docWilly

M2K is not prone to cross wind anymore since they patched it. Your issue is something else: NWS lock? Setting of your rudder pedals (calibration, spikes?), curves in the ingame setting? I do not have any issues with the mirage since the fix.

Pierre, Kobuleti is known as frame rate hungry and I guess with AI moving around even more. The tearing is a different story and the stutters. Thats not a simple frame-rate issue. The human eye takes every rate above 30 as "smooth", so your issue is something else. Just a thought: did you try it with NVidia inspector settings to stock? Sparse Grid SS killed me on my old system flying FSX there. With my actual system I do not use Nvidia tuning anymore.

Description: in main menue settings of 1.5 beta and 2.0 alpha the cockpit vibration rate can not be modified by user as the slider is stuck DCS Version: latest 1.5.6 beta and 2.0 alpha up to date 4 Feb 2017 Steam: n/a Map: both Nevada and Caucasus SP/MP: both as it is related to main menue settings Reproducible: yes Step to Reproduce: try to move the slider, it´s stuck at a given position Screenshot/Video available: n/a Track Available: n/a Mission File:n/a Controllers: see below OS:WIN10 RAM: see below GPU: see below Mods: on or off does not matter, mangaged by JSGME Any Additional Information: seems to be present for a while; did an extensive forum search with the search function but no report/match found. Hopefully I did not miss anything

I just found after updating 2.0 to the latest release that CDU wind briefing mod leads to not loading your modules on NTTR. Latest 1.5.6 version plus fix from yesterday works fine.

Come on man :-) your pic shows the instructor on the left seat grabbing the stick. What does that prove other than he is taking control? Reason unknown as I don´t have the time to research which episode this is and at what point and for what reason he takes it. I know that you are not satisfied with what we have with the Gazelle but I´d appreciate a more constructive discussion.

Hydraulics on or off? :-) Honestly....everybody will tell you different findings about that - as you said. Personal "feeeling": EC135 is absolutely "easy", UH1-D is a ittle more stiff, with hydraulics off you even need two strong arms to move it around to the extreme extend. watch 19.05 for UH1 and the next one for EC135 (and the tiny movements on the stick :-) ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8DVLjXv1vYhttp://

Sorry, did not realize it´s ironic :-) Thanks for clarifying.

One last comment from my side on VRS state in Gazelle DCS with no offence to anyone and not beating a dead horse: 1. we (hopefully) all agree that VRS occurs in DCS while flying the gazelle. Holbeach´s video clearly demonstrates that VRS is present. The statement at the end of the video "So Yea....no VRS" is wrong as he himself clearly proves the opposite. 2. the known parameters programmed into FM by PC are: horizontal speed < 30km/h vertical speed < -150m/min pitch between 0 and 6° nose up absolute roll < 3° 3. Holbeach´s video does not show airspeed or groundspeed. Thus we can not judge if it´s below 30km/h at the moment he pulls collective or not. 4. the airspeed indicator on front panel has no markings between 0km/h and 60 km/h and it usually comes alive at 15-18 km/h and at 60 km(h it is "valid" (this behaviour comes from the very simple technique of the airspeed indicator via airflow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitot-static_system see: "lag errors")....so no indication does not mean no speed, indication below 60 km/h means not that it is correct. Especially in slight backwards movement the front dash air speed indicator shows wrong values = 0km/h. The only "valid" speed indicator is on NADIR set to VS DER (in condition with no wind airspeed = groundspeed 5. it´s extremely hard in the sim to judge if the helicopter is below 30km/h or not visually , only NADIR helps here. Make a test yourself: no wind, safe altitude, set NADIR to VS DER, monitor NADIR speed vs airspeed indicator vs personal feeling to be in a steady hover condition and try to keep it there. You´ll be surprised. 6. it´s of no question that power only NEVER recovers VRS state!!! But we can definitely not state that Holbeach´s video proves you can recover with power only. This conclusion would only be vaild if NONE of the programmed parameters are exceeded while trying to recover. Personally I feel that the "area of VRS" is "too small" so you too easily come out of the programmed VRS values which lead to a recovery. The shape of the blades on the military variant are of no factor at the moment you are already in the stall. Take for an example the "pitch between 0 and 6° nose up"-parameter. This means if you pitch slightly below 0 degrees nose down by chance while pulling the collective you already broke one of the parameters and VRS is finished! I am not the one to reccon on my cockpit indicators if I am pitching down below 0 degrees whilst pulling the collective. And I can not tell from the video if the pitch parameter is broken or not. I believe that there´s definitely room for improvement but I can not second the statement that the Gazelle recovers by power only because i can not prove that I did not brake one of the programmed parameters. But as you said...it´s reported and we´ll have to wait if and when PC is going into that. Meanwhile I enjoy what I have and I am happy that I own a BETA-module without FC3 FM.

