zerO_crash

No one said it's ok, and it's not left for years, don't exaggerate. Funny you would compare a simulator to buying a house or car. Guess that nails your lack of perspective. In principle, although both purchases, you would never buy an apartment or car at such terms, and it's logical, cause it's a different good and price-point altogether. Again, what are complaining about? Why not complain about Windows, iOS or any other major software that has bugs? According to your, rather flawed, logic, there should be no bugs in those operating systems given how long they have been out.... Also, if you ever buy yourself a house or car, I suggest that you do proper reading, cause no lawyer will consider your "decency". Rather it will be a matter of what's worded and not in a given document or product description. If you settle for the first, then you are in for quite a treat. I am more than eagerly awaiting for this module finished, just as anyone else. I am not advocating for unfinished products sold at full price and left to die. However patience is a virtue, think about that. I will also add that wishing someone bad is not the noblest of things to do. Maybe you ought to apply some of that "decency" you talk about, to your rethoric, and start with yourself before demanding from others.

Hehe, we agreed pretty early on after MIG21Bis released that it is a fantasy-weapon IRL, you would need a single beam radar, like RP21 (not RP22 Saphir), to target the missile. Otherwise if KH66 Grom was simulated correctly, it would behave like Vikhr at the early stage of flight with RP-22 (dual beam radar) until spinning out of range of one of the radar beams. This is one of the few weapons in MIG´s arsenal that were added for fun, and because no other variants of MIG21 will be simulated in the upcoming future )

First of all, not changes are always posted in changelogs, many smaller fixes are not even mentioned while being applied. Again, who ever stated that the attention a module get´s is relative to the price? What you pay for is the complete product, and by that, the amount of work needed to complete the project, i.e. the magnitude of the project. That says nothing about how much work is going to be put in over a specific time. Consider UH-1H Huey, it was released in June 2013 (7,5 years ago!!!), and it is first now that we are getting multicrew (which was announced back then) with proper functionality and depth. As the team (Belsimtek and ED) themselves said, much of the core code had to be brought up to modern standards and rewritten. No one initially could guess how much needed to be done to finish this undertaking. Furthermore, given the nature of software, every new update can break other things. One good example is Ka50 where one of the updates broke laser guidance (for Vikhr) as well as HUD reticule and elevation of outer pylons. It was initially stated that Ka50 BS2 would not receive any updated until BS3, that it would be done in one go with the new release. Again, the new bugs made the helicopter unusable, forcing ED to re-allocate parts of its team to fixing the issue. For this, other projects suffered by extending deadlines. Another great example is MiG-21Bis. Ever since EDGE arrived, it has been a cat and mouse with LN trying to catch up on the ever changing lightning effects introduced practically on a patch to patch basis. This has been going on for a long time before it was finally looking like roughly like it should, but there was still much to be done, and the new upcoming patch has indeed most of the new fixes. For this, their other projects suffered. Point is, there are many standing issues, that date way back to the old engine, issues that are not counted in 1,5-2 years old, but rather 8 - 10 years old. Issues that were on purpose held back to await new engine being released in order to avoid having to work 4 times with updating the same element. Additionally, I want to stress out that this whole thread is a fest of expectations put by consumers on ED, something that ED never promised anywhere, for example your statement with how much a module costs vs. how much attention it "should" receive. Again, stick to facts and what you paid for, and not guesstimation and "I think it should be like X or Y...". Although I agree with the sentiment in this thread, and want the Yak52 to be finished and major bugs be solved, I kinda understand why it all has been taking time. It´s ok with constructive criticism, but this is going in circles now. And again, by people who are not patient and should never opt for a beta product. Stick to final releases, and it will do both you better, as well as show ED whether it´s a good idea to do pre-release business. Just to clarify, I don´t post toxic stuff. If my responses seem harsh at times, it´s because I respond in the same manner that I see a fellow virtual-aviator write in. Mutual respect is not always apparent here (I wish it was), but there are more propper ways to converse than what has been done in this thread. Initially me explaining the "why" for delays, and all of a sudden it get´s personal, nearly fanboism (really?). In that case, I spare no word for pointing out where a fellow aviator makes a mistake in his assumptions. Regardless of the tone in this discussion, I guess the point has come across to ED (considering BigNewy chimed in). Let´s wait and see what 2021 brings.

