NeedzWD40

Same reason why ASPI isn't documented in the "published" manuals for the AH-64. Nor why the AH-64A manuals available don't document TXARNG's CMWS installation. Or why the AH-1F manual documents AVR-2s when you can't find any official US Army aircraft equipped with it. Things vary from unit, to deployment, to timeframe; equipment is pulled from post-deployment birds to go onto deploying aircraft for availability, quantity, or any variety of reasons. Try as they might, there's not a monolithic block of standards that every aircraft must always be in, properly documented and up-to-date. Thus, you'll see mishmashes of UH-60As with uprated engines, CMWS, and sugar scoops along side a UH-60M with the latest fixings. How you implement such a system? Easy; you don't need to know exactly how the wires are routed and the frequency range of the sensors. You make an abstraction over the available information and get something that works similar enough in the game. You're not going to get a 1:1 representation and that's pointless for this anyways, but you can get something that gets close enough. For something like CMWS, there's enough info out there to make a pretty reasonable guess, particularly so for DCS since we already have multiple modules with it anyways.

Yup. You can adjust whether the missile curves left or right by putting the seeker on the opposite side you want it to curve to, but it won't affect anything beyond that.

Actually? No, it just abstracts it with the left or right curved flight path. Right now, it inaccurately always uses that mechanic regardless of LOBL or LOAL.

It is, but you're still at the mercy of how it works and ED's implementation of it. Think of it more like the way an AIM-120 works, except in LOBL you're pointing the seeker to a certain place in your field of vision. It's like a flashlight and the bleed over can sometimes reflect more on other objects, so those are what the seeker grabs. There's flaws in how the missile is currently implemented but unfortunately the documentation I have isn't distro A so I can't share it, though I suspect ED already has that documentation anyways. None of this affects this use case though, as the <2.5km behavior is about right (with some caveats).

If the BMP is nearby the target, the missile seeker can still acquire it instead of the intended target. If you utilize the link functionality, TADS should snap to the target that the missile is tracking, which would confirm the actual target. Even then, it's not a guarantee and you're best off shifting to SAL if you want precision or moving around to give the seeker a better view of the target.

CPG has both chaff and flare on the cyclic; the grips are identical across crew stations. Page 123 in the DCS manual if that's your thing.

Yes, you can do both and you do get auditory warnings from CMWS in the front.

Yes. The first and second rules of George are never trust George. The third rule is that George doesn't suck, he blows. When you complete the startup in the backseat, turn on the CMWS, then calmly get out of the back seat, go to the front seat, pull George out, stuff him into the back seat, and chain his hands to his ankles. You may follow up with a rubber ball gag in his mouth. Close the back door, get into the front seat, and run all operations up front. He may occasionally mumble something about being unable to go down because "water is under", but that's because he's a wuss and probably related to the wicked witch of the west (ie he melts when exposed to water). It used to be that George would automatically start certain things up from the front seat without being told to do so, but even that was too dangerous for him, so now he's relegated to being a meat sandbag for weight and balance purposes. Set the front seat up with a mode switch for your essential TADS controls, adjust yourself to using the FLT page on the left MPD (the symbology select depress will become your best friend for this), and enjoy the freedom of slaving TADS to your own helmet for 240 degrees of awareness. Works great with the FCR, too!

Ignoring the obvious "ok but y tho," you can do loops and rolls with the 64 in the game, you just need careful manipulation of the controls. It's also advisable to kill the SAS while doing it as well. An immelmann turn is hard for me to pull off without dumping all my speed and it seems rather silly to do so when more than enough authority exists for a bog standard climbing turns with a bit of bank and yaw.

A combination of Katanas Are Just Better and other tropes everyone is obsessed with. I've never seen compelling evidence that the variant exists with these blades as opposed to just being an inert warhead like a steel or concrete rod. Either way, for DCS it's moot, because for our scenarios it's rather pointless, we're not getting anything other than K and L, and if we were, I'd prefer to get M, N, F, and C over a specialty expensive inert version for narrow purposes.

