Sid6dot7

Can confirm. Cargo operations only work fine for the Mi-8. With the KA-50 and UH-1 you can't unhook your cargo.

Could you unhook the cargo? Didn't work for, same with the UH-1. For the Mi-8 sling loads are working perfectly fine.

OK, I deleted the DCS directories of all old installations in my "Saved Games" folder and the problem is fixed after DCS 1.5 created the new files. :doh: Thread can be closed.

I'm getting a black screen when changing the visibility range setting to anything other than 'High'. Tried several daytime conditions, aircraft and map positions, no change. Apparently the simulation itself is running fine in the background except for the black screen. Can anyone else confirm this?

:thumbup: But there is an error in the announcement, TFC will be called Tie Fighter Collection from now on. May, 4th be with you.

I want a Hawk

Yup, me too.

Yep, we would really call it 'coloured fluid dynamics' otherwise. You can calculate everything with CFD but that doesn't mean it's (physically) correct, only mathematical. What hardly is possible are real time solutions out of exact calculations if the mesh exceeds a certain simplicity (dependent on fluid flow model and iteration methods). Complexity would be the wrong word for such a mesh.

Increasing drag when extending the gear doesn't necessarily result in a loss of airspeed. Especially not on an 'instable' platform like a helicopter. The result could also be an attitude change, which lowers the helis nose a bit and you loose altitude, but maintain your speed. Attitude changes are energetically more efficient, so an unstable platform will likely do this. More stable platforms like airplanes have a higher resistance to such changes and therefore are more likely to just bleed airspeed. But generally parasitic drag (like a retractable gear) has a lower influence on helicopters due to their lower flight speeds and their overall larger drag index compared to airplanes.

That site is part of getgamesgo.com which itself is legit.

Danke MemphisBelle, du sprichst mir aus der Seele! :thumbup:

It is what the gauge indicates: the gas generator speed/rpm or the working turbine's rpm. Mainly used in turboprops. The propeller's/free turbine's rpm thus are named "Np".

I knew someone will mention it. :thumbup: Thought of that, but I think the annoying acoustical warning is more important. Dunno Do you know if the use of red is dependend of the nvgs type or is it a special wavelength (e.g. more orange) to make it more visible?

It was mentioned somewhere in the forums in context of the Fire T-Handles lightning color.

Your example should be a part of the A-10A (and/or early C without NVS?). The C in DCS, as in reality, has the monocolored (green) AOA Indexer because of it's night vision capable cockpit. As you won't see any other red lightning in the pit.

Stimmt, da war mal was. Das kann natürlich auch die Ursache sein. Hier der Link zu den 1.1.0.8.-Missionen: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1217182&postcount=1

Ich hab die Mission nicht gemacht, aber du sollst doch bestimmt den ILS-Empfänger einstellen und aktivieren, oder? Die Frequenz eingestellt hast du ja, danach noch einmal auf den linken Drehschalter mit der rechten Maustaste klicken. Dann sollte der äußere Ring (mit dem kleinen Dreieck) des Drehschalters von OFF auf PWR schalten. Am Navigation Mode Select Panel (NSMP) den ILS-Button drücken und evtl. den PTR-Schalter von STOW auf ABLE schalten. Mit letzterem würdest du die ILS-Nadeln im ADI bekommen, falls benötigt.

And on the next pass "Look ma', no teeth!"

+1 for the UFC Won't have a problem with some DIY, if it could help lowering the price.

Ok, danke. Dann bleibt der Somikon vorerst eine Alternative. Ich werde erstmal weiter suchen, vielleicht finde ich noch was. Ist halt schade, dass es so wenig (gar keine?) 7'' in 4:3 gibt. Und Touchfunktion brauche ich nicht wirklich, aber das treibt den Preis.

Mal noch eine Frage zu den Somikon-TFTs von Pearl: Fьllen die in der Hцhe die MFCDs voll aus? Oder ist die Displayhцhe etwas kleiner?

If the viewpoint of the upper pic (with the ships) is similar to the lower one, then yes. For cameras the focal length should be similar aswell. With differing lenghts you will have different reflection amounts. Little example to show the influence of viewing angle and focal distance. The exposure times of all 3 images aren't exactly the same (1/640, 1/1000, 1/640), but their influence is very little (i.e. details in the sky). The aperture value was the same for all pictures, only the exposure times were varied. No filters were attached, no polarisation or others. The last two pictures were taken within 5 minutes, with nearly steady weather conditions. The first one is about 25 minutes later. First picture Focal distance = 6.90mm. exposure time = 1/640, high viewing angle: Second picture Focal distance = 31.20mm. exposure time = 1/1000, lower viewing angle: Third picture Focal distance = 72.00mm. exposure time = 1/640, lowest viewing angle:

Additionally, the effect of focal distance I mentioned is seen in the pictures. The picture with the lower pov was surely made with a telephoto lens (less reflection) and the one with higher pov with a wide-angle lens (more).

@Kuky You misunderstood. As I wrote "one...no offense intendend", I wasn't pointing at you! But at forums, I often see people arguing only with their "feelings/thinkings" and without reliable sources (i.e. "Envelope of Flight Model"-Thread in A-10 Beta Forum). I simply say, that you can't compare what you see, with those photos unless you know how they're made (boundary conditions), because that causes non-negligible influences to the result. And optics, like many other natural sciences/mechanics, are simple only at the first look and can get very fast very complex. Especially when you go into detail. And, I was myself at see often. Besides that I'am observing my environment much more, than most of my fellow men. As said I didn't want to personally offend you.

UV/IR has influence on sensors of digital cameras. Through interference it can dampen or amplifying sensitivity for other wavelengths. But what I've twisted was, that UV/IR in most cases amplifies "reflections" from intense light sources, which can result in unwanted reflexes. But they're unlike water reflections. The objective itself has an influence aswell. High focal distances damping, low focal distance objectives, like wide angle ones, amplifying reflections. Because wide angle ones are capturing more light of different angles, so the area for capturing reflections is wider. It's okay to mention that and think about. But aswell you (one...no offense intended ;)) need to think about how to proof your assumptions and keep aware of influences on your proofs. It's the same with video proofs. In most cases too many facts are unknown, so it's not a reliable source at all.