msalama

It's an ME batch job rather than a dedicated script, but I'll do that later today regardless. Thanks Grimes.

Yep, call a routing function with a group name parameter twice in a row and the second call always croaks, complaining about a missing attribute. The exact attribute depends on the function called, but at least mist.groupRandomDistSelf and mist.groupToRandomZone both fail when used like this. Any ideas?

Is mist.groupRandomDistSelf broken? I made a small mission with a couple of ground units where I first make them go mist.groupToRandomZone depending on where our planes are coming from, and then later go mist.groupRandomDistSelf when receiving damage so as to mimic them panicking and deviating from their assigned route. No can do, because mist.groupRandomDistSelf complains about a missing "self" then croaks! Is it just me? I did check the pertinent function calls for syntactical errors etc. and didn't find any, but it could've still been something I overlooked. Anyone else seeing this or similar?

Thanks Vanir, excellent info. S!

Well IMHO the map is a reasonable approximation of 1940's Normandy. Folks can of course nitpick all they want, but I'll frankly speaking rather use the map than complain about it, especially now that its performance has been improved a lot. All of the above just IMHO, though.

Yeah. Us kids want to know too.

Serious deficiencies my boot. You haven't proven anything yourself, you're just spewing conjecture based on someone else's extreme flying. Try harder please.

Didn't see any videos where the guy attempted this. Did I miss something?

No need, since you haven't proven anything yourself. That video shows someone looping the DCS Mi-8, which may or may not be doable IRL, but as A16 said, the structure may well be sturdy enough to withstand such abuse. As for the rest of his videos though, he's just doing some stupid crap, which again may, or may not, be doable IRL. But judging from what I saw, he's just stressing the airframe to its limits, which may well be survivable IRL too. So no proof one way or another. The thing is, no-one takes the RL chopper this far, so there's nothing you can compare these virtual stunts with... ...but then again, you're obviously here just to troll anyway. So what does it matter?

Front-wheelers are difficult anyway, just do a 3-point stall landing and go from there.

Yeah, taken into account that the WW2 submodule is obviously the only thing they're working on. :music_whistling:

Well DUH! Stopped reading at "7" it seems :doh:

OK, thanks for the education. I always thought it tries to hold the engine RPM directly. S!

It's an old module not seeing any further development unless someone gets paid.

I said "try and hold", meaning it tries to hold the RPM stable up to a +/- limit, or within its control authority. And that limit is definitely exceeded when someone pulls excessive collective. So I didn't actually contradict anything you said.

So which exact subtype are they modelling, the D-15? And that one's still a razorback, isn't it?

I know, but shouldn't the governor try and hold the engine RPM even when the PIC pulls excessive collective? And its authority then just runs out when the aerodynamical load from the rotor gets high enough, causing the engine RPM to drop. EDIT: Or rather the governor throttles the fuel flow even when the engine RPM starts to drop in order to avoid excessive torque?

You're probably exceeding the engine governor's limits by pulling excessive collective (and thus increasing the rotor blade AoA) and the RPM then decreases, because that's just what it does due to the increased aerodynamic load from the rotor.

Why not? The aircraft is not even finished yet.

Ain't nothing wrong with that. Now I'm a groundpounder, usually don't see her lightly loaded, means more MAP. Ehm... so what was the point again, since I'm just gonna have another one by this point in time? And that's a Radeberger too, mindja :)

But then as the original(ish) poster said, something seems to be wrong with the WEP as well. Any comments from the devs?

Yeah that's it Grafspee. Fly her within the specs, but do use her TO the specs as well.

OK & thanks for the insights. All ears however, if you want to give us your interpretation of the results though.

Well, I usually do. No wear and tear to worry about, and one has to keep current with how the bugger behaves balls to the wall on takeoff anyway. Since you never know when you DO need it - and you don't want to be surprised when you do ;)

OK! Which is just the thing that makes it one of the fastest, if not THE fastest, serial production helicopter in existence, isn't it?