sc_neo

So do i understand you correctly: even if i am without internet access for 6 months, for instance, will i still be able to fly single player without issues? If i read your response correctly; DCS tries to verify when logging in or after every four days without login. DCS will not stop working if it cannot contact the verification server even if more than four days have past. The verification process is there so once DCS is able to connect to the verification server, to check whether the modules installed match up with you logged in account? If things don't match up on verification, unverifiable modules will be become inaccessable and/or other measures taken. If the systems works as i think it does after re-reading Wags response i'd be fine with it.

So how does steam's offline mode work or 'protect'? I must say i have never kept steam for weeks on end in offline mode and thus am not totally sure you could play your games for ''years'' in offline mode. If i am not mistaken, steam relies on games being protected with various anti temper/piracy mechanisms like Denuvo, Starforce or a combination there of in adition to its account scheme. So how would removing starforce but phoning home solve that issue? Additionally, i kinda feel its just wrong to display to honest paying customers a verification prompt (like you have done something wrong and need to prove you are good guy) if you are without or choose to be without internet.

@Manitu...... ist das dein eigener Warthog mit der gebogenen Verlängerung? Falls ja, ist die ein Eigenbau oder kann man die so kaufen?

Hrm, i don't like the idea of not being able to fly if i am for whatever reason without internet for a longer time. It does not pertain to me at this point, but software that stops working once your out of civilization is generally not a good idea. Is 1.5 or 2.1 ''calling home'' at the moment, even if i don't fire up ED DCS for a week or longer?

"new and improved FLIR technology"....hopefully this will be ported over to all existing modules that have the current ED tech for this!

Great update, really appreciated! I have a bet going on with my brother whether 2.5 will (unexpectedly but very welcome of course) hit us still this year! If you deem it feasible to release this year, i stand to gain a jucy steak dinner....if not, i'll be spending the better part of an afternoon cooking nepali spicy chicken for my brother. So i'd like to have my steak please :) AND: what really made my day; VULKAN Api...i salute you to this very smart choice! Multi threading, here we come...

Just concerning the 'no pedals' requirement. The TM TWCS throttle has this nice and broad analog ''Manual toggle rudder with 15° angle and re-centering'' attached to the front of the throttle. I use it myself and i feel it is way better than a twist grip for yaw control. Mainly because you don't have to work all three axis with one hand of course. But, you very likely needed to do some regreasing of the throttle with products mentioned here more than once on the forums.

I am just curious how this works with ED rules concerning charging for mods for DCS world. Last time i checked this was not permitted. I am not really sure when or for what one needed a contract with ED.

Hey Hollywood, haven't checked whats up with Vaicom for quite some time. I actually let it rest awaiting a stable DCS 2.5 release. But you seem to have us covered anyway overcoming the issue with 2.1 and stuff. I reckon i can pretty much forgo Vaicom 2.0 and wait a bit longer until 2.5 drops. The Pro version is a sure buy for me as well, it sounds really great what you have planned. Especially that Vaicom will support all modules! And i think you priced it perfectly. I am curious though. May i ask; how does this differ from offering a DCS aircraft module without a contract with ED? I reckon its not a mod (when it does not use any ED DCS code) and has not been developed with ED tools and such. Not trying to be the devil's advocate here, just curious how it complies with ED rules. Anyway, best wishes for the final leg to the 2.5 release.

This baby will postpone the F/A-18 for me for quite some time. This looks really great! Its awesome that we can step through naval aviation in the correct order in the not too distant future. This i gonna be the next big DCS project for me and my brother....so i got my RIO already assigned!

''Hab ich mir extra für 2.5 aufgehoben.'' Haha geht mir auch so...ich hab bisher die Finger von Kampagnen gelassen um alles in schöner 2.5 Pracht genießen zu können. Da hat sich doch jetzt einiges angesammelt!

@docWilly ...are you talking about new changes to the FM for 1.5.7 or do you mean that 1.5.7 received all the FM goodies that came with the last 2.1.1 patch? I just updated and on a fast glance it feels pretty much the same like 2.1.1.

hey hey came to the forum right now to express my excitement for todays update as well. I don't now exactly...but it feels somehow more like a real machine now!!! And, i am not sure whether this was chagned today or in one of the October patches....but skid-landings are a treat now. Still kinda feel there is a bit to less weight to it and you slide to long or at least i'd expect to feel a more abrupt halt at the end when most momentum has been eaten up. And i don't know how much you have influence about and what is limited by DCS atm. Still, way better! I guess this is what i really like to see happening if i overdo it! I have tried to take a closer look but am not sure atm, but are the landing skids compressable? AND....autorotations are so much fun now!!!

Hey guys, just a short question concerning modern aircraft and a simmer's FFB joystick. I a modern Fly-by-Wire airframe, would you feel in RL increasing resistance at higher speeds? Since there is no direct connection, do real FBW aircraft simulate that for the pilot as sensory feedback?

