wonder why I was obviously the only one (from the numerous applauding audience) who had doubts. But I was wrong in the sense that I was assuming your are smart in video editing. No, your solution was even smarter. Bots. It’s another example for bots and fake news - fake aviation news.

yes, I did refuelling myself and in mission hectic I wasn't aware of that jump. As I didn't save my track I foolishly was looking at Shkval KO-06's video only. Yes, it's coding. When the probe is positioned almost to the center of the basket the basket seems to "grab" the probe and immediately fix it to the center - there is the jump. Question answered. No reason to suspect brilliant skills.

Thanks for the invitation. Is it France? Great, even better. But still I like to get my simple questions answered first. Why time jumps? Don’t you see these jumps?

ok., but what about the more than clearly visible jump with each contact? If this is not a time jump, what is it? Why is the video just jumping here? It would be interesting to see this "magic moment" when probe meets basket hole, smooth and slowly. But this magic moment is missing.

And all I can say for sure is that there is an unnatural time jump (more than clearly visible) from probe being very close to the center of the basket (but not yet in contact) to the final (snap in) contact. Seamlessly, unnaturally, no smooth cinematic transition as a true live action would show. Not even a professional editor will see here this less professional cut. It’s not really "dupe", but let’s say: "Shorten an awful long period of trying to immediate success in order not to bother the audience with lengthy scenery".

It’s a nice job . . . done with the aid of some video edit? Look at the moment just before the refueling probe gets in final contact with the drogue basket. There is always an unnatural time skip (jump) from the moment when the probe is very close to the center of the basket (but not yet in contact) to the final (snap in) contact. The procedure to let the probe snapping into the drogue basket is of course the most difficult and time consuming procedure of air refueling. But just this (sometimes awfully long) time from the moment the probe is very close to the center of the basket to the moment when it really snaps in is missing in all levels. One example can also be seen clearly from outside view at 1:41. Nonetheless flying in very close formation with another aircraft needs much skill especially when “wake turbulence” is considered. It’s impressive to see is how fast the pilot gets in sync to the ideal refueling position and stays stable there, regardless in which (crazy) manner he approaches the tanker. But here again, I have some difficulties to understand another observation in the video. When probe is in final contact with the basket there is some strange dislocation between the center of the basket and the tip of the probe. Even considering the perspective the center hole of the basket and the tip of the probe should stay more or less one above the other. Attached are 3 images were a strange dislocation is visible. (taken from video 1:37, 1:50, 2:14) What is it? While I’am sure about my first observation (jump in the video) I don’t want to speculate here for the reasons behind my second observations. Maybe I'm seeing ghosts here. Can somebody comment?

Chute dragging in this sim is much overpowered, not even near to reality. Or carrier desk is sticky - but how and why? Any glue? I did quite some Su-33 carrier landings; some of them were smashing touch downs (“Oh my god” type) but the sim was forgiving. My stomach tells me that the DCS sim of carrier landings is more forgiving than sim landings on a normal RWY. (Of course I wasn’t in game flight mode). As real pilot a like landing challenges, if you like see my other Fw190-D9 spot landing clip here: (sorry, this clip didn't get any cinematic cut)

I couldn't have said better. . .

You may try it yourself. Of course, this kind of extreme high AoA and extreme low speed carrier approach is more than hazardous, it’s luck if you succeed and survive. Approaching an airport with high AoA and low speed (both at limits but still safe) I could slow down the M2000C to ALMOST stop after 350m, only dragging chute deployed. It took 8 seconds, not 3 as on the carrier and not 20 seconds as in real life. Without chute it’s the question in which manner you apply wheel brakes (and how much brake repair costs). Again, the only issue which I want to report is that M2000C carrier landing is possible, but with the given FM of the sim only. No Mirage pilot will never ever try it in a real mission.

The result of my test flight does reflect the properties of the sim flight model (FM) only. I was already saying in another post here that slowing any real MIL jet to full stop within 3 seconds (equals 200m here) with the aid of a dragging chute is simply impossible. Here 2 examples from real MIL jets which are deploying dragging chutes. After Mirage F1 touch down the jet rolls more than 20 sec with chute open. The landing roll of Eurofighter here was also more than 20 sec. A dragging chute can slow theses real jets to full stop within 20 seconds or more. The M2000C simulated dragging chute slows the jet to full stop within 3 - 4 (!) sec. This can’t never be real.

Is there any useful substance for us in this grandiloquent reply . . .?

Each parachute jumper knows that it takes at least 2 seconds after the chute opens until it generates its max drag (accumulating enough compressed air) Here 2 (of many other) examples of MIL jets deploying dragging the chute After Mirage F1 touch down the jet rolls more than 20 sec with chute open. The landing roll of Eurofighter here was also more than 20 sec. But in the sim the M2000C dragging chute stops the jet to full stop within 3 - 4 (!) sec. Is it real? Not at all.

In this special flight cockpit view would have cinematic meaning only. The extreme approach configuration here is the key to be shown: very low glide slope, low altitude approach and extreme high AoA for speed as low as possible. (IAS at touchdown was 124 kts!)

"Yes, signal officer". Low glide slope (low altitude approach), high AoA for speed as low as possible. You have to touch down at the very beginning of the RWY with spot landing (IAS was 124 kts at touch down). A spot landing with a glide slope of 1 or 2 deg will increase speed and bouncing after touch down or crash. Give it a try yourself. Don’t forget, it’s all about the FM of the sim. The real delta wing M2000C is by design not qualified for carrier landings.

Landing the M2000C on a carrier seems to be some challenge. I calculated length of the carrier (Carl Vinson) vs. landing speed. And did some tests to learn the effect of the dragging chute on landing roll. (carrier speed 30 kts, head wind 11 kts). Results: It seemed to be somehow possible and I flew some carrier approaches. To my own surprise I was able to get the Mirage down safely after the third try. I didn't apply neither wheel brakes nor speed brakes, the Mirage stopped after about 200m. . . Hmm. I think it's not possible with the real bird. The real dragging chute won't slow down the plane within 200m.

But this setting works in mission editor only. With INS it's not (yet) possibble to assign a WPT as "LANDING" type. No problem, I can live as it is now.

Yes, thanks, works now. WPT has to be "LANDING" type.

No, unfortunately not. In APP mode - with gear up: waypoint info (distance to, no.) on the HUD - with gear down: no waypoint info on the HUD anymore