Re-tested to make sure I did not over-torque.....same result. Test: climb to "safe altitude", establish hover, engage auto-hover, bring yourself into VR state and slowly apply collective again up to 75%TQ and your tail goes off without reaching any overtorque situation. Tested at 1.000mtrs ALT, no wind, no turbulence, max indicated TQ 65 to 75% ....TQ limit never reached.

He even went a step further: with SAS off in cruise NO anti torque because of the aerodynamic shape of the tail fin. SAS off comes into account especially in slow flight and TO/LA, hover. With airspeed the fin is the largest counteract. They fly 2 different EC´s: one with fiberoptic gyros (if I got him right) that come online very fast after start up and another with "analogue" gyros that will take a while to come to speed. What does that mean: in an emergency takoff (alarm situation) the anlogue gyro (and thus (PR)SAS) is not "ready" and they have to lift off in a SAS-off condition, as soon as the helo gains speed all is compensated by tail fin and fenestron apart the fact that the stick is kind of sluggish in the input but in no way a wobbling helicopter in handling. Sorry guys, i am not a native speaker and I hope I could make clear what I learned today. Concerning stick movement Reality vs DCS: pls consider that your joystick is much shorter than the stick in the real GAZ, so we only make tiny moves while the helicopterpilot makes bigger ones...

Yes, I have the same feeling. I know that the internet is a weird place and you can post "alternative facts" (sorry...no offense but I LIKE this wording since the election :-))) ) but I promise you that the interview today is true and not from my imagination or to prove something that may be clearly wrong. I did some VR testing with the gazelle: 1. using autohover/autocollective "cheat" to make sure that there´s no forward movement: then disconnect auto collective and you easily get into VR exceeding 150m/min descent. Once you raise the collective your tail goes off. This is clearly a wrong behaviour :-) in 1.5.6. At least: VR state is modelled. 2. fly the helo manually with no-wind-condition, hover, then exceed 150m/min sink rate and you get VR state. Once you raise the collective the helicopter yaws to the left and I am not fast enough to keep it straight with pedals , you clearly see the forward speed suddenly higher than 30 km/h = you already exited VR state and the raise of collective does not have "final" negative effects. It´s absolutely hard to create a "stay in VR state situation". Other effect is that you gain speed by pitching back or forward...result is speed above 30 and you ar safe. So I have a really hard time to test that. Tried several times in 1.5.6 but I always exited VR before it came to a catastrophic situation. In the past I had several VR states on NTTR while in auto-hover, raising the collective drove me into the ground. This leads me to the conclusion that VR is more or less correct modelled here.

