TX-EcoDragon

Nice work you guys! I'm so excited to see DCS getting some sweet aerobatic aircraft! As an aerobatic pilot who regularly flies the Extra, I'm kicking myself for not seeing this project sooner, as I'd love to help! I would definitely buy such a model, and know how much work goes into an aircraft even with "simple systems." Hopefully someday we'll stop seeing the posts that ask why we have aerobatic airplanes in DCS. Not only are these aircraft a ton of fun, great at increasing you pilot skills, and item #1 on some of our wishlists, but they also benefit the people who wouldn't bother trying them: They require high fidelity flight models and the FM features needed to capture the nuance of actually flying through aerobatic figures realistically helps evolve the base simulator.

She's my ex girlfriend, and one of the only people who I can put through most anything that airplane can do without her throwing in the towel (and this includes airshow types). Her new man doesn't fly aerobatics, but he's understanding about her need for G! The single seater makes more sense 90% of the time!

I'm really excited about this one! And it's $23! I can't even warm up it's big brother Pitts for that price!

Those libraries were the problem in some way, though I was only able to clear the error by completely re-installing, rather than attempting to update.

Same issue after removing and re-installing the various .NET, C++, and DX libraries... I miss DCS.

I have been getting the (0xc000007b) error with 2/3rds of my installs as well. I have updated .NET, DirectX, as well as Visual C++ with no change to this error. DCS World Open Beta version 1.5.6.5199 launches without issue, however DCS World and DCS World 2 Open Alpha both throw Error 0xc000007.

VR is awesome - I loved using it in DCS, and found the experience of being *IN* the sim really immersive. I'd have purchased a headset after that experience, except there was one big problem: the current VR headsets have a field of view which is much narrower than the human eye, and for users such as myself who weight peripheral vision very highly, a triple monitor setup plus TrackIR still gets you that better than VR. In a combat setting, also keep in mind that to check 6 with VR, you actually have to turn your head almost all the way around - even more than you would need to do so in actuality (for the FoV reason listed above). Once VR approaches representative field of view, I'll be first in line.

Here's ours, in our modded VolairSim. VolairSim Mods: *Replaced the bars on each side of the rudder pedals to allow for the width of our Crosswind pedals. *Added a much larger floor plate to bolt the pedals to, with no lip, along with a spacer between the pedals and plate to allow for heels on floor usage. *Shortened the 90 degree bracket to allow the center stick to rest lower. *Fabricated an aluminum plate to interface between the throttle quadrant and the stock plate. *cut and re-welded the right side stick arm (the angled one that also holds the keyboard tray) to allow for the side stick to move a bit closer towards the centerline. *shimmed the stick and throttle supports to eliminate slop. *built a steel dolly with wheels to affix it to, that enables portability. The MFG Crosswinds also have custom footplates on them that I designed in CAD, based roughly on some CAD that I got from Milan (MFG) and cut on our HAAS. The pedals are elevated above the custom floor plate to allow for heels on the floor operation and the balls of my feet can now rest on the pivot point of the toe brake actuators instead of above.

Still available?

Flying K4 through a torque roll, the engine fails and releases the smoke, go external then internal, and the sim crashed with the following report: Problem signature: Problem Event Name: APPCRASH Application Name: DCS.exe Application Version: 1.5.0.45208 Application Timestamp: 560e60b2 Fault Module Name: Weather.dll Fault Module Version: 1.5.0.45208 Fault Module Timestamp: 560bf204 Exception Code: c0000005 Exception Offset: 00000000000095a7 OS Version: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.1 Locale ID: 1033 Additional Information 1: 6725 Additional Information 2: 672530bb97b12d3b7cffcbc9e7f329c8 Additional Information 3: b483 Additional Information 4: b483bd324c6a9a849918545610d62239

Add me to the list of people who'd like to get in on this. I'd probably be in for two or three.

1) An Aerobatic prop aircraft, Sukhoi, Yak, Pitts, Extra...

I just grabbed the HUEY

In English it's called Pilotage. Dead or (more correctly) Ded-Reckoning is the related method which relies on using the compass, clock, and weather forecasts to fly a given heading, for a given time, using a calculated wind correction angle such that you end up near-ish to your desired destination, where you will then most likely need to use Pilotage to actually locate the destination. At very low altitudes, as would often be flown by rotorcraft in a combat setting, Pilotage is a challenge unless you have detailed maps (and detailed scenery) which shows local terrain features, roads, powerlines, train tracks, streams, rivers, and lakes etc.

Yes, that would be great! Thanks! Yes, I discovered the e key a few days ago. I hit 175 something without it but the main thing for me is the line through the course. I think there are a few more seconds waiting for me at the gates where the vertical is used...ie being as close to vertical when hitting them.

Only if your system is churning out a minimum average frame rate of 120 will there be much benefit from a 120Hz display. Given that such high frame rates are pretty uncommon in the flight sim genre you are probably better off getting a higher quality 60hz display, at least for flight sims.

I'm loving that we can haul @$$ in a high fidelity Mustang around a race track! Thanks again for your work on this Shadoh! I'd dig a Reno Style track packed with competitors, where each player has their times tracked, but I'm not sure it would be as exciting solo. A longer range endurance race where navigational accuracy and power system management factor in more would be fun too. You should make one GOZR! :-D Thus far my best time on the Batumi track in the P-51 is 171.55 [EDIT: Time now down to 171.26]

Nice looking gear! Subscribed.

