Sandman1330

Everyone is correct, there are no dynamic forces in helicopter controls, with one major exception: light turbine helicopters like the Jetranger and EC120 (I use those as examples because I’ve flown them) when the hydraulics are failed / turned off. Movement of one control will cause bumping and resistance in the other. Larger helicopters like the B412 are completely uncontrollable without hydraulics, and most smaller ones don’t have hydraulics at all, so the light turbine class is where you see this the most. All that being said, this small use case probably isn’t enough to build a whole control setup around!

Oh, you are not alone! https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=162243&highlight=Save

I did contact them directly, and friendly. The experience was positive, even if it wasn’t my desired outcome. I’ve actually reached out to them again, pointing out this thread and others with people having this covered outside of warranty. I’m waiting to hear back.

Huh. My right earphone failed about a month ago, it’s the earphone itself not the ribbon cable, confirmed by swapping sides. I’ve had it for 2 years on the nose, and Oculus support said I’m on my own to purchase new phones. I didn’t make a fuss knowing that it’s out of warranty, but while I’m happy for those who have had this covered 2+ years post purchase, I’m disappointed in the double standard...

I feel the same way, there’s another thread on this topic: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220980&highlight=Mk20

I had the same problem. It’s tough to stay under 10K and still roll in with enough time to drop before the break x cue!

I’ve been able to do it. Those things have killed me enough times in the A10 and Huey, I love getting my payback against Tunguskas! Note that it shows up as S6 on the RWR.

The 9 line format is used by a JTAC (aka FAC) on the ground to control close air support by aircraft. Close air support is when the ordnance is to be dropped in close proximity to friendly forces. The JTACs job is to ensure the pilot engages the correct targets, without endangering the friendly forces. Even if the aircraft is equipped with a targeting pod, this does not negate the need for a JTAC and brief when in close proximity to friendlies. The 9 line format is standardized and provides all the necessary info to do this. It can be seen in game when you use the AI JTACs, and is as follows: 1 - Initial point 2 - brg from IP to target; 3 - rge from IP to target; 4 - target elevation in MSL; 5 - target description; 6 - target location (grid); 7 - mark to be used; 8 - location of friendlies; 9 - egress direction Remarks and restrictions: may include mandatory attack headings, time on target, weapon to be used, etc. Mandatory readbacks are lines 4,6 and remarks.

“Available now in the Open Beta” And you still don’t see how some people interpreted this as available now? Maybe you should read instead.

If you are looking for hands on, I think the Tomcat will be your winner when it comes out shortly. Harrier is pretty hands on too. Me, when I really want to fly raw I go helicopters or WWII birds, but the Tomcat sounds like it will be a handful to fly well.

Thanks! I did read the brief and kneeboard, and did see the remarks about landing order, etc. My question is once the tanker goes off station, can I fall back and fly off the wing of the AI, or do I have to remain at the tip of the wedge formation? That's exceedingly difficult (hard on the neck!) when I'm flying off someone at my 5/7 o'clock.

Hey BD, always loved your campaigns! Question: I just started the demo Mission 1. Am I supposed to be flying lead or wing? The wingmen don't follow me, they just fly straight and level, so if I'm supposed to be lead I find myself flying formation over my shoulder off the guys behind me. Is this correct behaviour?

Are we sure it’s not available yet? It sounded like it was in the news to me. Just yesterday, while doing aeros in close form in the CE2, I inexplicably lost my elevators, but we didn’t collide and the other guy had no damage. Wake turbulence may explain this?

Negative. I already paid for Huey multicrew when I bought the module, which has openly advertised multicrew is coming since inception.

This! The gazelle is the closest thing we have, but a AI tanks are sharpshooters with their ATGMs and outrange the HOT3.

Wow! I wonder how many attempts that took...

From my observations, I think DCS treats chaff much like flares - a decoy that the missile goes after instead of the real target. This is why it works while beaming. In reality, I think chaff is best employed when placed between the missile or tracking radar and the aircraft. Chaff is designed to create a large return that the radar beam cannot penetrate, allowing the defending aircraft to manoeuvre clear of the beam and thereby break lock. I don’t think it works this way in DCS, since tracking radars don’t seem to be modeled correctly (with a very narrow beam).

Same issues, CTD with no log file when using external views.

Yeah, I’ve found sometimes it works and sometimes not. Didn’t know about the Mach limitation, maybe that’s why!

He asked for ED’s official response, not to restart the whole argument over again...

Could be the home fuel caution. It uses your current fuel flow to calculate fuel required to make it to your home waypoint, so sometimes it will deedle deedle on and off when you work the throttles. PITA on a carrier approach!

I get dud on occasion too. Assuming you’ve correctly set up your fusing, switch mode to CCIP then back to Auto, usually solves it for me.

If you’ve used the Stennis (and not the Vinson), perhaps it’s your graphics settings? I’ve noticed when I play on my laptop and have to turn settings way down, the carrier gets ugly.

Are you using an axis for your TDC? Does it look like the video in this post? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=227481

It eventually worked for me. Longest 46mb patch ever! Haha