Viersbovsky

Voted Thunderbolt. At the moment I love the Dora, but on the American side I will definitely be driving the P-47. Rugged, loads of firepower, speed - what´s not to love?

First off: What is your background in programming and electrical engineering? I am just going to assume you are completely new to all this stuff, feel free to roll your eyes at me if that is not the case. A microcontroller itself is just a chip, the Arduino usually use Atmel 8Bit microprocessors. In essence, the Arduino is just a breakout-board with all the necessary peripherals to use that chip – a clock source, power supply, all the necessary electronics. The Arduino is simply a beginner´s board that tries to make everything as simple as possible. You don´t need to solder, you don´t need a programmer. You don´t need to setup a toolchain. Arduino is a brand, there are now many knock-offs or projects inspired by it. The philosophy is that you have a complete package: you can program the board with USB without a separate programmer. You get a simple programming environment where you can compile your code. You get libraries for simplified use of the microcontroller´s functions without having to directly mess with the registers. I would get the Leonardo, because it can be used as a USB-device. This means, that it can be programmed to simulate a Joystick or any other USB-device, perfect for your homepit. What you will need: An Arduino for about 40 bucks, a USB cable, a breadboard and breadboard cables. Buy a resistor set, leds and breadboard compatible switches and buttons. There are some starter-kits that have all the necessary stuff, but usually they are overpriced. Just Google for Arduino starter tutorials, there are hundreds online, most have a parts-list. You should start simple like getting a led to blink, then switching the led by pressing a button, then getting the led to change blinking frequency by turning a knob etc etc etc. One important thing is that a microcontroller has a limited number of IOs. You will need port expanders or use techniques like matrix circuits if you have more than maybe 24 switches or leds. The amount of IOs depends on the Arduino-board. Welcome to the world of timer registers, interrupt handlers and pull-up resistors! Once you have the hang of it, you will realize all the limitations of the Arduino platform. This is when you take the training wheels off and use the Arduino as a normal Atmel microcontroller – you buy a cheap programmer (15 bucks) and use the GCC compiler as well as a proper integrated development environment like eclipse or atmel-studio. Oh, also, Hempstead made a sophisticated library for using arduino due boards for homepits and joysticks. I think you will first want to mess with the basic Arduino to get to know what microcontrollers are about, then switch to his solution if you are so inclined. You may not be able to make a clean switch though, as the Arduino due is based on a completely different microcontroller and generally runs at 3.3V instead of the usual 5V of the older Arduinos. Advantage of the old Arduinos though is that they have been around for quite a while and are based on very popular chips, so there is loads of documentation floating around the web – the due is way faster though. As for your project, that is exactly what I am planning to do, unfortunately I have not yet had the time to get on with it.

The Arduino is a micro-controller. It is used to control systems and has inputs, outputs. You code in C, then upload the program. Microcontrollers are used in Joysticks and other relatively simple systems. You are very close to the hardware. You have memory in the kB range and maybe 8-72mHz clock. Raspberry PI is a microcomputer. It runs a Linux and you can do most you can do with your regular desktop PC and netbook. You can even run Quake. It has some additional IOs though. Using the Pi to control some lights and switches for your homepit may be overkill. Usually a microcontroller is enough. So in short: Arduino: Joystick, Warning light panels, electro motion control, etc etc etc Raspberry PI: Central control for a Robot with vision systems, everything that needs the power and flexibility of a regular PC.

It seems to catch at about 10-20 degrees deflection. Look at the outside view, it snaps, no, jumps to the straight position as soon as you get the tail-wheel almost straightened out. @Rodd: Use the toe-brakes to get the aircraft to roll straight while pulling the stick back, it will snap. Just a little hint, don´t use the brakes during landing or takeoff to try and stay on the runway. The propwash is strong enough to turn you, the brakes will only get you killed. Oh, also don´t instantly push full power on the Dora - do it slowly, in 1-2 seconds. Way less tendency to attempt to jump off the runway that way-

You need more practice, simple as that. I have gone from making hundreds of craters at takeoff and landing to taking off and landing successfully 90% of the time. With more practice, I think even that will improve. The key to landing is to pull the stick when descending until you are in ground effect and the plane wants to go up again. That is the moment you ever so slightly center the stick and you should touchdown without bouncing up again. And by the way, the K4 is supposedly harder to land, because it has a narrower wheelbase. This supposedly killed a lot of rookie Luftwaffe pilots.

Inertial moments... Or in layman´s terms, how easy it is to turn that crate.

"o2-Wächter": lit. "O2 guardian": "O2 Indicator" "U/min": Umdrehungen/min: "RPM" Shaping up nicely!

Flying choppers as well as taking off and landing in the Dora and Mustang with only a twist-stick is perfectly doable with a bit of practice. You will be somewhat less "accurate" however. I am leaning towards upgrading to pedals too however, so I am also looking forward to your recommendations.

DCS world is free to play and comes with the free SU-25T and the Mustang training version. The A-10A is an older version of the Warthog with older systems and less electronics. The A-10C is the newer version with electronics advanced electronics suites. BUT the major difference is the detail level: The A-10C features a fully click-able cockpit. Almost every button does what it does in the real thing. You can click through the menus of the on-board computer, change settings for the bombs and missiles (launch mode, lase time, chute open altitude etc etc etc). It is highly complex simulation that is as real as it gets. The A-10A is a model is on par with the free SU-25T: You get a 6dof cockpit, simplified flight model and no click-able cockpit. Most everything is simplified and the controls fit on most joysticks. So, if you are unsure just install DCS world and fly the su-25t free of charge, the A-10A is on the same level. If you want to see what the A-10C is like, there are numerous videos on youtube. Also, the A-10A is included in the flaming cliffs3 module, where you get the su27, su-25 and f-15 as well.

