Schmidtfire

Interesting! Will Deka get the correct info and data on all this? From what I have read, only 2 (!) Peace Pearl prototypes was fitted with the western avionics. Incomplete and cancelled around 1989-1990. Im sure Deka can dig up info on individual systems, but maybe guesswork on how they are tied together? Anyways, interesting choice, will buy Day 1

Hmm... Is this maybe a bigger DCS World issue? Several modules calculate insufficient lead when using a radar gunsight. With bullets falling behind target even in a gentle turn.

Im a bit curious about this aswell. Reading instruments, MFD’s, spotting. Currently playing at 1440p on a 27”. But Im contemplating trying DCS on a reasonably good 1080p LED projector, without spending too much on it.

WWII... Korea... sure. But don't forget the 1969 Soccer War. Corsair vs Mustang https://www.flightjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/The-Soccer-War.pdf With the P-51D, TF-51, C-47 (AI), F4U, South Atlantic map.... could be reasonably close and a rather interesting scenario.

Technically, you could probably go low alt level release with HD bombs with a manual release. Put a waypoint over target and a final fix not too far away. Not a great solution but should be helpful for striking targets at night.

Exactly. Emphasis is on nearly. Why would pushing a button make a difference? It is a quality of life feature in the same way autostart/autostop and pre-aligned ins is. Or the ability to remove the radar glareshield. Never flown like that IRL. But that does not count as a type of cheat to get better visibility? Just asking for a quality of life option. Nothing more. Wouldn’t make much difference in terms of gameplay, except the need to manually declare every contact.

No. Not at all. Why would it be cheating? It’s just like auto start/stop, pre-aligned ins and other quality of life features. It saves a button on the joystick (or digging through the radio menu)) There is still a delay between asking for a Declare and getting the answer. The IFF still happens over the radio with EW or AWACS. No radio comms = no IFF

My wish is implementation of a new Special Options setting. If player locks contacts at BVR range it would automatically trigger a DECLARE radio call to the nearest EW or AWACS unit (if present in the mission)

Depends on point of view I guess. If you are just looking to add another module into your collection... Yes, it is on the expensive side. There are other modules with much more features and content. But if you really love MB339 the price is fair and you get a quality simulation of your favourite aircraft. I can only speak for myself but I would be more intrigued to get it at a lower pricepoint. On the other hand, developers needs to get paid for their work. It's not only getting a product out of the door, there are years of upkeep attached when new bugs emerge or graphics that needs to be updated as the DCS engine evolves.

The range of the WMD-7 is not great IRL. Just check the brochure. Target detection at around 20km (or 11nm) with identification at 15-17km (8-9nm). Also worth noting is that Pakistan bought ASEL pods from Turkey instead of integrating the WMD-7. From what I know, only Nigeria has bought WMD-7 for their JF-17's. Maybe Im wrong here, or maybe it's bad press.. But I wouldn't be surprised if our WMD-7 pod in DCS actually overperforms. Especially in terms of image quality and stabilization. Im pretty sure we can identify targets beyond 8-9nm... but need to test that before drawing a conclusion.

Im not sure you are correct. Weapons that concerns ED current (or upcoming modules) are developed by ED. Or do you actually think ED invests both time and money into developing something like the "Cold War" R530 or Super 530F specifically for the Mirage F1? Those missiles are not a concern for the Hornet/Viper playerbase, so Im not sure ED spends time developing them. My guess is 3rd party (maybe with input from ED)

Im ready for the F1M

But.. the propeller, or rather texturing of propeller is why this is a particular issue with DCS WWII in VR. While we can discuss origin of the issue back and forth, the solution is still making the propellers and their textures VR friendly. It works great on the P-51D compared to the other props. I think you might overthink this issue a bit. There are several mods out there to fix this issue. It shouldn't be difficult to add a Special Option for "VR friendly" propeller textures. If anyone could run DCS 90fps without reprojection, we would not have an issue in the first place But we can't and that's why there is a need for a fix. And while such textures might not be used anymore, why couldn't it be an option for VR?

+1

What I really miss at the moment is a Free Fire option for George AI. There are many situations when I am facing large formations of soldiers and vehicles. Sometimes under fire. Gun selected. IT MAKES ZERO SENSE in that situation to designate every single individual soldier, truck and btr. I want George to be able to fire and engage the entire group in rapid succession. It’s essential when using the Gun.

