TripRodriguez

But do we have actual confirmation that the new DCS ka-50 will have equipment that we are fairly certain it has never been equipped with in reality, including those few still in active service today? Because the real debate is whether or not ED is including "fictitious" aircraft in DCS world. In my opinion as long as there has been at least one aircraft with the same equipment in active military service at some point in time it is legitimate. If there was never a single one in service with that equipment it technically shouldn't be in DCS. I wouldn't be super critical of stretching that a bit, but adding a third hardpoint to each side of the Hokum would be be going too far IMO.

Kariyann71 could you share your setup for the OVRLay? I have no idea what I'm doing LOL, but I'm just trying to see my leap motion (and/or Vive Tracker) hands in DCS. I don't want my hands to operate anything in DCS, I just want to see them in 3D so I can find switches more easily in a real cockpit. Any help would be very much appreciated, and I know there are others wanting the same thing.

But.... that post neither states nor implies that all Ka-50 helicopters built were prototypes... nothing there contradicts anything I said. The fact that it became obsolete before many were built changes nothing about its operational status in the mid to late 90's.

Eldur I'm glad someone enjoyed that comment. =D

What I find really really strange is that Leap Motion themselves don't just make it a native SteamVR device. Seems like such an obvious thing to do....

Maybe I should have been born Russian! I too have a fondness for duct tape and zip ties. Also I recently saw Russian engineering described as building prototypes until something works and that is absolutely the way I do my engineering LOL. I edited my post to include my guess that the photo was a Ka-50N or Ka-50sh prototype at the same time you posted LOL.

LOL nice. I wonder when that photo was taken, Ka-50 with a glass cockpit. Maybe one of the night variant prototypes? Mind you I much prefer the old fashioned way. =D

I did say I will read those posts later :book: and that I'm willing to accept that Wikipedia may very well be incorrect, so no need to argue it out again regardless. :thumbup:

Also, I'll be a little surprised if we see those additional hardpoints added. I've got a pile of Ka-50 photos and none of them have a third pylon. Some of the photos certainly look fairly recent. I mean... look at those trees. They didn't make HD trees like that in the 90's! :megalol:

Ok, my reply was lighthearted, and this one is friendly, but DISAGREE!!!!!! Before I start, when I'm not 12 hours overdue for sleep I'll read the posts you referred to, I would like to see what they have to say and I would guess that their info is more credible than mine. My info comes from Wikipedia, which I know some people criticize but most of the time when I really dig deep I find Wikipedia was accurate. If what those guys know differs, I'm going to go tell them to edit Wikipedia! :D The Ka-50 only barely went beyond a prototype, but it did go beyond a prototype. Ka-50 was authorized for active duty in 1995. Initially 12 PRODUCTION copies were built and then production halted due to the collapse of the Soviet Union causing financial constraints. Later on three were built from incomplete airframes. 32 total Ka-50's built, 15? of which were actual production aircraft for use in the field. Neither night attack variant ever entered "full production", whereas the original did. Other stuff I've seen online stated that there are Ka-50's still on active duty today, generally as radar equipped scouts. So, since there were at least 15 "production" aircraft and they were put on active duty, I say the Ka-50 is real (if rare as hell) and the Ka-52 is a different aircraft rather than the final version of the Ka-50. That last bit is my opinion mind you, but I see it like the Hornet and the Super Hornet. One is the evolution of the other but both saw active military duty so both are legitimate. In reality there are probably only about ten times as many production Ka-52's as their are production Ka-50's. Not all THAT huge a difference. =) But, as I say I'm willing to accept that if people who really know their stuff say this is incorrect they are almost certainly the ones with the right info.

:noexpression: :chair: Ka-52 is the dumbed down version for people who can't drive and shoot at the same time. =P The seats are side by side because the Ka-52 was built for hand holding! J/K, I think the Ka-52 is badass, but I love that the Ka-50 is single seat!

Excellent, thank you very much for the very thorough answer. I personally prefer the old setup to the glass cockpit so that's a non-issue, and the thing I love best about the Ka-50 is that it was designed for a one person crew so there's no need to use AI or switch seats. That being the case, I don't really care about the Ka-52 being added, though it would be cool to see it done and I'd certainly buy it if it was available. To be honest, I'll continue to buy all the helicopters unless they outpace me which is unlikely I think. I'm most looking forward to the AH-1, but still there's that two person crew thing.

I'd say it just needs to be debugged, and isn't getting enough dev time. I'd go for a payware version if it's easy to use and reliable. Unfortunately Driver4VR Leap Motion support is also apparently a mess based on what I've read. I didn't buy it to try since lots of people were asking for refunds for that software.

