Swift.

Looks like you've got a fair few mods throwing errors back at you here. Have you tried removing those mods and repairing DCS, just to check?

The gunner being centered is a different issue to the one raised in this thread. Having said that, it's not incorrect. Look at the seat position in the cockpit. You will notice the seats are offset to the right hand side, to make space for the collective on the left side. The TDU is centered in the cockpit however, making it look offset relative to the seat.

It looks like the default TEDAC viewport is now called 'TEDAC'. So we don't need to mod one in anymore. You will however notice the same issue with this export as with all exports: it's hopelessly dim.

Or a black screen with a faint 'whop whop whop'... But you make good points. AH1F AH1W - pre MWS, CM or CNU AH1Z - 2008 with MWS and hellfire etc.

I know the T had an RWR in 1983 at least, it's described in the manual. I can't find anything about AAR-47 on the Whisky other than it's some time after 1998 and it definitely got it at some point. I do agree about the G though. I'm just keen on a round glass canopy because it's got a better view out the front without the rail in front of you face. If I could have 3 cobras, I'd take a Zulu (I only have knowledge about the 2009 model), a post CM or post CNU Whisky (ideally with AAR-47 but idk how it's implemented), and either a T or an S.

I feel like if we were to expect a cobra, it would be a Whisky. It just seems like the flagship cobra. But then again, you could make a strong argument for the 1G to match with the existing Huey in game. Overall I think I'd like one that at least has an RWR, just for functionality.

OK, I have decided. My Cobra wishlist in order: AH-1Z AH-1W AH-1T AH-1S AH-1Q AH-1J AH-1G (Flat glass cobras are ugly, I don't want them)

FWIW, UH-1N served in Vietnam. It was just the twin engine version that the marines wanted. Obviously, as with AH-1W, there is a broad spread of capabilities and upgrades. For example, both of these are UH1N cockpits, but one is obviously more modern than the other:

Can you get your DCS log when these crashes happen?

Instant mode doesnt require you to have a 'stay where it is joystic'. Instant is the same as the options available in other DCS helicopters.

It looks like it cant display negative numbers, right?

Instead of thinking of the Go/NoGo numbers directly, think about what they represent. If I tell you the max gross weight you can hover OGE is 18000lbs. How can you tell that your aircraft is above or below that weight, other than trying to hover OGE and seeing that the torque is limiting? The thing about torque is that for a given set of environmental conditions, the torque will correlate to the gross weight of the aircraft, very predictably. So you can calculate what torque will represent a gross weight of 18000lbs at a given altitude (in this case 5ft). And then if we hover at 5 ft and see the torque is higher than that number, we can say that the gross weight is higher than the 18000lbs we used to calculate from. Thats what Go/NoGo is, its a value that if you are above you can determine you are above the max GWT.

Yes. Its only 'yaw' and 'pitch' so to say. As those are the motions defined in the model. By default you get 'yaw' motion only. The 'pitch' motion is disabled in MP, but enabled in SP. CoreMods/aircraft/FA-18C/FA-18C.lua

There are more ranging sources than laser though. I'd imagine it would give the TOF until the current ranging whether or not that's where the missile is actually going.

I believe it still oscillates, the hold mode efficacy was considered a worthy sacrifice to counter the 'sticky' collective issue. As for whether I should have disclosed that I was using a tweaked FM, I don't see the importance tbh. Its not changing the actual FM its just changing what the breakout zones for the yaw are. If your problem is that you are wobbling all over the shop, having a slightly more sensitive yaw (as per the mod) isnt going to change that. It just makes it easier to set up stuff like hovering rocket firing.

FM edit yes, I use Scaleys mod because the default yaw breakout values are way too high. I use the two technique because the SCAS is still WIP, so it's disengaging when you hold the FTR instead of augmenting.

Like this?

I find myself wholeheartedly disagreeing with your sentiment. I have no RL flight experience, but I can confidently say that if the apache we have in game becomes any less sensitive it will become too dull to control. And you will end up in PIO city. This is a short vid I made a while back. 0 curves, 0 extension, 100% saturation, 0 deadzone.

Indeed, but the friction modelling in DCS is a bit off. So you will often see the tail just sliding sideways as you try to drag it forwards to recentre. The best technique I've found, which is super gamey, is to just lift the tail wheel ever so slightly. It doesn't even need to fully leave the ground for it to pop back into line. Alternatively, you might be able to drag the wheel sideways as intended and then dump the collective to suddenly drop pressure onto the wheels and increase the friction again. But thata also super gamey.

I didn't think they had added dynamic harmonisation yet.

Its an issue with the MPDs too, its just not offset like the TEDAC so you dont notice. The way it seems the rendering pipelines work in apache is you have the basic video feed then overlayed with the cockpit glass texture, and then when you export you get another video laid on top of that. Which is why you lose the glass effects on the display when you export. Also part of the reason its so glaringly bright.

Sweet, thanks BN. Do you know if that fix applies to the double rendering of the MPDs aswell?

Anecdotally, I was sat on the ramp at nellis with the HMD as sight (so no man trk input to the TADS). And it looked like it was drifting about a degree a second.

Its a shame they won't get a straight set of pylons to go with those beefy engines. Alas!

That might have been an exaggeration on my part, I apologise. But 'Easily' might be a similar exaggeration by you no? I'm just digging through the numbers now, it also looks like hornet can climb a little bit quicker than rhino. And I think might have a slightly higher ceiling. And going off of a sample loadout of 2W2A1 on both aircraft, it looks like hornet might accelerate from endurance to 1.1 a tiny bit faster than rhino. So all in all pretty close performance, but I think I still give it to the hornet.