Nothing was left behind, it´s simply not a priority. I don´t get why you feel the need to write that, when that is exactly what I´ve been explaining to you all this time. It´s not a priority and yes, mostly because of Corona. It might be that there were no updates for some time before Corona occured, but have you heard what is going on over at Belarussia? Parts of ED-team, specifically Belsimtek are from there. Also, you have no idea if there were plans to update it between then and now. As I wrote before, most projects have been set behind, and for example Ka50 BS3 is not coming in 2020 (now previous year), although it was expected to. There are many more modules pushed back, or even put on hold because of that. Is there anything that is hard to understand then? Or does it make sense why things take longer to get fixed? Also, they made the smartest decision to focus on the most popular modules to please as much of the crowd as possible. Makes 100% sense when you consider that everyone wants their own fix to be brought. I don´t feel the need to set anyone straight. Complain as much as you want to, I am giving you an explanation as to why EVERYTHING is being pushed back and taking longer. But writing 3 separate posts stating that: "I will not buy any more modules until you show any progress on Yak52" (Bringing forth the sentiment here), is not very productive nor logical considering it is advertised as a beta (with no other time reference except "decency"), and borderline trolling. This last point is not specifically aimed at you though. Not buying a module in beta is much more effective as it will prove whether practice with pre-releases is lucrative or not. Writing 3 posts about the same stuff does not.

How nice and thankful of you. Or what did you expect, and instant fix scheduled for the next update because "msalama" set a window in his mind for when the complete release of Yak52 should be? Now it's not only coming from me, but someone within the company. Pandemic msalama, do you know what it does on a macro-scale to a society? Given your impatience, I suggest that you only buy what is ever labeled "finished". You've made it more than clear that betas are not for you. Also, cute that you point out the third time that won't buy anything new until Yak52 is finished. However, it would be more strength to it if it came from 3 different people, rather than one.

Timely is a matter of decency, but it also depends on the magnitude of a given project. Additionally, no one talks about being timely during the pandemic, rather, about surviving. I suggest that you, for a change, read what's happening in the world and go outside and look for yourself. This is not an ED-thing. The whole world is in a recession right now. Every single firm has it's projects pushed back, just to survive. And no, sadly, most people here are not CEOs, or anyone in a leading position. This is obviously apparent. You want yours, and that is fair. However given the circumstances, you do not posses the ability to see this from a different point than your own. This is simply not a priority at the moment, as it's not the most popular module. It's only a logical choice that ED makes. Every competent CEO would in a situation like this chose the lesser evil. Yet you argue here and complain. We are all waiting for something to get fixed, every single one of us, but sometimes you need to see the big picture.

