Blackjack_UK

Here you go: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=264457&highlight=baked+reflections&page=4 Post #37

I don't quite know how to search on here, but there definitely is a thread which tells you how to get rid of them. Or maybe there's a download link for new textures. But a cure is available.

Makes sense :thumbup: I read your message carefully - your messages are worth reading carefully, so I guess it was a translation error... BTW, what the translated message said was "IMHO, I believe that this switch sets the temperature of the powder charge of the ATGM propulsion system, which accordingly depends on the temperature of the surrounding air." I *think* that would translate as "IMHО, я считаю, что этот переключатель задает температуру порохового заряда двигательной установки ПТУР, которая соответственно зависит от температуры окружающего воздуха." Edited to add your initial quote but also to say that re-reading it in the context of your reply I can see what you meant. Machine translation is good. Just not *quite* good enough...

That's not entirely accurate. I interviewed Dr Mikheyev in, I think, 1992 and he quite openly stated that one of the specified mission profiles was to stalk and kill NATO (he actually said NATO but the official translator changed it to "Enemy") attack helicopters and to carry out precision strikes on defensive positions. That then got "corrected" to carrying out precision strikes on advancing enemy units... So the majority of what you say is absolutely right, and with the adoption of Ka-52 into service the Ka-50 was always going to wither on the vine. But that doesn't mean, in this pseudo-realistic world where Ka-50 is in mass service, that certain defensive and sensor capabilities wouldn't have been implemented...

I *think* that rather than affecting the rocket burn temperature, this control adjusts presets for air density, which will make a difference to aerodynamic performance and thus range and control effectiveness. But I may be mistaken. It doesn't matter anyway as the control has no effect in the sim, just discussing it for the sake of it. Definitely not looking for an argument ;)

De nada :)

To be all helpful, like: Cabin light switches and adjustments not working, Auxiliary panel lights switch does nothing Cockpit instrument lights switch also turns on auxiliary panel lights Cockpit instrument intensity button also affects the intensity of PVI lights PVI intensity button does nothing Top panel intensity button does nothing Auxiliary panel intensity button does nothing When the throttle lever is raised (idle / auto) there is no EKRAN alert when starting with manual procedure, but there is an alert when doing an automatic start. (I'm not commenting on the validity, just trying to make life easy)

Hi, The NVG compatible cockpit lighting is now so dim as to be nigh-on unusable. I suspect it's linked to the separately reported nav lights and beacon glitch. Interestingly, tip lights are still fine. Cheers,

I worked for Novalogic for a while and was tech consultant on Comanche 3 and Comanche 4, as well as the simulator program for the DoD... Happy days.

I think you'll find the flight model is BSx is rather more realistic than LB2, but tactically everyone else is right - it's a helicopter and NOE flight is generally the way to go. As regards multiplayer, I'm currently working on a whole raft of helo only (or helo as main role with FW support after) missions to build into a multiplayer campaign which I will put online after it's been tested... Watch this space.

Alligator is the Ka-52. Ka-50 reporting name was Hokum, allegedly because there was so much disinformation, rumour and wild exaggeration going around about it. Hmm, sounds like another way this sim is realistically modelled... The aircraft was originally called "Werewolf" and only changed to "Black Shark" after appearing in a movie of the same name. Really. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5140952/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

I think it was me... Still behaves a little strangely but it seems to be mostly working now. I'll keep messing with it until I get it figured out.

It seems that whatever weather criteria I set - either using a preset or customising - as soon as you save a mission it defaults to Default weather. Clear skies, wisps of cloud. Lovely for hill walking but a bit crap for building a tactical environment where you need to use poor weather to hide from AAA... This is on OB 2.5.6.xx (latest patch)

It's a ballistic setting that adjusts the aim point to take into account different weights etc. It doesn't choose what you fire.

Good heavens - a reasonable response! This is the Internet you know - is such a thing allowed? You're absolutely right, of course. Each to their own, and there's plenty of room in this community for differing viewpoints...

OK, then I will try to make it more clear. Factual = clear evidence that something exists/existed. Realistic/believable = clear evidence that something close exists/existed AND that it would be logical to assume that under slightly different circumstances the proposed configuration would have become fact. Fantasy = anything else. I'm assuming you also aren't an avionics engineer, otherwise you'd already have worked out how it could be done and what changes would have been needed. And with respect I'd say that makes your opinion no more valid than anyone else's. But it doesn't really matter anyway - ED will do what they feel is best and we'll either embrace it or not. I'm looking forward to what they come up with, you obviously are not. Your choice.

That's not what I am looking for at all. Like I said, I actually agree with you. You said Igla, can't work in a chopper, I just clarified that it can work in *a* chopper, just not this one...

Fair enough - I understand your point and see what you mean. I think I even agree with you, to an extent. Though just to be clear, we do know that Igla can work in a chopper (KA-52, for example) - just not this one, right?

No, I can't. I'm not an avionics engineer. I also can't tell you that the next release would have done so. But it's not a totally fantastic leap of faith to suggest that it would. I'm happy to continue a reasonable and civil conversation on this. Our opinions are just that, and as many have said they're unlikely to make much difference to ED. But I'm not going to get worked up about it, I'm just looking forward to whatever they give us.

I've kept pretty quiet on this one so far, but as conversation has now got reasonable, here's my take. I think we can all agree that what is being proposed for BS3 is realistic if not actually factual. This is important. We're not looking at a TIE fighter, or even Airwolf. We're looking at something which is a logical extension of the earlier version, had Russia elected to continue down that development path. We're also looking at something which has existed in parts, just never together as the whole. So historically accurate? No. Practically realistic and believable? Yes. We also can't discount Field Modifications as well. Might a unit have jury-rigged Iglas? Especially if they had access to -52 wings... It may or may not be a practical thing to do. But you can bet that if it came to it, folks would have found a way to do it - us military types are good like that... A slightly related question. If a Huey picks up a Stinger team you've now got a Stinger armed Huey. Likewise Iglas in an Mi8 or a Hind. I don't know because I haven't tried - can passengers fire from helicopters? 'Cos that would make CAS missions interesting - take one cab with a couple of Stingers or Iglas and some reloads and really piss off the CAP when they come find you...

The dust doesn't dissipate fast enogh. But much of the time there shouldn't be dust...

It has, I believe, yes. Might be worth mentioning it again though... Edited to say it's reported so hopefully in the fix cycle: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=243817

I guess the alternative for helos is for AWACS to call "SCRAM" but that won't work properly until the vast cloud of dust generated by a chopper on the deck, regardless of terrain, is fixed...

True, but it also had a nasty habit of stalling the fenestron as well. But yes, I do remember G limits (though it was 40 years ago and I've had a couple of big bangs on the head since). There was something else that it bot you with, but I can't remember what. Just remember arriving at a crash site to see the student and instructor sat in their seats, basically unhurt, upright, with the rest of the aircraft scattered around them in barely recognisable pieces...