Flamin_Squirrel

I fly an R22 which is about as twitchy as they get. The DCS Huey feels much much more stable in comparison, so I can believe it's probably about right.

Yep. Of course another benefit of a shallow approach is that you can aim to enter ground effect just before you lose ETL, which make things easier.

Sorry but that's completely wrong. You SHOULD make your approach as if you're flying fixed wing. The steep approach you're suggesting is exactly how players get into trouble. Not only is your suggestion dangerous from a VRS point of view, it leaves you in the "dead man's curve" where auto-rotation is impossible in the event of an engine failure. No pilot in their right mind what do what you're suggesting (with the possible exception of a confined area, but that doesn't apply here).

Agreed. If you're looking to make your fortune, DCS isn't the way to do it. In fact I'm surprised it's a viable business at all given how niche it is. I believe ED are genuinely trying to developing the best sim they can with the resources they have. Which is partly why I'm frustrated they won't be more open, in order to reduce the incidences of threads like these.

I think we're probably in the worst state I've seen in the last 10 years, but I think it's for the right reasons. Sure the Hornet and Viper are not in the greatest position, but I think that's because they're developing much of the technology that will be essential for these (and future) modules. I think we need to view the sim as a whole rather than individual modules - it should get better from here. That said, their comms are awful.

You're an active forum member who's been here for 5 years, so you know what to expect. Put yourself in the shoes of a new customer, with no knowledge of the news letters and may not frequent the forums. The primary source of info you have is the product page which doesn't really provide much detail. The number of threads like this indicate there's an issue, even if you may not agree with it yourself..

Why? The F16 isn't designed to land on a carrier. The hook would probably get ripped off if you tried, assuming there was much left of the plane after the gear collapsed.

Couldn't agree more. Referring people to a news letter which they may not even know about is a cop out. A proper road map should be on the product page for every module - it would eliminate the need for many of these types of threads.

Hopefully it'll help someone, but I've attached a track of a gentle approach. Constant angle approach with a gradual deceleration, losing ETL as I enter ground effect. mi8 landing.trk

Please be more open minded. It's perfectly possible to love ED's (completed?) products and still be frustrated with the lack of comms at the same time.

Not really; your vertical speed is a function of your airspeed and descent angle. Look after those and vertical speed takes care if itself.

You shouldn't be below transition speed until you're entering ground effect anyway, at which point you're not going to be looking at your VSI.

To keep a nice constant decent, find a reference point on the canopy or frame in line with your landing spot and keep it there. It won't move up/down if your approach is steady. Ignore the VSI. A steady approach angle and air speed control is what you need. A gradual reduction in air speed as you come in to land will help with the shaking (the faster you decelerate the more violent, so avoid that). Once you've got the hang of that, start thinking about landing accuracy.

Those are certainly limitations of a desktop sim, but I doubt they're likely to be the biggest issue here. I'd bet Backdraft's approach are simply too steep. You don't get into VRS from lowering the collective; in fact quite the opposite. 3 things are required to enter VRS: Low forward airspeed Descending Power (collective) applied This is why steep approaches are so risky, because by their very nature you're likely to be checking off points 1 and 2 from the list. Add power to arrest your descent at the end, and you're straight into VRS. No need to check VVI either. If you maintain a constant (shallow) angle of approach, you won't be able to enter VRS because you can't be flying slowly and descending quickly at the same time. Once you're comfortable with sight picture, you can start monitoring airspeed to ensure a nice gradual deceleration to the landing point.

:huh: Airboss station, ready room, LSO station, all being included later on. That might not meet your 'full aircraft carrier simulator' definition, but it's part of the way there. This isn't an all or nothing situation.

Can you provide a track Backdraft? That'll make it easier to give advice.

What info are you expecting?

They've still got a month and a half to go to release. Patience, they'll get there.

It shouldn't :smilewink:

Not to the collective. To the throttle. Do you not find it too far to the left?

Interesting. How do you find access to the throttle with the collective there? It looks like the throttle will be too far to the left?

Any word on a throttle only option yet? :music_whistling:

All valid points, but the bigger picture of which you speak is more nuanced than that. This is not a sector that you'd get into to make your fortune. Given the enormous levels of expertise required to develop this sim, they charge a very reasonable price. This means when faced with the "good, fast, cheap - pick two" dilemma, fast is what suffers. ED may be slow, but generally speaking, they get there in the end. DCS has been around for over 10 years now, and it's come a long way. That's not to question your decision; you money is your own. I think it's worth considering that ED don't just take your money and sit on it; they do use it to fund further development - and for that reason, despite their faults, I'm happy to spend my money with them.

Wrong way round. They're not charging a lot then trying to justify it. They're investing a lot in talented people with specialist knowledge to develop a sim to a level never before seen and charging accordingly. This isn't a market to get into if you're looking to make your fortune.

Working deck crew, ATC, etc, sure it's good for single player too.