Fred, this is how the real Ka50 is designed, yes. It differs here in comparison to other helicopters before it (Russian, American, etc...) in that it doesn't have that logic to use microswitches to disconnect AP by overriding it's authority. It's also the only helicopter in the world (and Ka52) that has such a sophisticated AP with this much authority for the AP to command. There is nothing even remotely close out there that is this augmented, because there is no other single seat attack helicopter out there. If you are fighting AP, then you are flying it wrong, most notably, not trimming enough. This helicopter is fantastic in that it is so autopilot driven, yet can be flown by hand with only the dampeners on and no AP-hold per se. Couple that with the maneuverability of this beast and you have the best performing helicopter in the world, pretty much in every category. It's about understanding how it works. Generally you should fly with Pitch Dampener and Bank Dampener. Those two are mandatory and dampen your input so as to give you filtered, but smooth flying qualities. Those two are always on, flying without them is emergency. With only those two engaged, the helicopter holds nothing, only dampens your inputs. You do not really need to trim here, you are not fighting anything, but you need to make strong moves with the cyclic for the helicopter to be maneuvered to it's potential. Still, the helicopter is incredibly stable and this is how you fly it basic. You can engage the the FD-switch, which in turn will turn off the automatic angular stabilization. Keep in mind that the dampeners are still active for pitch and bank. Again, you don't really have to trim here, the helicopter is not fighting you, and now with FD on, it is incredibly responsive and aggressive in maneuvers at the cost of stability. This is what you would fly in if you wish to maneuver much, again FD can be off, but then you get back automatic angular stabilization, and the helicopter will feel a bit stiffer in lateral movements, something that is countered by deflecting the stick more than with FD on. In reality, you would have stick-forces acting on your cyclic, thus trimming would be recommended here for sheer pilot workload (this is similar for us with sticks that have springs as well). For realism, I still recommend trimming here, but you really don't need to. Now, the two other autopilot channels, altitude hold and heading hold, are two that you can choose independently of each other, and are used depending on what you need at the given situation. If you are flying long in a straight line or engaging a site from a long distance, maybe scouting out an area and need to focus on Shkval, well, then engage the heading hold, and if you wish to change your heading and assign a new one for the AP to hold, use trim button. Alternatively, every time you turn on the AP heading hold, it will hold the heading that you had at the moment it was engaged. Both work, though trim on the stick is more accessible. Otherwise, if you are not doing something that takes your attention away from flying, or not in need of flying straight, turn it off. Same goes for altitude hold, if you need either barometric or radar altitude hold, then engage it then, otherwise, leave it out. This could be for example when you wish to hover in a place, be it automatically or manually. It will relieve you of having to maneuver the helicopter as well as keeping your eye on the collective. This time around, you use collective brake to erase/assign new altitude, works the same way as trimming. Again, you can also engage AP altitude hold, and it will hold the altitude you had at the moment you engaged the AP altitude hold channel, be it barometric or radar. If you don't specifically need it, turn it off. With these channels engaged, you MUST trim and collective brake for every change in attitude or height, otherwise, you are fighting the AP. The only time you would fight the AP here is the heat of the combat, but then you focus on evading and targeting. Still, you are only one click away from having the helicopter fly for you and you able to focus on aiming that 30 mm. If you turn FD-channel on with all four AP's engaged, it will turn off both heading hold, altitude hold and automatic angular stabilization. Now you are not fighting the AP, but you are less stable because of lacking automatic angular stabilization. This is why I say, turn it off, rather than engaging FD with all 4 channels on. That way, you neither fight AP, nor do you lose that important stabilization. Ultimately, think of the trimmer in Ka50 as a microswitch in itself. Every time you press it, it erases your current trim, releases stick forces, and disables stabilization (thus simulates FD switch on), making the helicopter feel very non-augmented and unstable as long as you hold it. The stabilization temporarily shuts off, but the dampening is still there. When you release the trim, everything comes back on, along with a new trimmed position. If you have heading hold on, you will assign a new heading for that channel to hold. It doesn't do anything to the altitude hold, for that you need to use collective brake. In simple terms, you should always trim the helicopter, for every move you make, for every change you do. That way, you will never fight the AP, and the helicopter will feel like a dream to fly. I remember a ED-tester wrote back in the day a post for people who didn't understand the autopilot in Ka50. I will link it to you, and if there is still something you wonder about, I will gladly explain. Remember Fred, if you are fighting AP, you are doing it wrong. It means you must either change the AP configuration, or use the trimmer more actively. This would make even more sense if you hade a ffb cyclic and were able to trim it out of centre. This helicopter is out of this world, just amazing what Kamov pulled off with it. The often mentioned obstacle of fighting AP is not an existing problem at all, if a pilot has the right technique and knows the autopilot inside out, like real pilots do.