Looking at the little bit of real world footage and screenshots we do have... The monitor always has a very high contrast. Makes a lot of sense too since the system tracks on object contrast. Most likely vehicles and tanks would be very dark against the background, Much darker than even Hobel's screenshots. Just look at the contrast on those trees and fence. Like a silhouette.

Regarding Shkval color. It depends on what version of Television Monitor IT-23 is installed. I have only seen yellow/green-ish appearance from real life footage. Black & White on recorded footage (most likely recorded internally) but not from monitor in cockpit. @Chizh can probably share some more info as this subject has been discussed over the years, but I think ED originally modeled it black & white because they found that new black & white version IT-23VM (ИТ-23ВМ) was installed on the Ka-50 #24 and #25. Since we are dealing with a prototype helicopter, maybe a selection in Special Options for monitor color would be a nice touch?

Is there a way to declutter the IHADSS? On the Hornet, Warthog or Viper the JHMCS/HMCS is very customizable to the point where you can have only the crosshair visible.

Not being an expert but I expected the MK60 to be closer to the MK47. All sources I have seen point to them being rated at the same speed range and altitude. In DCS they have been very different. I have yet to come across a Pilot or RIO interview where they bring up motor differences. Only differences between A and C model. Also found some other interesting info: The AIM-54 can have varying active distances depending on the target size switch in the RIO's pit as this switch changes when the AWG-9's WCS sends the active command to the missile. Target size small sends the active signal at 6 nms Target size normal sends the active signal at 10 nms Target size large sends the active signal at 13 nms Much like the target size settings on the JF-17/SD-10, but I have not verified the source. AIM-54C Speed: Mach 5+ Propulsion: Rocketdyne (later Hercules) Mk47 Mod 1 Propellant type: HTPB Thrust: 13,595N for 27 seconds Aerojet Mk60 (some squadrons equipped their AIM-54Cs with their remaining Mk60 motors) Propellant type: CTPB Thrust: 17,793N for 20.6 seconds

That's why I kept both Ka-50 and Gazelle out of the comparison. For different reasons. That's not the wobble Im on about. Your issue has to do with crabbing. There are guides how to go about it. The "wobble" I'm describing, is when the helicopter oscillate/swings back and forth. Think of a child playing with a simple RC helicopter toy. Or like an apple hanging from a tree - swinging side to side in the wind.

It seems very strange that old helicopters like the Mi-8 or Mi-24P are much more carefree in their handling. Trim it and there is no nasty surprises. Throw the cyclic around. Abuse the collective like there is no tomorrow. If I was a Boeing engineer, I would be very disappointed seeing my flying supercomputer being less safe and have worse handling compared to soviet bicycle chains and steelrods. But again, the FM is in progress. Also it might be that the older modules FM is not as complex as the Apache FM. But I don't think there is any doubt that the Apache is hard to fly in it's current state. But Im all for it, if it's realistic and how the irl pilots perceives it. Keep it sim

Yes! More adjustments please. Would like to see that we can adjust transparency and Reject the information boxes around the crosshair. Also the crosshair is a bit big and obstructs view. Maybe option for something smaller, like the hollow red dot that is on the F-14 w. Jester Lantirn. It always brings me out of the immersion seeing the current Petrovich interface.

I have an extended Virpil HOTAS setup (with curves) and a MSFFB so should be good there. Thanks for info on the collective and past FLY. I will look into it Compared to other DCS helicopters the Apache is very easy to PIO and get into a dangerous jojo-type situation when trying to recover from "Rotor RPM low". Hopefully the FM/SCAS tuning will result in a more enjoyable flight experience (that is accurate ofc.)

Thanks for all the replies! I know it's an Early Access module. However, I have not seen this "wobble" issue mentioned. At least not officially. Several players that I have flown with has mentioned the "wobble", but Im pretty sure that they think it's part of how the aircraft behaves in real life. I just find it very strange that it is less forgiving than older helos... Anyways, glad to hear that the FM tuning is in progress.

So I have had the Apache since the release and I just cannot figure out why it is so difficult to fly. In the other helicopter modules it is pretty much just point and trim. Turning is easy. With the Apache I get this strange "top heavy" wobble effect it, banking from side to side. Especially when coming out of a turn. The collective I don't understand at all. ROTOR RPM LOW! ROTOR RPM LOW! ...yeah, thanks Betty. It's like the helicopter is trying to kill me on purpose What am I missing? Or is it known to be a very difficult helicopter to fly IRL? Because comparing it to other modules it is night and day difference in difficulty.