Haha! Nice work!

I just revisited the DCS headroll in the P-51 and think any of you can confirm that there is excessive lateral displacement of the pilot torso as a result of aircraft roll. In fact it's so strong that initially it's the dominant force on the virtual pilot even if you kick a boot of rudder while flying straight and level! Thanks to yaw to roll coupling, kicking a lot of rudder but not adding aileron will produce some left aircraft roll, but obviously this should not be the dominant force, as there is far more significant left yaw produced by doing this and the pilot will experience this as a lateral shove towards the right side of the airplane. In DCS: P-51 the virtual pilot will be thrown initially to the left when you yaw left briskly, ie. inside of the skidded turn, instead of the outside, and then an instant later it switches to throwing him to the outside. The overall result is the pilot flopping around much more than is realistic, especially in situations with rapid roll transitions, and pitch and yaw inputs. I don't know what you disagree with. I've repeatedly acknowledged your freedom to tilt your head with abandon and I don't understand what your point is with your example, or see anything that there's any disagreement on. I'm quite familiar with looking though a turn and there's no reason you can't do what you are suggesting without the in game headroll, and with 1:1 scaling for roll in TrackIR.

Bottom line: I'd love to be able to enable the otherwise very well done head shake in DCS and not be forced into sloppy virtual head tilting. There's no reason to keep that component of the headshake at all, but if it could be optional that would be great! This was brought up in 2008, and I have had to have DCS headshake off ever since: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=33832 I'd love to turn it on and get the other effects. Please? I'll say thanks by buying the Huey!! :joystick:

Yes It's most natural and better imho that we can have consent over what our necks do, just as we would if we were in the aircraft. As my reply to you before suggested, I'm not here to tell heli pilots they gotta keep their heads straight up if they don't want to, I'm here to point out that we can do that even with headshake off and without TrackIR, so we don't need our virtual pilot doing it non-consensually, and those of us that do not want our heads to tilt are forced to turn off "Pilot head motion from G's forces" or whatever it's called in DCS. Exactly right! OK, we mostly agree then! But again - TrackIR should have no place in head tilt, unless we're talking about a guillotine simulator! Imagine the red horizontal line in this forum is the top of the glareshield of your instrument panel, say you want to tilt your head 10 degrees relative to that line, how do you do it? Hint: You don't need to turn on your TrackIR! See what I'm getting at?? When you tilt your real, actual human head, your eyes perceive that tilt...there's no reason to further augment the tilt. If you do, you end up with this cosmic portal of death:

Yes, most pilots of lower performance aircraft where maneuvering flight is incidental to their pilot duties. As maneuvering flight becomes the focus, you'll see fewer puppy-dogs in the pilot seat. I'm sure many people will be more comfortable head tilting. If you want to head-tilt in the sim aircraft you fly and the operations you fly it in, then that's simple enough to do...just tilt your actual head, even if you are a hat switch user your head actually tilts relative to the instrument panel and horizon just as in the real aircraft so there's no reason for the sim pilot's virtual head to tilt as well. I agree pretty much with IvanK in this debate.

It's not a matter of perception, or opinion. I don't know how to be any clearer than I've already been. In a coordinated, level turn, there is no net lateral acceleration on the pilot. Case closed. Yes, your drawing is wrong in a few ways. Most notably is that you aren't accounting for gravity, and the fact that the forces sum such that....you guessed it, there's no net lateral force on the pilot. See page 176 of Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/media/00-80T-80.pdf You may also find these useful: http://www.free-online-private-pilot-ground-school.com/Load_factors.html http://selair.selkirk.bc.ca/training/aerodynamics/turns.htm http://www.docstoc.com/docs/53946162/Turning-Flight http://www.av8n.com/how/htm/maneuver.html#sec-turns http://www.recreationalflying.com/tutorials/groundschool/umodule1b.html and of course: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMWxuKcD6vE

That is incorrect. In coordinated turns of any magnitude there is no perceptible force pushing you to either side of the cockpit. In your example of a 70 degree bank, assuming constant altitude, and coordinated flight, the pilot will experience a net load factor of +3Gz with no perceptible lateral G (Gx). In the case of uncoordinated flight, the slip/skid angle will result in a lateral acceleration that will move the pilot to the side of the cockpit if they do not correct this by restoring coordinated flight via proper rudder usage - this is the so called "seat of your pants flying" and in a well implemented headshake, the view will most certainly move laterally in this case...but NOT during coordinated flight. My TrackIR profiles have the roll axis disabled and the reasoning is much the same as my initial point. Think about it! It makes sense that we must (until we get better VR setups) apply a multiplier to the pitch and yaw axis of TrackIR because we must still look forward at the monitor even when we are checking 6 etc. However amplifying roll serves no realistic function. If I tilt my head 10 degrees, what *should* happen is the view on my monitor rotates 10 degrees, and with your TrackIR roll axis disabled that's exactly what happens (WOOT! 100% REALISM!). However, with my TrackIR roll function enabled then my pilot appears to be sitting upside down in the airplane (BOO! 0% REALISM). Why introduce all of these artificial obstacles to the one part of our view system which works 100% realistically? Yeah...it's foolish, yeah, it's "too much."