Gents, as promised the compressed results of my conversation just a few hours ago with one of our rescue helicopter pilots. We talked about SAS, fenestron and anti-torque at different speed regimes, tail-fin and anti-torque at different speeds, collective movements in cruise and effect on yaw and last but not least behaviour in vortex ring state with a fenestron/large fin-tail equipped helicopter (here EC135). He´s a fairly experienced guy with ~ 4000 hrs of flight, mainly on BO105 PAH (German Army) and EC 135 up to now. He has never flown the Gazelle so his statements refer to "helicopter with SAS and large fin/fenestron = EC 135). Q: Do you use SAS "on" in EC 135 all the times? A: Yes. There´s no reason to shut it off. Comfort, easier handling in flight (and hover in EC135 as it works independent from forward speed) and therefore safety. If you shut it off for training purposes the helicopter behaves well and is in no way uncontrollable but a little bit more slugish to inputs and influence by wind and turbulence. Q: is SAS in any way a "stick positioning device" (as mentionend in one of the articles I quoted earlier)? A: No. It´s only a stabilisation augmentation. For stick positioning you have magnetic trim and trim (china hat on stick). Q: What does "magnetic trim"? A: You move the stick to the desired position to maintain a desired attitude, press it and release the stick - which then stays in position at the time you activated magnetic trim. Q: Do you personally use "magnetic trim"? A: In earlier times yes, but it feels a little strange to me, so I prefer using trim only (by klicking the china hat on the stick). Only if I have to compensate strong crosswinds winds inflight that need larger movements of the stick I use "magnetic trim" first and do the fine tuning with the china hat. Q: Do you have to use anti torque pedals in straight forward flight and are you able to fly hands-off at cruising speed? A: No use of anti-torque pedals necessary as the fenestron and especially the large fin tail compensates torque effects totally at cruising speeds. Of course...hands-off every day once trimmed in calm air with no significant turbulence. Q: Would you say it flies "on rails" while trimmed and hands-off? A: Yes and no. You almost never have conditions in operation without disturbance of the air mass you penetrate, almost every day you have at some locations at least slight turbulence or change of wind direction which of course you have to counteract then. Totally hands-off occurs mostly on late summer evenings or during winter time when stationary high pressure systems are present. Q: Do you use anti-torque pedals in turns enroute? A: Yes, slight inputs depending on speed and bank necessary - otherwise the helicopter will climb or descend Q: Do collective inputs call for the need of anti-torque pedals while flying with cruise speed? A: No. All yaw is compensated by either the aerodynamic shape of the large fin tail and the adjustments of the fenestron which compensates (automatically and) additionally the increase/decrease of torque/collective input. There´s no yaw moment by collective I have to adjust while in normal cruise speed. Adjustments are only necessary in low-speed conditions or while landing/take-off/hover. Q: Do you need anti-torque pedals in autorotation? A: not at a reasonable forward speed, just in the phase you get slower and start to flare. With speed (and even in conditions you lost the fenestron completely) the large tail fin compensates for yaw in autorotation. With BO105 it was mainly the airframe (and not the smaller fins) that compensated the yaw when you lost the tail rotor. There we had to use more input on pedals to keep it straight. Q: Do you believe that any helicopter could manage a vortex ring state just with pulling the collective (given that the helo has plenty of power left?) A: I never experienced VR state in real life, just in the simulator sessions. But keep in mind that not power makes you exit a VR state...it´s by leaving the condition with a) lowering the collective thus giving the blades a chance to exit the stall and b) forward movement...if not applicable...side movement. VR is a stall of airflow over the blades and increasing the angle of the blades (and it doesent matter how "large" your blades are) by pulling the collective makes the situation worse, sinkrate dramatically increases and you will probably crash --------------------------------------- I´d wish to thank "Andy" for the insight and the time he spent with me discussing the topics above though he probably will not visit this forum :-) I hope that my interview with him will help us a little bit more to "judge" what may be correct and what maybe "wrong" with the FM. I am well aware that I talked to a EC135 pilot and not to a Gazelle guy, both helos are different airframes but they share some fundamental aspects and therefore it may help us in our discussion here on the forums. And I am glad that I can provide you with informations from a "real pilot" with experience on fenestron-equipped, large tail-fin helicopter with SAS system (more advanced than the old one in the Gazelle of course). I am now more confident that great parts of the FM are modelled correct, especially the "hand off" situation in cruise even with collective adjustments. Please keep in mind that no real operator will raise the collective to an extreme limit until it bends :-) ) - which means there´s no information on what happens next then....and I guess PC doesnt have any information on that as well as no one in real life can comment on such a situation. I see know a discussion rising on VR state behaviour :-) yes...if we are stationary in VR state with the Gazelle and pull the colletive we should see an increase of sink rate. Before we now judge the FM, let´s make sure that a) we are definitely in VR state and b) that we are not slightly moving out VR but not recognizing it. I will do some tests tonight and see what I find. Happy flying, cheers Willy

AFAIK yes. Just another philosophy of design.