Fred: If by hold, you mean holding down the trimmer, then by any means, no. There is no counter force by the system at that point. By engaging the trimmer, you are indeed simulating a situation where FD is on, for as long as the trim button is held. Thus, no countering input from AP Or do you mean AP hold engaged? In this case, if all the AP dampening/stabilization channels are engaged (except FD), then yeah, the AP will zero them out by inputting and equal and opposite vector on the cyclic. This is if your movement is within of AP's 25% authority. If it is outside of 25%, then AP doesn't have the authority to moderate your stick inputs and you are in command. You can test this out in DCS. If you make minute inputs, the helicopter will indeed change it's attitude to begin with, however shortly after, the AP will counter that and bring back the helicopter to it's originally trimmed attitude, and thus speed. The reaction there is slow on AP's side because the reaction, as per the design, is rather gradual so as to avoid abrupt forces on the stick, and helicopter movement. Merry Christmas to all by the way

No you are, you have first and foremost nothing to back up your statement. Even the manual states against you! You have no idea what you are talking about! Mil and Kamov might be different brands, but trimmers work the same, and they have the same trimming options except Mi24 having additional trim switch! Except that, they work the same. Mi8 doesn't have the hatswitch for trimming, and thus is directly comparable to Ka52's. The video is from the ground with engines shut down because of demonstrating the extreme trimming that can be done with click-trimmer. If he did that while in the air, it would tear the helicopter apart, in the least, it would highly uncomfortable to do it. Regardless, the pilot would not show a method of trimming that is not permitted in operation. I am surprised that I have to explain this at such a basic level to you. Ka226 - Pilot uses mixed method of trimming where he seems to be using clicking when he wants to make smaller attitude changes, and after takeoff (around 4 min. into the video) uses hold-trim to make up for greater attitude changes. This post is a discussion with SL-PAK who is an ED Team member. Because of error accumulation, it is common-practice that when a pilot is close to the final attitude, he clicks the trimmer multiple times to somewhat erase the error and find the perfect sweet spot for he stick. In other words, raw adjustments of helicopter attitude are done with click-and-hold, while fine adjustments (small changes in attitude) are done by clicking and releasing the trimmer. This can often be observed in all of the videos posted on yt. This is common practice, doesn't mean always. Again, ED-staff. I can post much much more, and not only from ED-staff or forums, but from actual sources (Google translate won't work for pictures for you)! It won't change a thing, at the end of the day, I know my stuff, and you don't! I am right, and you are wrong! It's that simple. You better get accustomed to that idea, because it's clear to my as day that you have no idea what you are talking about! Most of all, given how the trimmer works, why it should at all be "wrong" to click and hold the trimmer, adjust attitude and finish off by releasing the trimmer-button. It's all demagogy. Not only is it wrong with regards to IRL, but it doesn't even make sense on the technical level! That's it. Now go and do your homework (manual), the question is fully explained there, there is nothing to debate! And stop confusing people!

Stop spreading misinformation. The helicopter can be trimmed both by clicking the trimmer to recenter the stick-forces after you have chosen a new attitude, or by holding the trimmer in, moving it to a new position and releasing. The preference lies in the pilot's technique of flying. Some do it one way, others do it the other. An instructor would only ever point out what you shouldn't do, and what might be recommended, but at the end of the day, there are as many ways to fly an aircraft as there are people in the world. Everyone has their own technique, just like with driving cars. In MI24 for example, there is additionally a trim hat-switch, and some pilots only use that. Some use a mix of all three, depending on speed, approach-attitude, etc... Simply put, there is not one correct way to fly an aircraft, and neither trimming it. I would give you examples, but most of them are written or recorded in russian (as Ka50 is a russian product), which I am pretty sure you don't understand. That's all there is to it. Again, stop claiming things without knowing it for sure, doesn't add anything but confusion. Better ask than state, there are those of us here that, although not real pilots, do have access to original info from Russia. Here is an example showing MI24 trim, worth noting it's on the ground while demonstrating. This pilot uses the click-and-hold method (also shows the collective brake, and how that works):