I was asking at the VKB forums about whether a gimbal base like the gunfighter with a 'force trim' system was something VKB would be considering. It seems at the moment, there are no active plans to develop something. Too niche and especially, to bulky it seems. Although i reckon, a FFB joystick would have a bigger comsumerbase. I wouldn't be to hopeful atm that something will materialize in the coming years. http://forum.vkb-sim.pro/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=2801

no pinky switch on the outer side of the left throttle? Like the pinky switch in the A-10 for isntance? Feels a bit like wasted space and opportunity. Generally i'd say; if there is space, put something there....you can never have too many switches and buttons!

Yeah....i have a bunch of them FAA documents laying around, including the 200page complete paper you linked. Gotta go through all of that.

''2nd will be about the questions asked and raised by us and the comunity and how this effected the flightmodel in the past weeks. Also I thought about to explain how the real helicopter is flow by the army ilots and why that is that way. '' Thats great news. Looking forward to that! And i was totally oblivous to 'the new scout functions'....to really keen on getting to know what that is about! So best of luck!

As i said earlier, i am pretty happy with the Gazelle overall and appreciate the work going into the FM, especially that the devs are inquring with RL pilots flying the version we have in DCS world. So i consider my question about ''no roll'' on lift off answered, as borchi positively stated that he received confirmation that there is no roll on pick up with whatever loadout. What do i take away from this discussion we were having about the FM? First, i myself need to invest more time into reading about helicopter design and flight principles. Second, if i kindly may suggest to borchi_02; simmers come with varying degrees of knowledge about flight principles etc. to the forums and i reckon, its everyones own job to read up on it. But, this is mostly limited to the general case, but more often than not this will not apply to the very module in question. Simply put, we probably cannot read about the Sa-342M in detail unless in the manual that comes with the DCS module. Hence, i would suggest to put a 2 to 3 page description/explanation about the modules fm paritcularities into the manual. Just describe briefly the main forces and important aspects for the different flight states and than contrast this with how the aircraft, the Gazelle in this case, behaves and or differs from the general case. The general stuff would probably be a good deal of condensed copy and paste from a authoritative flight principles book, and then the application or reflection on the Gazelle in particular. For instance, concerning the question about roll on pick up. You could briefly explain the forces responsible for this behaviour, mention the various design principles to counter that tendency and then shortly outline haw the Gazelle is designed to deal with this. I guess this might clear up a lot of misunderstandings and doing this for future aircraft as well, might save a lot of hussle and time spent on us nagging about small stuff on the forums :)

I'd be pleasantly surprised if proved wrong of course, but in my book it would not make real sense for Heatblur, Ed and Razbam to have both releases compete around years end. And we would not really miss out.We simply get a further developed F-14 whenever it eventually arrives.

@borchi 2b ...and loadout and fuel quantity has really not enough influence on CoG, so that it does not roll on pick up?

sorry for not getting back to you earlier. You are 9 ahead of me, i am located in Germany. I guess wednesday or thursday might work. We just need to work out who takes the morning shift :9. Or on the weekend. Cheers mate

@Scarecrow84 I have re-read your linked op and this threads op and i gotta say, that centric nature is not really true, at least not in the ''absolut centric'' way you seem to imply. If you pick up with no inputs whatsoever on the cyclic and only right rudder so you don't turn one inch horizontally, the Gazelle flys pretty damn straight forward, that is true. But you absolutely must put in some constant forward pitch or trim it forward to stay level. If you pitch forward to pick up speed and let go off the cyclic so it centres again, the Gazelle keeps going foward, but it climbs steadly as well. You need to trim it to stay level. Additionally, i must admit i fail to see in it in the video you linked. Borchi stated earlier in this thread that the Gazelle indeed has no rolling tendency on lift off due to its design, i.e. the Fenestrom being pretty much level with the CoG. I wonder two more things: if it is indeed stable in the roll axis by design, does the loadout matter (weight of weapons and fuel) and would that shift the CoG in a way that we should expect a rolling tendency on pick up? Sorry if i am beating that horse to death. Its not that i am in anyway unhappy with the fm, i simply like to really understand why the Gazelle behaves like it does. Second, can somebody explain that ''new?'' roll to the left or right when sharply raising or lowering collective when flying at crusing speed? I see it gradually happening and then increasing above 60kmh ground speed. Below 60, it purely translates into yaw which you need to counter with pedal inputs. Somewhere above 60 no pedal inputs are needed anymore and torque is completely countered through airflow along the fuselage. Which combo of forces actually makes the aircraft roll at that partiuclar point then? Is it the tailrotor that produces a bit more thrust in that instant that is not being translated in to a yaw but a rolling movement because of aforementioned airflow a at cruising speed? Or is it because mainrotor vertical thrust changes not completely in sync on both sides?

Have you guys been meeting on teamspeak already? How about having a little chat about our observations later today?

My first choice would be the Tiger, closely followed by the Ch-53. I think a modern western coop gameplay capable attack helo is what's needed next. @borchi...is that even possible concerning the state of classification of the EC665?