Thanks for all the constructive replies - highly appreciated! About stick movement: with my HOTAS I need just a small physical movement to make the helicopter react. In a real gazelle - as stated correct and seen in the video - the movement is rather "crude". This may be related to the different length of the sticks. The longer the stick (the one in real life) the more you have to move it. Am I right? So we in the sim make small movements and get big results and I confess this is NOT reflected in the visual movement of the stick in the cockpit. Here I would expect more deflection and this is not modelled like the movement in real gazelles. But it is in the code - otherwise I would not get the anticipated output to my input :-) I take this to mean the SAS holds the stick in place where it is put? Kind of like an automatic trimmer? That's what it sounds like to me, and makes sense from what I've seen in the real life videos. This is different from how the module works. In the sim, the attitude itself holds while the stick moves back to center. Big difference. Right, Sir. What the author describes in his article is not what we see in the sim. When you use Magnetic trim (brake) and trim the stick in our simulated GAZ you see what the auhor describes but not with SAS activated alone. This is something to look into. About sensitivity: You are right. The very interesting thing is that I experience sensitivity...I do not feel it to be laggy in response....some people feel different. I assumed in an earlier post last year that this may be related to different sim hardware/sticks we use. Personally I use the stock Warthog HOTAS/Stick with the following setting in axes: Joy_Y and Joy_X: deadzone =0, SatX =100, SatY=100, curve = +15 Joy_Z (collective) 0-100-100-0 Rudder (Saitek combat pedals): 0-75-100-0 This gives me a responsive reaction to my controls but not oversensitive. Your needs may be different. "It's controls are so light and sensitive that if feels more like a jet fighter than a helicopter"... I am just in a wild guess what the author is telling us there as there´s no additional reference to that statement. I heard the same statement from one of our rescue helicopter pilots couple of month ago talking about the BO105 (he flew earlier) with the hingeless rotor system and referring to extremely agile reaction to the input. Some RL Gazelle lovers state that it feels like a racing car compared to other light helicopters (due to speed and agility). Just a guess: is the author using the word sensitivity but wants to tll us something about agility? @jcomm: I tried to my very best to fly up-side-down as shown in the vid.....and messed badly every time - can´t keep the copter in a stable situation regardless of what I try. So I´d say it´s not possible in 1.5.6 anymore unless you "tweak" your settings or the FM to a totally unrealsitic behaviour just to prove PC that they are doing crap in development. If I have the chance to interview one of our pilots on EC 135 I´ll ask about Fenestron/stability/torque/input at different flight regimes.... I am on duty twice this week as medical doc but on ambulance and maybe I have a chance to ask and report back here - promised :-)