Absolutely, a warm thank you to the whole ED-team, every pogrammer, coder, reseacher, manager, and all you other wonderfull people that I haven't mentioned by profession. Your work cannot be measured by any metrics, it's groundbreaking every single time. You deserve praise and respect, much more than you get. Just remember that we are all here thanks to you, thanks to what you fantastic people created. Be proud, because you make dreams come true. Merry Christmas to all of you, enjoy your time with your families, stay safe and fly high. Sincerely zerO

First of all, what I wrote is not "partially true to some extent", it`s completely true given the link and explanation to where reality crosses your assumed perception of the world. There is obviously a mismatch there. Yes, I believe what I said, and yes, I`ve been with the developers since LOMAC when we only had the so called Flaming Cliffs. The simulation has been stale for many many years with little progress (visible for us that is), and people started growing impatient and asking for more modules. This especially picked up when Ka50 and A10C were merged and could fly together online. What we see now is ED`s wish to please the community, and how badly this can potentially come out. If you go to the Mi24 forums for example, you will see people begging the Mi24 be released in whatever state it is now. The community has been divided here for a few years, and it seems that it´s the new-kids that join DCS that want things released yesterday. Us who have flown Ka50 and those who flew A10C for years without any new module are patient enough. Whatever way ED choses then, ends up with getting hate from one of the sides, regardless of how honestly they present it. Now, ED is doing something immense, something that no other third-party is doing, the amount of modules at the same time is staggering, and their complexity: Ka50 BS3, Mi24, F-18, F-16, WWII. There is a lot of work to be done, and many complex systems and integrations, many of which are lacking from before. This is no "bullshit", I suggest you open your eyes and really look at the F-16/F-18 not merely as single planes, but as actual platforms that need to integrate into a big network with all the software, systems and sensors. You apparently have no idea about coding, especially on this scale. Yes, it is absolutely impressive. Just for reference, MS2020 only focuses on civilian air traffic and they still cannot get the physics right, THE PHYSICS, in a flight sim! Their systems coding is mediocre at best. In DCS, physics is one of the components, on top of that come the hefty systems which are just endlessly advanced. No! If it´s so easy, why is only ED doing it to this standard?! ED, to please all of us apparently, released multiple modules at the same time, allowing those that want to fly F-16/F-18 yesterday a chance to fly them in whatever state they are now. And to please us who are more patient and can wait, a piece of information stating "it will be finished when it will" was attached. Buy it at your own discretion. If you are one of those who can wait, then I do not understand what you are even doing here?! No one held a gun up to your head and forced you to buy it! It´s your choice, live with it! This has nothing to do with the trust towards ED and their authority, they provided you with open and honest info, thus take it for what it is. The rest of the people, who wanted the modules yesterday, they are writing threads on forums about how they "just" need a maverick and it´s all going to be great. Next up is "just" a AGM-88. And since you did this much, "just" SLAM-ER would be great too. If they are not pleased, it´s a cryout like here with the Yak52. Sad to say, the other modules are more popular than Yak52, and thus they will be prioritized. This is normal conduct. Comprende amigo? If you have ever been in a leading position in a company, this is nothing new, and it´s an infinite problem that cannot be solved utterly, because if you don´t release the modules now in incomplete state, people will complain that no progress is made. If you release the modules now AND label them as incomplete (QED: we´ll see when they get finished, no promises or deadlines), you have people like you that come and complain even about that! You cannot please everyone! Neither in a country, nor in a company. There will always be someone complaining. If they don´t finish Yak52 (when you want them to), then we have a thread of 3 pages like right now. If they don´t finish the F-16 (when others want them to), there will be a 100 page thread within 1 hr. Do you understand this? Have I brought the administrative burden to you in a concise and understandable manner? If you were the leader of this company, with limited resources (pairs of hands), what would you prioritize? (It´s a rhethorical question, I don´t care about your answer. There is only one logical solution, and it has been presented above.) Also, your speculation about F-18 not receiving the care that you want it to, it´s pure speculation. Nowhere have there been made statements about the progress being crippled in that area, neither today nor tomorrow (Ka50 BS3 was announced as on hold, why would they not admit something similar for other modules if they shared the fate of BS3?). For all we care, your concerns are groundless and could prove to be false. Tell you what, wait and see, or ask them.

