blave

I just started flying this wonderful mod yesterday. I'm using VR (HP Reverb G2). The electronic backup artificial horizon instrument shimmers, unlike the perfectly fine MFDs. Is there a way that I can edit "something" to disable that instrument? It's very distracting. Oh, and one other thing -- is there a way to brighten the HUD? I have the brightness turned up all of the way but I still can't read parts of it in the daytime.

That's where I'm looking. AFAIK I have the latest beta version, and my manual is different. Not a big deal; I'm sure this will sort itself out. But this is the diagram in my manual: null

where can I find this new manual? The screenshot you have there is different than the TEDAC image that my current manual has on pg 87, as are the control descriptions.

From what I think I know, that is not a true statement. The FCR is an option on the D model, but there are or were plenty of D's flying without the FCR.

Modern (w/ screen)

The F/A-18 Missions for SC are missing in my OB installation. ???

https://www.helisimmer.com/news/virpil-entering-helicopter-market-showcases-collective No pricing announced that I've been able to find. If you have the coin, this is what I have on order (it's about $1000 for both stick and base): https://komodosimulations.co.uk/collections/collective/products/135-collective but I am nonetheless excited about the Virpil setup, as it's more suited to military helis.

I have my TMW grip mounted on the spendier Virpil base, along with the 100mm extension, and I love that setup. Now, I like a very light stick force (I spend a lot of time in helicopters, which I have some RL flight time in), which is probably why I like the Virpil base better, since it has "friction" adjustments on both axes. (I know it's rather expensive, but I have zero regrets in spending the extra coin.) The extension probably adds to that light feel. Until recently (when I bought a Monstertech MTX profile-based sim rig, as an xmas gift to myself), I was using the Virpil desk mounts on an Ikea "Fredrik" desk for the stick and TMW throttle, and those worked very well. Pursuant to my reply here, I just played around with the TMW base (with the F/A-18 grip installed), albeit not connected to my PC. I do not think I would like its (unmodified) feel for helicopters at all. Good luck in whatever you decide on!

I deleted those folders; same thing still happens. My controls (TMW throttle and Virpil MongoosT-50CM2) are calibrated and work fine in every other aircraft I've tried, including the Mi-8 and Gazelle. HOWEVER I just tried one of the instant actions that has the a/c running and on the ground at start, and sure enough the swash plate is tilted way back so that the main rotor mast-bumps and flies off. So @Holton181 was absolutely correct. I just checked the cyclic's Axis Tune settings, and -- sure enough, that was it. I have a Thrustmaster steering wheel connected to the same laptop, and it was auto-assigned axes (I wish they wouldn't do that). What's weird to me is that the Mi-8 and Gazelle worked fine with that setup. Maybe those models don't auto-assign controls the way the Huey does? (I thought that is a global action though.) At any rate, I'm up and running -- thanks folks for all of the input (har har). cheers, Dave

I have tried to instant action and training in the UH-1, which worked fine before (in the last couple months), but at some point it got porkulated. The main rotor is missing visually, and the instant that the sim starts in the cockpit, the gauges all "get weird" and the flight controls are non-responsive. There'a a big "clunk" upon first entering the cockpit. Should I delete/reinstall the aircraft? I haven't seen other mention(s) of this, but maybe I missed it. This experience has made me newly aware of how generally stable DCS-W is, considering how complex the sim is... But I want my Huey back :). thx, Dave

First. Day. Preorder. I'm all in.

Thanks @Campbell for your suggestions! I'll give them a whirl on the weekend.

I posted this in the server admin subforum, but am wondering if anyone saw it, so I'm posting it here: Hi, I set up a dedicated server on a laptop that I have. I fire it up and then the browser-based console, and everything seems fine -- my WAN IP address is correct, etc.. If I log into the DCS site and look at my server list, I can see the server listed along with my WAN IP address, although mission time is stuck at 00:00:00. If I click on the server name, I get the DCS Server Dashboard, but the server name is incorrect ("DCS Server") and the IP address is shown as 0.0.0.0. Most importantly, the server is not visible in the multiplayer server list. I have my Xfinity gateway's firewall level set to "low", so port 10308 should not be blocked. What am I doing wrong? Thanks!

Hi, I set up a dedicated server on a laptop that I have. I fire it up and then the browser-based console, and everything seems fine -- my WAN IP address is correct, etc.. If I log into the DCS site and look at my server list, I can see the server listed along with my WAN IP address, although mission time is stuck at 00:00:00. If I click on the server name, I get the DCS Server Dashboard, but the server name is incorrect ("DCS Server") and the IP address is shown as 0.0.0.0. Most importantly, the server is not visible in the multiplayer server list. I have my Xfinity gateway's firewall level set to "low", so port 10308 should not be blocked. What am I doing wrong? Thanks!

This airplane is a work of art, even in its early days. I just PP'd the team $100. I'm not bragging -- I just want to encourage other happy MB-339A pilots to help them out with whatever amount you can afford - I'm sure they'd appreciate ten bucks or a Starbucks gift cert (and btw I am sooo not a Starbucks fan, but it seems to be a sort of universal currency these days). There is a huuuge amount of work that's gone into this airplane module, and I'm a bit in awe of that. I have been spending a fair amount of time in DCS-W over the last few months, primarily in the A-10C (I bought a printed version of the manual! (from lulu.com) and the SA-342 Gazelle (all in single player training mode). I am so impressed with the team's work -- is this really a free module? I am hoping to fly it multi-crew with a friend, once I can get my standalone server working (but that's a topic for a different post). My only request at this point is to offer a different installation directory/drive. I am driving an Acer Predator laptop with a teeny (?) 256GB main drive, and so I added a 512MB SSD second drive, which is where I like to install non-Windows applications/mods. That is a low-priority request -- for now I can live with it, but I do try to keep non-Windows chaff off of the C: drive where possible. TT4N, Blave.