Well, perhaps I'd consider trying again but I fought with SDraw/Driver_Leap for hours the other day and it was a frustrating experience. It was extremely unreliable as far as the virtual steam controller appearing, and to use it in DCS I had to hold my hands up in front of my face as soon as I click launch on the DCS.exe and keep them there until DCS loaded up or I'd have no controllers at all. That technique was recommended by the developer of the driver. Then again, that video is only a month old so maybe worth another try. Sometimes it had one controller active, sometimes six! And as you say, there's still the problem with DCS which hopefully they will solve but I don't want to wait without knowing if it might be years until they fix it. I will do a bug report on it and see if I get any response.

Agreed! But for me (cockpit builder) all I need is to be able to see my hands, I'll be operating real switches but I'm tired of having to feel around for them because my hands are invisible. I'm chasing this down via multiple channels, now I'm about to check out the program this guy said he was using to do the overlay since an overlay is all I need. I'd like to be able to use Vive Trackers though, as well as Leap Motion.

Sorry to ask, I don't have time to read the entire thread... what is the last we heard on the Ka-50 update? I have read a lot of the posts here, so I know from you guys that ED have been putting all their effort into the cash cow jets. =( I'm just wondering if there's been any hint of anything since the expected update by the end of 2018 didn't happen. Just so we are clear I'm not complaining, just hoping that there's been some kind of word since. Also, to weigh in on the "updated shark" topic, I actually prefer older technology as I think it's more fun and interesting to use. That being the case, I don't particularly want that glass cockpit version, but I'd certainly support it's being introduced so long as we also get a nice update to the original version. I do agree that we shouldn't be given a Ka-50 variant that doesn't exist, but if there is a glass cockpit version out there and ED can get enough info to do a proper job of it then I think it's a reasonable wish list item. But to be clear, I prefer the older equipment! Let's get the original Ka-50 up to current standards. Everything else is optional.

I just realized you may have misunderstood me. I want my hands in VR, I just don't want them to move switches unless I squeeze a trigger or grip. So if you mean just leaving the hand controllers off, that's not an option for me I'm afraid.

I need to see my hands, but have them not move anything when I touch the panels. Think there is anyway to do this on our end or am I at the mercy of ED?

I have the same problem, I was doing all my testing in the Ka-50 I thought it was that my right hand was doing it and the left hand was ok, but now that you pointed this out I imagine it's just that I was using my right hand for stuff on the right side and left hand for stuff on the left side. Either way, unintended button presses are a BIG problem so I think we need to figure out how to make sure this bug really gets ED's attention!

Thanks I'll try to check that out. Last night I noticed my left hand was not activating switches as I touched them, but my right hand was. Something like you describe could be the answer. I might have to try to dig for patch notes from when the feature was implemented, but I don't know when that was so I'll have to put my Google-fu to work. EDIT: Just found another thread about this. He said it's that the switches on the right side work without a button press, the ones on the left side don't. So my left/right hand observation was probably incorrect.

Is there any way to have the VR controllers not activate controls unless you squeeze the trigger (or something.. anything)? I can see the current setup of touch to operate being an option, but probably not the default and certainly not mandatory!

I'm still chasing this. Tried playing with Reality Blender but it's definitely not good enough (because of the lack of depth perception) to improve my immersion. Leap Motion still seems like the most likely option but the free driver for emulating controllers was a real headache. I haven't tried Driver4VR, tempted to buy it and see if I have better luck. Another MAJOR problem there though, I need to be able to "use hand controllers" without them moving switches! I don't know what ED were thinking making the hand controllers active without a click, and giving no option to disable that mode and require a trigger press. Other than that, I'd be back to trackers. They have a ton of potential, but I'm concerned that due to my cockpit moving around the trackers will lose sight of the base stations all the time. Especially using the lower right panel in the Ka-50. Still though, most of the time when using the side panels it will be on the ground or while in level flight or a hover so I could probably manage to set up the base stations so that they have full coverage when the cockpit is sitting level at mid travel. Still likely to have issues because of the no-click controls though. More experimentation required.

Thank you for the links Sokol1_br I will have to give this a close look and some thought to see how bad I want it. Crazy that it's not something available considering it appears in both a US and a Russian aircraft. I thought probably I just needed to know what it was called and I could find it (although probably too expensive).

Ok, so in the Ka-50 there are two of the type switches I'm talking about on the upper panel. Lights (nav?) and wipers. There's another on the right side, that one I think is formation lights. The upper two are four position. I think the formation lights may be five but I didn't make a note. Also in the P-51 one of these is used for the weapon selector switch.

I'll get more details later, but just to describe: It looks like a normal old fashioned toggle switch, but instead of just up and down, or up/middle/down if I'm not mistaken they are usually "off" in the middle (like a normal three position toggle) but instead of going just up or down from there they go to say... something like 2-o-clock, 6-o-clock, 10-o-clock. In effect it's basically a rotary selector that looks like a toggle switch and has an off position in the middle.