I understand absolutely everything, and I suggest you start reading what you actually pay for. There are two things you need to acknowledge that are apparently a distant concept for you: #1 https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.c...modules/yak52/ Read what´s written on top of the description; "Early access (What is DCS World Early Access?". Now I suggest you click on the hyperlink for what "Early access" means! It does not state anywhere when the Yak52 will be finished, only that bugs and and an incomplete module is to be expected. You better start reading what you pay for, because this was there from the start, so coming here now and complaining that the module is incomplete or not fixed does not give me the best impression of you! #2 Who said anything was ever "left twisting in the wind"?! Do you have a statement from the devs mentioning that they abandoned the module? Your time schedule is not ED´s! It´s about time you grow up and understand that due to reasons mentioned before (Corona, demonstrations in Belarussia), some plans might extend. And even though some mods might have hinted at things getting fixed sooner, well welcome to real life! Things can happen which no one has control over! It surprises me greatly that grasping this concept for you is so hard. The whole world is in a state of suffer right now, and people have worse problems than Yak52 not being finished when YOU expected it to be. Makes sense Mundo? Also, I have to admit, sure, 40 quids is quite a bit, but very little for what you are getting and the type of work that has gone into it. To be quite honest, if ED wanted to rip you off, they would be making the next Ace Combat... Complaints are good as long as they are on point and relevant. The fact that the module is labeled as "Early Access" neglects all of your points and complaints. By any means, don´t buy anything more until these modules are finished, but Early Access was perfectly labeled on Yak52 and other modules, thus it´s your responsibility and fault for not reading what to expect!

It´s funny how everyone here forgets how we are in the middle of a pandemic that sets back all the companies out there years behind in schedule, and some even go bankrupt... Maybe tone down the harsh comments, and try to understand that ED are people with passion that want to deliver, but struggle with the same problems as just about everyone out there in the world, esp. right now in the pandemic. We are given discounts regularly and can buy new modules often much cheaper than a fair pricing would be, yet there are people still complaining here... You all know that software development is shady business and one fix can cause 10 bugs. You also all know precisely what a module in alpha- or beta-state means. It may take years to finish due to the complexity of the systems and the sheer level of detail that goes into it. There really is no counterpart to DCS, simply because of the sheer level of precision and detailing. Try to be a bit more friendly and respectful. No one forces you to buy any new modules, but there are nicer ways of presenting your views. And trust me, there have been bugs with other modules, sometimes for a long time, but patience is a virtue, and if you look at how much we are getting (upgrades to the core, fixes that are priority, new elements like new DM for WWII being up and running now), then it´s really worth waiting for it. There are sometimes more pressing issues than with a single module, like for example some people having crashes with the new Syria map. That is more important than fixing subtle bugs with Yak52. Please try to understand. I could agree on some of the points mentioned here IF ED was like EA or 99% other firms out there that run a greedy and shady business model that is a cash-grabber. But you obviously cannot say that for ED at all, considering all the stuff we have been getting free, just as updates and so on. To be quite honest, these people deserve respect, regardless of the paid modules. Go and see how much money you would have to pay for a 2nd grade module in FSX or some other sims (which are old and poor compared to DCS). Show some class fellow aviators, and think twice about what you post, the wording can always be improved ;) With that I wish you all a splendid time in the air, and if you have a bug with your favourite module, then don´t tease the bug, or get acquainted with another module that you have, in the mean time ;)

It would be preffered to have someone from ED/Belsimtek chime and and explain this. I repeat, it has been reported in 2018, it´s the end of 2020. Will this ever be solved? On a side note, I respect and love your work, applauds to the whole ED bureau. I fully understand that Covid19 has slowed down projects, and as such wish the team the best and staying strong through this difficult time )

This bug is still not fixed. Had it happen again recently when flying and checking the rocket pods after the finished mission. Will there ever be a fix for this from Belsimtek? This is a post from 2018, we are soon in 2021... Is it supposed to work like this in case a firing-sequence is aborted (rappid trigger pulls where the whole sequence of 4/8/16 rockets isn´t completely fired), or is this a bug that simply has not been fixed? Thx in advance.