You don't have to be snarky about it. I have very little turbine time, and most of my time is in piston ships that don't have force trim (vs. just "trim"). That said, I'm here to say that I'm modifying my position about the SA-342. I've spent more time in the Gazelle and in the UH-1 (and to a lesser degree, in the Mi-8) since I first posted here, and I am starting to "get" why some folks are less than impressed with the Gazelle flight model. I now realize that it flies the way I *want* it to, not necessarily the way it really does :). I am now more anxiously awaiting an improved flight model, and will wring out the Huey some more. In my defense, I spent many many hours in FSX's helicopter model over several years, wishing it didn't suck, and even the Gazelle feels 10x better than that sorry thing, so maybe that's why I was so enamoured with the Gazelle for a while.

This thread is actually quite depressing to me, because as a real life (for fun) heli pilot, with just under 200 hours in trainer and single turbine ships (S300/R22/R44/MD500/Bell 406) -- I have had loads of fun in the Gazelle. It feels more realistic than anything I've flown in FSX or XPlane (and I have a lot of hours in the FSX 206, as annoying as it is flight model-wise). I haven't flown a single combat mission with the Gazelle; I just like messing around and landing on the nearest parking lot as I cruise around. So now I learn that it's not realistic. <Sigh> I have the UH-1 and the Mi-8 and I don't enjoy flying them that much. The Gazelle just feels right to me. Maybe I'm not as discerning as I should be, and I don't spend any time exploring the corners of the flight envelope, but -- it's FUN to fly and scratches my flying itch (I don't fly much IRL due to various reasons, the biggest one being $). So, I'll just wait for that new, more realistic FM that PolyChop promises... That will be interesting. (Edit: I meant to mention that I'm using a Virpil MongoosT-50CM2 base along with a TM Warthog grip and 100mm extension, with the centerless cam and very light pre-loading set. I think that makes a lot of difference in the way flying "feels".)

thanks for putting this together and making it available. I really suck at A2ARF but your mission gives me an easy way to work at sucking less :). cheers, Dave B.

Thanks for your efforts to put this together! The "quick ref" items to the various weapon deployment steps is much appreciated. cheers, Dave B.

file has disappeared At some point today, this checklist disappeared from the file library -- I get "Element Not Found". I know it was there earlier today... What happened? thanks, Dave B.

Here here, well said, except for all of the smileys. My eyes hurt. 8^) Dave. "The beatings will continue until morale improves."

Yes, BUT: As has been touched on, the throttle controls "spool up" the engines to operating RPM. After that, (at least in the Ka-50) you don't need to worry about the throttles, or cutoff levers of course. The engine management hardware/software will manage the rotor and engine rpms, as long as you don't exceed what the aircraft can "do". Unlike airplanes' propellers (airscrews :D), helicopters' rotor systems operate within a very narrow RPM range. For modern turbine helicopters (including the Ka-50), that RPM range is automatically managed for you. That said - if you try to pull in a big gob of power with the collective, eventually the engines will run out of steam and the rotor RPM will decay. Keep that up long enough, and you will fall out of the sky. BTW I haven't seen a lot of mention of this in the forums, but there is a gauge ("Engine Power Indicator") on the front-most RH wall panel that tells you how much power you're pulling "instantaneously". There are markers for takeoff, "maximum continuous", and cruise power levels. In real life, if you exceed these power levels for an amount of time that corresponds to that level (which is probably documented somewhere), you will incur very expensive damage to the engines, or destroy them outright. For all I know the DCS simulator models those limitations (it wouldn't surprise me!) but I'm not sure of it. Dave B.

I voted for the "A" model Apache because, as someone said "somewhere else" (probably in this forum), the D model's Longbow stuff is classified and past a certain point all would be guesswork. I'd rather have a very accurate A model than a less-so D model. At least, I think that's what I want. Part of me thinks that if the D model "study" largely emulated LB2's Longbow functionality, I'd be a very happy camper... But the main part of me (I think) wants accuracy. 8^) Dave.

FYI, I made my post when this thread had only one page. For some reason it was delayed in showing up in the thread. I would not've posted had all of this discussion already gone on - my point (or at least, opinion) has already been made by at least a couple people. regards, Dave.

<sigh> I CANNOT believe that anyone is complaining about non-functional switches in this sim. There are more switches in this "game" than (as we sometimes say in the US) "Carter's got little red pills". Have you actually gone through the procedure of getting the engines started in the Ka-50? E.g. if you try to start the second engine too soon when the first one is still spooling up, it will fail. I love fidelity, but most of the time I resort to the "cheat" just to get things to the point of being able to fly a mission. Every switch that has any possible impact on your initiating/flying/successfully completing a mission is modeled. I cannot believe the depth of systems simulation in BS, especially the ABRIS box - for crying out loud you can simulate non-operating satellites in the "GPS" system! I will estimate that 96.1 to 98.7 percent (approximately - I'm not real good at math) of the BS audience will NEVER experience every facet of what is simulated in DCS:BS. If you are not at least mostly (or in my case, completely) satisfied with the level of fidelity in this simulation, then you are in the wrong hobby. Dave B.