Weird hill to die on, but OK. https://www.dvidshub.net/video/670167/balikatan-2019-marines-execute-forward-arming-and-refueling-point-farp-training https://www.dvidshub.net/image/5239500/balikatan-2019-marines-execute-forward-arming-and-refueling-point-operations-farp https://www.alamy.com/us-marine-corps-1st-lt-susan-plunkett-conducts-pre-flight-checks-in-a-kc-130j-super-hercules-at-clark-air-base-philippines-april-4-2019-during-exercise-balikatan-balikatan-is-an-annual-exercise-between-the-us-and-the-philippines-and-comes-from-a-tagalog-phrase-meaning-shoulder-to-shoulder-representing-the-partnership-between-the-two-countries-the-exercise-promotes-regional-security-and-humanitarian-efforts-for-us-allies-and-partners-plunkett-is-a-kc-130j-super-hercules-pilot-with-marine-aerial-refueler-transport-squadron-152-image243730467.html https://www.dvidshub.net/image/9216078/wyoming-air-national-guardsmen-push-bales-hay-out-back-c-130-hercules-aircraft https://www.919sow.afrc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2626009/5th-sos-tests-new-aircrew-mask-for-c-130-enterprise/fbclid/5th-sos-tests-new-aircrew-mask-for-c-130-enterprise/ https://www.ang.af.mil/News/Features/Article/863882/becoming-a-c-130-pilot-or-combat-systems-officer-in-the-air-national-guard/

Flight member commands are WIP at present time, so the best you can hope for is they maybe, might, potentially attack some targets. At a minimum, they'll soak up a few missiles here and there, maybe expose your position. Datalink functionality is restricted to just getting their present position.

AI SEAD tasking can also be weird if they're not getting any active radars when they expect them to. They won't shoot weapons like Shrike or HARM unless they have the narrow parameters they expect (ie being tracked by the radar) when ready to go. To get around this, I like to equip them with a non-ARM type weapon like Maverick, which they'll use regardless of SAM emissions.

It's a wind compensation issue. There should be some effects from wind (we can't compensate for all variables, naturally), but not to the extent in game. The real aircraft does incorporate wind correction, which has been acknowledged since October 2024. You can test this by setting up an empty mission with 0 wind and see that the rounds are spot on every time, while setting wind and turbulence results in rounds not even hitting anywhere in your FOV.

If you're not in multiplayer, dynamic spawns are unavailable.

By default, CPG has to request it by hitting the C key (Take Controls Multicrew).

Unfortunately, it will not. It probably should, but for the AH-64 it (presently) doesn't. The only way to get proper INU functionality is to set the mission date sometime after 1995; otherwise, it behaves as if it is constantly drifting at an incredible rate, giving stuttery indications on the HMD, FLT page, lots of drift on the TSD, etc.

Virpil WarBRD with Constellation Alpha grip, spring centered. Central trim mode.

Yes. Mast bumping is a phenomenon specific to a different class of rotor systems, typically those of a semi-rigid nature. While the maneuvers are not consequence-free, they are definitely possible to perform. Numerous videos are out there demonstrating this.

The Max Q torque indications are the absolute theoretical maximums you could pull on the drive components, potentially imparting damage to the aircraft. Go into them if you absolutely must, but do so with extreme caution and limit how long you stay in those ranges. I don't believe this is currently simulated on the damage model. Your maximum torque should be treated as 100% in all but emergency conditions. Exceeding that value doesn't mean everything falls apart, but limit how long you do so, as excessive time above that value can damage the aircraft. If you need a quick second at 105%, make sure that's a need along the lines of "If I don't clear this tree, we're dead" and not "I need extra power to get 100% fuel, 1200 rounds of 30mm, and 16 missiles off the ground!"

The only way around it is via the cursor, which can be used point n' click style to select a direct route.

Unfortunately, the slot has to be set for it in special options in the mission. The default is the authorization request, but it can be set to hand off as soon as a player requests it.

NVS mode set to NORM will preclude usage of TADS as a sight in the front seat.

That's odd considering that a couple updates ago, the AGM-114L followed the standard loft in LOBL vs the extreme offset path of LOAL DBS. I had thought this was related to target speed at first as there is a threshold, but when I tested with the FCR as a sight, all of my missile launches followed a DBS trajectory. My final shot was <2.5km where it went straight to terminal track, which is correct. Unfortunately, I have no public sources at hand to share right now and all the footage I've found would be considered insufficient (and likely the wrong subvariant). I'll update this later if I do find proper documentation.

Can confirm, moving targets trigger LOAL DBS trajectory when they shouldn't. AH-64D AGM-114L LOBL Trajectory Failure.trk