Ok gents, I see you all talking about the incredible - but unbelievable stability of the Gazelle and telling that this is unreal. I see the videos you quote and all the forum entries here about the FM and the long lasting dispute about that. So I did a quick research today and I´d like to share that with you because these are statements of real life pilots you request....and these pilots are not affiliated with ED ot PC in anyway: All quotes are from test flights IRL 1. http://www.mwhelicopters.co.uk/File/LeapingAheadText.pdf Some Gazelles are fitted with a Stability Augmentation System (SAS). This might be a nice extra as it eases the workload if flying in IMC or at night, but in my opinion not a necessity as the aircraft is extremely stable. But in the cruise it really comes into its own. The cambered airfoil section housing the fenestron offsets the torque effect of the engine. This allows virtually all the powerproduced by the engine to go into rotors to keep it airborne and propel it forward without any draggy tail rotor to slow it down. 2. from: The Undiscovered Gem by Richard Boswell (The feature originally appeared in the May 1998 issue of FLYER) The civilian variants do not have the Stability Augmentation System (SAS) which is standard fit in the military machines but quite frankly you wonder why they needed it: the Gazelle sits solidly with a big helicopter feel about it. 3. https://books.google.de/books?id=2iPpBN29ezMC&pg=PA75&lpg=PA75&dq=gazelle+helicopter+SAS+augmentation+system&source=bl&ots=GOWG54nix9&sig=9-att5JLo9zsmJXwswV3PZEAfJE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi05YrR5enRAhVmG5oKHaPFAmAQ6AEIOjAF#v=onepage&q=gazelle%20helicopter%20SAS%20augmentation%20system&f=false .... SAS is more of a stick-positioning device that tends to hold any selected altitude, hands off, but the Gazelle also gets a high degree of stability in forward flight from it´s big horizontal and vertical tails, except in roll. Personal findings flying the Gazelle in 1.5.6 release: a) no chance to completely fly the GAZ hands off, but as stable as described in the arcticles from test flights above b) SAS (if used) engages around 80km/hrs and makes no need for anti-torque rudder as intended, exept in extreme turns to keep altitude together with cyclic. But still (AP off) no chance to keep hands off from the stick for long times. And before you ask: yes...stick is neutral, no spikes in hardware, tested against other airframes in DCS = all is fine :-). I fly the GAZ with the "realsitic mode" in setttings, no FFB. c) SAS off, AP channels off, and also Gyro off if you like: NO WAY to fly it hands off guys...you really can feel the helicopter getting more senstive, sluggish... and we are talking of no or moderate wind conditions in DCS d) forward and horizontal flight: the helicopter has always a little pitch down in axis...otherwise it would climb...and this means the stick has to be in a slight (very slight) forward position, trimmed by the pilot. This is realistic otherwise you would climb. I flew for 12 years on Uh1-D and even there (totally different helicopter) we had this attitude - so I am not sure If I got you right? I flew on EC135...and we have this littel pitch down in axis on sreaight forward flight. I see the same behaviour with the GAZ in DCS. e) abrupt collective inputs: yes...above 80 km/hrs no need to compensate with anti-torque rudder, below definitely.This is the only thing I can not comment on if it´s realistic or not!! It´s stated above in the first article that the huge fenestron neutralizes the torque - not mentioned if it offsets ABRUPT changes in torque though. Conclusion from my side: I love it as it is, some fine tuning my be fine, definitely no immersion killer. I´d really wish to see this "it´s unrealistic"-discussion to fade out.... make bug reports and prove that it´s faulty...fine. If you´d wish to come back when basic aspects of rotary wing flight dynamics (??? hey really??) like this get fine tuned...fine. Hopefully you are not flying FC3 aircraft such as F15/SU33/Mig27/29 etc...otherwise you´ll never come back due to their FM :-)))))). And please keep in mind...GAZ is still BETA...so there´s an ongoing development. It´s Your choice. Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Polychop in any way, I am a fixed wing pilot IRL for 16 yrs now, I flew 12 years on UH-1D as medic, had the chance to fly Bo105, EC135 occasionally in the past years. And I am a happy customer of PC, even happier with every improvement they make to the GAZ over the time. My excuses if anyone feels beeing attacked by my post, but it seems that I am a little bit fed up with these kind of posts about FM here. by the way: the EC 135 is a bit closer to the Gazelle concerning Fenestron and stability systems...and guess what.... in straight ad level flights...hands off without AP and no need to counteract with anti-torque rudder under normal flight conditions.

Maybe worth to try, posted by Octuplefire, 104th: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3030820&postcount=7 Had no conncetion issues yesterday. What I see in 1.5.6 (reported elsewhere on the forum by several people): long loading time on joining a server, initial stutter/lag looking around in the cockpit with TIR or in F2 view checking AI/other players, lot of viggens on an airport seem to cause stuttering as well...

Difficult task, yes. But once again: you can not fight physics. These are the limits you can not overcome. Either reduce weight at high altitude/pressure/temp or search for another way to approach the AO. Nothing more you can do...in the sim and in reality.

Hmm, flew yesterday on different MP servers with 1.5.6 and had no radio issues (i.e. talking to the tanker/AWACS) in the Mirage. Is every aircraft you own affected, only ATC or tanker also? Just to make sure....radios are "on" = you see the numbers in the display left upper corner front dash? Maybe you want to check simple communication vs "realistic" in your settings or try do perform a repair of DCS....sometimes DCS get´s bugged in an update.

POSSIBLE FIX Had the same issue with 1.5.6 after updating Open Beta. The FIX for me: disable all MODS and run a repair, then enable MODS. Done. Normal magnetic variation, no erratic 100+ degrees off. Simple and easy way to manage the MODS is via JSGME