Good, but this are the 3 Settings for flaps (there is no landing): "AUS" "START" = "Takeoff" = "TKOFF" or something? "EIN" Gear only has 2 Settings, I´d go with "RTR" and "EXT" as you suggested. But that is all up to Gözcü to decide.

According to the website approximately every 30 minutes. Yaw drift might be way more severe, though. It is really itching me to build one of those, sounds like a nice weekend project.

:thumbup: That is good to hear!

Ah, sorry, was talking about the F-15. It still seems strange that it turns only ever so slowly (about 1/3° per secoond). Indeed, it is no boat, so the effect of the AoA of the fuselage is less, but this still seems somewhat extreme to me. As I said, I believe the forces generated trying to straighten the aircraft out just completely overpower the forces which would actually turn the aircaft.

Well, I wish that by pushing that button I could annihilate those pesky Mustangs on my 6 instead of my own ride. -"FT-Angela" should be FT-System Don´t know about that "Control" button, since it can mean both to "check" something as well as "command/steer" something (that´s one of the common "false friends" when it comes to german/english translations). So could be "Check" as well. I have no idea why it is called that way, but some technical terms from back then were pretty weird. - "vorderer Behälter zu" literally "front tank closed" /front tank valve closed, I´d go with "rear tank only" - "hinterer Behälter zu" literally "rear tank closed" /rear tank valve closed, I´d go with "front tank only" Factoid:"Not" means emergency At flaps and gear: "Ein/Aus" does probalby not mean "ON/OFF" but is rather short for "Eingefahren/Ausgefahren" "Retracted/Extracted"

I have not yet tested this, but if it is true, then something is significantly wrong with the flight-model. For example, if you yaw the airplane to the left, then the engine exhaust will be pointed slightly to the right (in comparison to the original flight path). That means that thrust will keep pushing the aircraft forward, but a small fraction of the engine power will also push it to the left. So the aicraft should at least slightly translate to the left. Or does it at least slightly translate to the sides when rudder is applied? edit: Just tested it. The plane deflects in either direction only about 8° and as soon as the rudder is set to neutral it jumps back zo 0° deflection. The plane actually keeps turning veeery slowly when full rudder is applied. My theory: There is no lack of a force like fuselage sideforce but there is actually a force that tries to push the plane back into 0° yaw. It becomes stronger the greater the deflection is, and at +-8° it becomes greater than the force caused by the rudder. edit edit: Imagine it like there is a force that tries to turn the aircraft *into* the wind.

Sounds like you had fun!That seems like the next best thing to me (no stick time, but at least in the pit). So you still have one flight ahead of you, lucky you!

Just to get this a bit less direct: - increase/decrease should be climb/sink - airplane anihilator should be emergency self destruct - Marker lamps are position lights Stuff you have yet to translate: - "prüfen" means "check" - "vorn / hinten" means "front/aft" or "front/rear" There are some other inconsistencies, but I will have to look up what the original german wording was. Feel free to ask if you are unsure, I bet a lot of native speakers would be glad to help out.

Same here, Mig 21 takes veeeery long to load for me, and sometimes even crashes (rouhly every fifth launch gets stuck on loadscreen). Other planes take a slight bit longer to load than before too, and now also sometimes crash, but more rarely. edit: I have an SSD.

Great find! This might explain why no matter how hard you strain your eyes, some targets seem to be invisible when approached until you are at about 4km - they really are. I hope someone can do some tests with boxes visible form all directions and with all kinds of colors - as well as ED chiming in on this find. *edit* That´s reassuring, sithspawn, thanks!

That sounds awesome! That reminds me, my father (a professor at a technical college) once got a helicopter training flight from his pupils as a present. He could fly the helicopter as co-pilot and got a fair bit of stick-time Unfortunately, this is no longer legal (the co-pilot must now at least be in pilot training), so I will never get to do the same, thanks bureaucrats! Make sure to take many pictures and have fun!

This should be an option. As said, some people have no toe-brakes or other axis left for the brakes (X-52 and no pedals users like me) so steering without assistance becomes rather dicey. Yet, this should not be to the detritment of people with the neccessary equipment who want full realism. Just make it an option like take off assistance and auto-rudder.

As has been said by countless people above me, please add an option (like takeoff and rudder assistance in other modules).

Interesting, but it is only 3DOF, I take it? Maybe this can be combined with a more primitive version of Freetrack to get the translational movements. This way you get smooth rotation and absolute translation, similar to how Occulus Rift does it. Otherwise, no bloat on CPU and can be easily implemented since it is a joystick (also, no problems with headtrack dll), I like it.

It runs pretty smoothly for me with 30fps on ground, 50 in the air, better than the Mustang (which runs worst of all the planes I have, 15-35 fps). My System, if that helps finding the bottleneck: 8GB Ram, i5 2500k 3.3Ghz, Geforce GTX560Ti, Asus P8Z68-V LX Mainboard, Installed on a Samsung SSD, Windows 7 64Bit So what does my system have that the other´s with very low fps don´t? Also on a related note, the MIG missions take very long to load, at least three times as long as those of any other plane. May this be related, does anyone else have this problem?

Have just watched it, very nice! You know what you are doing and have a pleasant way of presenting information. Really looking forward to this module, will be the first air-to-air plane for me.