heloguy

I guess I need to go back and mess with it (moving, and just had to pack up my SIM computer). Yeah, gauges need to be visible when looking underneath the goggles, but unreadable through the goggles.

What do you mean by not functional?

Actually, you do adjust focus IRL when you first put them on. You just wouldn't adjust focus after that unless it was not done correctly in the first place. The above pictures with the dome light off where the instruments are easy to read are completely unrealistic. The dome light on pic is much more representative of what it looks IRL. I have about 600 NVG hours in helos, so I'm speaking from experience, not just trying to say harder is more realistic.

Instruments should be unreadable through the NVGs if focused correctly. That's why they aren't supposed to be right up against your face, so you can look under them to see the instruments.

Only one day for a track and balance?! That's a good day...

Sweet, thanks EvilBivol.

I know there is a mod for this already, and I'm not really sure which NVGs are modeled in the sim, but is there anyway to have a smaller, more circular FOV with the NVGs? This would be a ton more realistic than the current football view. Also, adjusting the gain is not possible with current real ANVIS 9s. Only focusing them, which should yield a 1:1 magnification (i.e. no magnification).

Not sure if anyone else can confirm, as I'm not sure if I tried this with the G940 before or after I did the force feedback workaround with the Sim FFB program, but the last time I tried turing off the force trim via the switch on the center console, all of my force gradient remained on the stick. Maybe this is just a bug with the G940, but could someone try it with a different FFB stick?

Yeah, I was looking for that the other day when trying a night flight. Everything seemed pretty bright in the aircraft, then I noticed that the cabin dome lights were on and started looking for the switch.

Actually, in my experience, flying in places in the world like this, it's likely that the maps represented in this sim are pretty close to what a U.S. or NATO pilot would probably have. The only way to make it better perhaps would be to scale the mission editor in to take screen shots for your iPad. Kind of like mission planning software. I thought the kneeboard system was kind of refreshing compared to other sims, like CLoD, or IL2 1946, where it seems like the consensus among those developers is that flying with a line drawn on the map is somehow a cheat, even if you have icons turned off. What pilot would fly without a freaking line drawn on his map? Would be nice if we had a tacan in the thing. I'm willing to bet that Chair Force Huey's probably had it, or at least some of them did depending on where they were based. Wouldn't mind getting rid of that 3 needle altimeter on the pilot's side while they're at it. Just give me the same one as the co-pilot...

Thanks a lot, that's even better than my previous workaround!

I know it's been said a whole lot already, but just wanted to say thanks again for such a great sim. Just for the hell of it, I did a hover power check at the end of the second mission in the campaign. 29.92, 5ft. skid height on the helipad. About 250ft PA, 15 degrees C, and 28psi on the torque, and when I checked it out on the hover chart in the UH-1H -10, it came out to just shy of 8000lbs. I exited out, and opened up the mission editor, and sure enough, the A/C weight after dropping off the cargo was set at 7,798lbs. That's amazing!

So I am using the "macro" workaround to get the trim forces to release when I press the trim switch, which seems to be working fine (i.e. creating a macro that continuously presses and releases the trim switch in Logitech Profiler), but I would like to know which button sound the trim uses so I can disable the sound. It's a little crazy since the Profiler software is constantly pressing and releasing the button.

Looks great! Shouldn't have guns, though...

It shouldn't be as loud as the Shark's. I'm pretty sure the UH-1 force trim is about the same as that in a B206, which I've flown, and you couldn't even hear it. From what I understand, the force trim system being so loud in the Shark is one of its unique attributes.

If you mean the cyclic has too much authority, I agree. I fly helos IRL as well, just not Hueys. A buddy of mine has in the past, though, and always mentions how stable they are. The cyclic control would be fine, if the teetering motion didn't happen when static. In my experience with semi-rigid helicopters, the teetering motion gradually gets worse with over-controlling. This one moves 5-8 degrees on the artificial horizon without touching the cyclic at a hover.