I second Davic OC´s post. As RL fixed wing pilot I can tell you that definitely even aircraft of the same type with the "same engine" mounted, same weight and configuration behave different in flight and especially in slow conditions or while landing. There´s always a margin within these "identical" aircraft behave according to the book. You have to take the numbers given as a "recommendation". I am talking of light aircraft. And please don´t start the FM discussion....PC is to my opinion well aware of the things to be tuned. Patience and compliance is the secret. But overall the GAZ is a wonderful addition to DCS....thanks Polychop. At some point I posted that a couple of issues users experience do not occur on my system (HOTAS set, no extension). My guess: every setup is different as well (i.e. how your specific joystick "behaves" or your throttle/collective). But I got burned for that statement. If you join MP sessions you´ll find a LOT of people flying FC3 aircraft (F15, Mig29/27, SU33. And they have FUN, not complaining too much of the FM implemented there. And their FM is way off from reality. I am a "realism junkey" but as for a desktop sim I am fully satisfied with the status of the chopper we have right now...which does not mean that there´s no room for improvement. I am 48 yrs now and decades into different flight sims. I know well the times we even could not imagine what is nowadays possible on a home pc for a couple of hundreds of bucks. And we had fun back there as well. Thanks HAWKEY60.....you are so right. So let´s fire up DCS and have FUN guys.... And yes....eagerly awaiting the BO105 as it is my favourite helicopter in real life (had once the chance to fly it with a test pilot). I talked to many former german army pilots working with the PAH...now they are flying rescue choppers (EC135/145) for a private company...and if they could....they would go back to the BO (responsivness of controls, power, speed...). And guess what: once the BO is out people will complain that it does not behave like the Gazelle or the Huey...

Bearfoot, there´s nothing much you can do. High elevation, thinner air, high temps, air pressure AND your gross weight limit your helicopter´s performance. The only "safe" tactic is to reduce weight before going out to the mission. Either less weapons carried or less fuel to reduce the only parameter you have influence on....the condition of your helicopter. Another way (not safe) would be not to hover but to perform a slow forward flight (which needs less power than a steady hover) just slightly higher than the mountain and with a little distance to the rocks, check for situational awareness, fire and dive away.

Homefries, in your first post you mentioned "own skins"....just a wild guess: maybe there got something corrupted with these implemented. I do not have any additional skins and use extensivly JSGME-ready mods for various purposes and as well with the Gazele and do not experience any gitches with the gauges. If not already done, I suggest to disable your "own skins"completely (to see if there´s an issue..) and at least run a repair on DCS 1.5, if not maybe it´s worth un-installing the GAZ and re-install it from scratch...absolutely no mods activated while running repair ! I highly suggest to use mods only that are JSGME-ready and simple to remove with the application. Sometimes there goes something wrong with an update or a mod in the complex folder structures if you copy "mods" or "skins" manually into the sim. That´s not too much work to try but worth it. I do not believe your problem to be an issue of your graphic/system settings.

to my above posting...just tested again: fuel 55%, 4 HOT, TOW ~4535+ LBS, standard conditions, sealevel To maintain level in slow forward motion (below 60 km/h and slower) I need around 60% of torque at sealevel; hover up to 75%-80% TQ, The faster I go the more the helicopter will climb and vice versa. When I cut collective in fast forward flight without altering my pitch (angle) the 342 will descend not climb. The faster it is (and given that I want to maintain altitude while slowing down the less input on the stick is necessary and the slower I am the more I need. Thats hwo I would expect it to behave. That does not mean that it is like in real life with the Gaz...thats something a Gaz pilot has to chime in. Another thing is that I would expect the nose come up/down while playing with the collectiv in forward flight....that does not happen above 60 km/h. The gaz just maintains the angle of longitudinal axis and climbs/decends. Just my 2 cts. Have a fine weekend Willy

zerO Crash, 1. never experienced this with the sim Gazelle in other situations than beeing in overspeed conditions. Then it becomes uncontrollable (in a dive) and hits the ground. In fact on my side it is totally as expected...the more speed, the more pitch down to maintain altitude. Some people seem to get some weird behaviour out of this chopper and I have no clue why. 2. and 3. I can not comment on this as I never flew the 342 in RL. But I assume, that a reccon/light attack helicopter must be constructed to optimal lift of the three blades (popping up quickly even in hot/high conditions with weight of the HOT for example and hide again...which induces for sure some amount of "stress" on the blades). Climb is specified to 12m/sec in forward flight. Concering transitional lift: not on my side, and I think we are talking of a situation where the chopper is out of ground effect. I definitely need a fair amount of cyclic (fuel ~40-50%, HOT on/off rails) in slow forward movement. The slower the more - that is what I experience. It would be cool the get a reliable statment on your questions from a former/active 342 pilot here.

Never had any issues with autostart "cheat" in various MP servers since very first release of th Gaz. There must be another issue and maybe on your side. Not sure if the server admin can inhibit this "cheat" (which is none to my opinion). Does anyone know about that?