Jester986

That was a little disappointing. The dispersion fix is good news but with the big update hinted for next week i was hoping for something on the hornet or supercarrier.

I play a lot of singleplayer and unfortunately I'm subject to the whims of the AI flight model. With the WWII content coming please consider making adjustments. I understand that it can't have the detail as the player aircraft without melting our cpu's into slag. But chasing F-5's, Mig-15s, and 109s on endless vertical loops isn't fun. The F-5 aggressor campaign is a perfect example. The second mission is practically unplayable when dogfighting other F-5s because they can go vertical forever while you quickly lose energy. The only way to beat it is using wildly unrealistic tactics.

I want all of the century series, so definitely on board for a Starfighter.

Seems in poor taste to me, but not enough to make me really care. If ED does do this though, please really give a lot of thought to PR. You don't want to look like your trying to capitalize on a pandemic. It's not a coronoavirus sale its a since you all are trying to avoid the public sale. Obviously someone in marketing can phrase it better than me but you get the idea.

Plus its older and therefore cool :)

In real life you learn your aircraft. The position of the collective generally corresponds to a certain torque. It's not exact but enough to know when you need to look at the gauge when your longlining, which is when the lack of an audio cue becomes a problem. Otherwise you should be constantly scanning all your gauges in between scanning the environment. Your never flying around just staring out the window. Also in the aircraft I have the most experience in I can tell by the engine sound where its at. I'm not there yet with my other aircraft but luckily it has an extra set of gauges built into the door that I can see while long lining. Some newer helicopters do have audio cues for when your approaching or at max torque but I doubt the gazelle does. If someone could knows better than great lets get it added. But for most people its just a quick glance at the gauge in between checking everything else that you have to keep an eye on.

To be fair the Gazelle does seem to lose an excessive amount of rpm compared to a real world helicopter like an astar. But an auto in the gazelle is definitely still doable. Have to talk to the mechanics and have em make a few turns down on the pitch links.

Cyclic goes back to increase the airflow threw the blades. In an autorotation the air going up threw the rotor disk keeps them spinning and generating enough lift to keep you from dropping like a brick. Adjusting the collective changes the size of three aerodynamic regions of the blade: the driven region, the driving region and the stall region. The overall lift vector of the driven region is behind the vertical so that lift also adds drag to the rotor system. The driving region's lift vector is forward of the vertical with respect to the rotor blades. That is where the energy is coming from to keep your blades spinning. The stall region contributes nothing but drag where as the driven and driving regions are producing the lift that keeps you in the air. You control the size of these regions with the collective and control the airflow through rotor disk with the cyclic. This gives you two ways to manage rotor rpm. Lower collective and aft cyclic both increase rpm while raising collective and forward cyclic decrease it. You can also look at it as trading airspeed for rotor rpm. My 206 has a little blue line at 100 knots to indicate that above that speed you will be in such a nose low attitude as to not have enough airflow to maintain rpm. It varies for every helicopter but generally speaking around 52-55 knots is going to give you your lowest rate of decent and around 90 knots will give you your longest glide. Between 60 and 70 knots is usually a good compromise because you'll have enough energy in your airspeed to convert to rpm in your flare to landing.

I'd like a T-2, T-28, or T-45. All would be pretty cool and it would be nice to have a carrier trainer just for kicks. Unfortunately I don't think we'll see too many more trainers unless a new Dev does one as an initial DCS release. And our newest Dev is already starting with the A-7

Awesome. It will make a good hunter killer team with GBU-12s and the Kiowa when it comes out.

I wouldn't have guessed since you posted about it.

There's a difference between planned and announced. I think we've seen pictures of a rough port of their FSX A-7 in DCS, but a fair assumption is if there's no deal signed with ED it's fair game. Hopefully the different devs would have a gentleman's agreement not to poach other's modules, but I'm guessing Razbam isn't too upset given the years long backlog of modules they have.

So you don't want new developers joining the DCS community?

cool, I hope they do a good job.

Was glad to see the Japanese skins selected. Those will come in handy with the Marianas.

Sorry to see some people aren't haveing a great experience with it. I think it looks amazing in VR. Thank you ED.

I have sslr off but still have reflections...

Agreed! Thank you for the beautiful new cockpit ED, but baked in canopy reflections are so immersion breaking. Please add option to disable.

Tucking can be expected without a loss of components as well. The change in CG exagerates it but most helicopters will tuck the nose if at high speed and very out of trim because of the sideways-ish airflow. Atleast I know a 500 and a 206 will. Never tried it in a Huey.

Thanks! I know it'll take years but I can't wait to see a Pacific theatre get filled out. It's nice to know the man himself has an interest in it.

Functionaly an Mi-26 wouldn't be too different from the Mi-8 we already have, although it would be really cool. I'd rather see a CH-46 as it would add something new with the tandem rotor and it would go well on the Tarawa.

Could you post the link to the thread where Mr. Grey says the F6 is happening?

Thanks for posting this! That's exciting news!

Because we're talking about the Pacific theater here. While it would be great that it can pull double duty in both theaters and its fair to mention that, a conversation strictly about its European merits belongs in that sub forum. Because of the maps we have inbound and the likely focus on carrier combat priority for Pacific aircraft should be given to the most influential of that campaign. Otherwise it would be like if I went on the European subforum and said we needed the F4F because they flew off British carriers and did fleet protection during the invasion.

Try the ones attached to the puma proflight trainer ;)