Tried a couple of autos today. Just had my pit packed up for a move, but set up the computer with an old X-45. First of all, after some fiddling around with the curves, I was able to get a decent enough hover that I was comfortable trying some power on autos. I landed my first auto in this thing with my pit setup (floor mounted Warthog, separate collective, and Saitek pedals), but had issues with this portable setup. Now, I know part of it is the controls, I do sense, and sensed the first go I had with my pit, that the pitch control seems to be too dependent on collective use during the auto. Initially, when entering an autorotation, the nose will pitch down in this bird (since it doesn't have SAS, or any other form of AFCS), but after pulling back to get to my auto speed (shooting for 60kias, as I was taught on the 206, and I'm not sure if there is a difference, will consult the -10), it seems like if I want to start my decal, I have to pull in a little collective to get the ship to respond. The aerodynamics of an auto allow for full A/C control, and on no A/C I've flown have I had to do this, except in a simulator. The auto seems fine otherwise, just needs to be a little more responsive in the pitch axis once steady state IMHO, unless a real Huey driver can attest to the above behavior. Edit: realized this should be in the bugs and problems forum, sorry. If it could be moved, mods, I would most appreciate it, or I can repost.

Yeah, I think it's good, but it could be great. Black Shark is great. This could be there, but it still seems a little off in stability. I don't have much, but my 800 hours in helicopters tells me it could be a little more stable. Harder doesn't equal more realistic.

I hear you man, but I have my cyclic floor mounted with an extension. I've tried increasing the curvature, but really it seems to deaden the input too much. Linear is fine for a hover, and easy to work with for forward flight I've found (as in the Dodo Sim for FSX and FS9). It's not the inputs that bothers me, but the oscillation during flight. Without any movement, the helicopter wants to move quite a bit laterally, and seems too sensitive in the pitch. I watched Furia's video, and I noticed the same side-to-side movement. I don't think a properly tracked-and-balanced Huey would oscillate so much, based on my experience with various helicopters with various rotor configurations.

That's awesome dude. Just remember, every time you touch the tail skid, that's a case of beer for the crewchiefs.

Took it for another spin around Tblisi. Still feels way too squirrely. The main differences between a Hawk and a Huey should be performance ( ie engine power effects) and A/C reaction due to rotor system differences (fully articulated vs. semi-rigid). The 206, while different than the Huey, definitely seemed more stable in a hover than this sim. In flight, the same. The sim oscillates too much in the roll channel. I've flown instruments in a 206 and had to touch the cyclic less after setting trim than I do in the pattern in this sim.

It seems awesome so far...too bad I have to tear down my sim to move tomorrow. Took it for a couple of patterns in instant action, and it does seem a little squirrely. I'm a UH-60 pilot, and I figured it wouldn't be as stable as a hawk (obviously), but I was sure it wouldn't be this squirrely. I've got a guy in my unit that started out in Apaches, then went to UH-1s before coming to Hawks. When I asked him about flying Hueys the first word that came out of his mouth was 'stable.' This thing feels like the hydraulics are turned off. The pendulum action feels a little overdone. I would expect maybe one or two degrees, but I seem to be getting 5+ degrees with little to no cyclic movement. Using a brand new Warthog btw. I know if I had to go back and hover a 206, it'd be humbling, but I figured this would be somewhere in between.

Actually, the image in NVGs is not magnified at all. It is 1:1 when properly focused. 64 guys can fly with NVGs, or with their integrated night vision system. Their NVS is also 1:1, without magnification. It's just situated in the front, and therefore a little offset when viewing things off to the side up close. This can cause a little confusion, but they usually get used to it.

I did a clean install of the new drivers from nvidia, using driver sweeper after the uninstall of the old ones. So far, so good. I made it about twenty minutes on the first mission of the campaign before being smoked by a Shilka. Better than a CTD though. I'll post back if I have any more issues, thanks.

Thanks for the reply, I'll try it out. Edit: Searching on the Creative website, I think I have the latest drivers there. The software autoupdate only lists some programs that I have chosen not to install, like Mediasource 5 Player, WaveStudio, 3D MIDI Player, Media Toolbox, and Sound Font Manager. I'll try out the graphics drivers though.