Tested the new afterburner "boom" option in audio settings and it´s not cutting it for me. If you fly with music from time to time, it´s won´t be heard. Even with normal flying, if you go up in speed, the air drag causes much noise. It just doesn´t work for me. @Matt, would it be much hassle to add a small visual afterburner detent "bump" animation on the for the throttle as a special option? So far, that´s the only reason I don´t fly Hornet.

Not so far. Guess this question should be asked to the devs at Virpil ;)

On a technical level, S.E.B. knows what´s up with Ka50 (we talk together on the Ru side) and Fri13 doesn´t. That´s a fact. We can argue all day about inconsistencies with Shkval, why Vikhr for example doesn´t detonate around trees (proximity fuse). But the question is, who really asks for that? We have tons of other systems/units that are more important than nitpicking on such small "lacks". We have a temperature setting for Vikhr which no one knows what does precisely. That´s far greater than "having a fuse that explodes around trees"... The matter is that ED did as best as they could for the time and technology they had to simulate this, but the locking parameters are relatively close. And to be honest, no it´s not as perfect as you read about it in the manuals. Search YT for videos on Ka52/Mi24/Mi28/AH-1Z/AH64D and you will see that even with IR, pilots relatively often have a problem maintaining lock based on picture contrast. This is not a perfect system IRL. So even though locking-logic works different in DCS than in real life, claiming that it´s breaking the simulation is bollocks, because although different, it´s lock-on parameters are very similar to that of what those machines are capable of IRL. And that is going by YT videos and seeing how gunners often have to fiddle around with the sighting-system to maintain the lock or even acquire it. It´s not uncommon at all to see them guide ATGM´s with manual sight-correction. Pretty common actually. But as Weta43 rightfully mentions, this is a ranting thread for Fri13 where he struggles with the sighting system and getting a lock, and thus venting himself here. We all fly the same Ka50 here, but some of us, rather than complaining all the time (complaining, don´t confuse it with with constructive criticism), are finding work-arounds and practicing those. When pilots IRL take a new aircraft to a different continent and climate, and find out that things don´t work like the manual states they do, they learn and adapt to the situation and try to make it work in the climate/continent. So if you want to simulate reality, find ways for it to work. To be quite honest, with a bit of tactics and training, you are fully capable of guiding the missile manually while attacking a moving plane or helicopter. Pro Tip: Use the incredible autopilot of the Ka50. I pretty much gave you a golden egg here. (Don´t be like many people here who don´t understand the trimming and AP in Ka50 and therefore fly without them. That´s like trying to walk without a leg). We have discussed all these tings on RU side and they are being looked at. That´s also why ED made the claim that they want to fix all the bugs and problems plaguing the Ka50 really since BS1. But claiming that they are breaking everything is a exaggeration. Even with these systems fixed, if you struggle now, you won´t magically make it work after BS3 is released. What Fri13 is going on all about in all his threads is: why don´t we get a Ka50 that has all the systems ever proposed or tested on it, add FLIR, TGP, Anti-Radiation Missiles, and everything possible to make this helicopter become a multirole... And his prerogative is: "I am right, unless you prove me that what I state does not exist." He makes a statement, and now you have to prove it´s incorrect, otherwise in his mind, it´s the case. There is no single helicopter or plane that has all the systems, be it offensive or defensive regardless of nation. That´s because IRL each machine has a role to do and thus no one has a budget to outfit each and every of their aircraft with all of the systems. The primary complaint is from people incapable of dealing with what they have, and rather wanting the impossible just because let´s have a transformer that does everything out there. It´s just not realistic, neither from an economical nor from a strategical standpoint. When F35 was first announced, all former: frontline bombers, fighter jets, attack aircraft, CAS aircraft and EW-aircraft were supposed to be replaced by 5th gen JSF only. But guess what, the government took the economy to the knee and realized the services (Air force, Marines and Navy) don´t have the money nor budget to swap out all their planes with 5th gen JSF... And so, most squadrons running 4th gen ++ planes will maintain those and only be supported by a minority of JSF. Some people will understand that, while those who are ignorant of anything but their own POV will wonder why everything Air Force isn´t JSF. Back in the Ka50 days, the Soviet Doctrine relied on illumination flares during night-fighting besides NVG´s (there wasn´t too much emphasis on doing "search and destroy" (Air Force) kind of warfare during the night in a wartime scenario) and so it was initially deemed that Shkval was enough for Ka50. Times have changed, and so have the requirements. But the Ka50 we have is a production-ready proposal for that Doctrine (Soviet). Thus people asking for FLIR and this and that are basically uniformed of what the Ka50 was designed from a tactical standpoint. When FLIR was tested on Ka50, it was already known that it was for the future Ka52 which was a new machine designed for a new doctrine. Making a FLIR Ka50 makes no sense whatsoever for realism purposes. People here keep asking about RWR. Have you ever wondered why RWR wasn´t put in the Ka50 variant we have (that indeed is a production proposal from Kamov JSC)? Ever wondered why Mi24 had RWR? Because Mi24 was supposed to operate at the frontlines and often beyond them. Mi24 would be the helicopter that would first and foremost engage enemy SAM threats if there were any left while assaulting enemy positions and support infantry and motorized units (In offensive: 1st Wave: Su27 to clear out enemy figthers. 2nd Wave: Su24 for frontline bombing + SAM neutralization. 3rd Wave: Army would move in). But Ka50 was given Vikhr and the range to snipe out enemy targets while still staying within friendly-held terrain. Even if Ka50 would move in behind enemy lines, it was sent on special missions, and in any of such places, SAM would have been already neutralized. Yet still people complain about Ka50 not having RWR. Just to give an example.

Во втором видео проверьте пилотную камеру. Это не медленно, не проблема с камерой. Я имею в виду не мерцание, а обновление скорости (км/ч), высоты (М), G-нагрузки и т. д... в ХАД. @Chizh, спасибо :thumbup:

А что с ХАД? Будет ли ниже частота обновления? Медленно, как настоящий?

Didn´t notice that, will have to check it out. Thanks :)

I´ve been trying to get used to Hornet´s afterburner detent since it´s launched, and what buggs me is that I can get close to 100%, but somtimes I might miss with my throttle position by 1-2% lower, just to be sure I don´t use afterburner. Esp. when flying higher up in altitude, the values on IFEI are different, and same goes for nozzle position. Now, I have tried the special settings with mapping detent to a button, but for me, somehow it´s just not right. I cannot help but disagree with the fact that commanding the engine power should not be a 2-step process (button for unlocking the afterbuner then throttle to full) but rather a single-stage process. Now, I like the way F16 has it, where you can actually see the throttle being lifted up to go into afterburner stage. Now although this is not realistic, for those of us who don´t have a throttle with afterburner detent (I have Virpil), could the small "bump" be implemented visually in F18, where the throttle somehow displaces a little (either move up, or maybe 1/2 degrees left) and then back when you are within afterburner stage? This would be far less intrusive, and better to use (such as on F16 or AFB lights on Russian jets). Make a special setting where this option could enabled to make the throttle visualize the afterburner AFB-stage. This would for me be a lot better than current implementation with a button having to be pressed before I can move the throttle...

Cправедливо!

:lol::lol::lol: Угадайте, но ведь для этого контейнера нет никаких систем, физика "только"? Может быть, не так много, как оружие? :music_whistling: