Dr_Arrow

It is realistic, Mi-17 uses AI-9V and Ka-50 uses AI-9 (a tiny bit different version), so it is normal that they both have very similar sound. I am all for it, it is really a nice little change for Ka-50 towards higher realism.

Can anyone please confirm this?

When the AI are flying in pairs, they have big problems with landings (1.2.8 release version). They always seem to attempt a landing in pair but just before touchdown they will interrupt the landing for a go around and either crash in the process or repeat it until they run out of fuel. It seems to affect all aircraft (though I haven't tested all), I am sending tracks for Su-27, Su-25, Mig-29, F-15. See the attached tracks (all aircraft have 30% fuel, AI set to excellent): AI_Mig29_landing.trk AI_Su25_landing.trk AI_Su27_landing.trk AI_F15_landing.trk

Well they've said Mig-21 will be released sometime after 1.2.8, what basically defines a time interval 1.2.8 (today) -----> infinity :music_whistling:

I am also hoping for the collective brake fix and also KH-25ML fix.

This is really bad news :(

Yep, the end of March is approaching very quickly :thumbup:

In Il2 1946, Daidalos team patch 4.13 - there will be a fully flyable B-24D with some very interesting features. Enjoy, if you haven't seen it yet:

I am certain that Leatherneck knows how to run its development, my humble opinion in this matter is that the team should be concentrated on implementing/testing/fine tuning the 21 and its basic avionic/weapon/other systems, so it could be released with its basic set of characteristic weapons as soon as possible and later implement the exotic ones. It is really a waste of effort and time trying to code some badly documented exotic bomb that cannot be properly integrated into DCS World while work on the flight model or radar is on hold.

:smilewink:

well, we are getting the world's leading distributor of F-4 Phantom II parts - Mig-21 :music_whistling:

As far as I know ED is planning SU-27S. We won't get any modern multirole variant soon, as it is still top secret and the laws in Russia are very strict in this regard. Aircraft like SU-22 or Mig 23 are more accessible, simpler avionics wise and can still bring interesting simulation. I also don't think we will see F-18E or Eurofighter soon, as these are complex weapon systems also classified with imense systems' and avionics complexity, which takes years to code.

the produced Mig-21, which is a BIS version wouldn't be suitable for Vietnam map, Mig-21PFV, PF and MF are the versions that were used in the conflict. Modeling them to DCS standard would require a lot of work.

Same for me, Su-22 is a beast.

These are exactly my thoughts, one aspect of popularity is that Mig-21Bis is really a very novel aircraft in simulations both exotic and iconic. The segment of the market covering vintage Russian hardware (Mig-23, Su-17, Mig-25, Su-24, Su-25, etc.) is quite empty. With Beczl studios, I have hoped that we will have at least one stable high quality company dealing with eastern hardware, while we have 4-5 other companies dealing mainly with western aircraft. Even all the success of ED has been built around Su-27, I think the potential there is still huge and unused. Moreover avionics wise the Russian aircraft are very similar, so a lot of code and knowledge could be shared.

The model is truly beautiful and work of art. However, Griffin has a good point and the load-out is certainly not realistic for operational use. The computer can be set only for a single type of unguided weapons and a single type of bombs.

I also hoped that the studio will continue developing eastern hardware as all other independent parties are looking more at western aircraft. It is also quite sad news for me that Mig-23 was dropped.

I'd say that cannon employment on KA-50 is very easy, just lock in shkval, auto-turn to target ON, shoot. Without auto-turn to target just put the target in the big square on the HUD and shoot. The cannon is very precise and has nearly endless amno.

This is not an issue, this is how the real thing works. In the real helo without pressing the trim button the stick is hard to move. Pressing the trim button removes forces acting on the stick and disengages the attitude autopilot allowing you to move the stick freely. After releasing the trim button the stick is kept firm in its current position and new commanded attitude is maintained. If you have an FFB stick and use simffb program, it works exactly the same. So it really is not an issue but a feature.

You probably meant that pressing the collective brake does not disengage the alt hold channel as it should. Now it seems that pressing the collective brake has no effect on the ALT hold channel, collective brake release however assigns new altitude.

This could be it - although it is quite strange to dampen the altitude channel - allowing only gentle climbs/descents. I'll post a track tomorrow.

I've read this several times and I am doing exactly what's written there.

Hello, I have quite a few hours in the Shark and I've read all the manuals, watched all the videos, but still have one problem with collective brake that I think is a bug or I am doing something wrong - please evaluate it. To illustrate it: 1. I am flying with 3 AP channels engaged (pitch, roll, heading) 2. I climb to the desired altitude let's say 800 m. 3. Manually stabilize the altitude with collective so the vertical speed is zero for the given forward speed. 4. Now I engage altitude AP (set to baro) and the Shark maintains the altitude (rotor pitch blades angle changes automatically) and the channel has enough authority to change the pitch. 5. Now I want to climb another 50 meters. I depress the collective brake (animated collective brake is depressed). 6. Increase the collective while still holding the brake depressed. 7. Autopilot is fighting me and is decreasing rotor blade pitch (it can be seen on the indicator that the rotor pitch at first increases a bit and then returns to previous level). 8. Shark does not climb unless I pull the collective lever beyond 20% authority of the alt AP channel (still holding the collective brake). What am I doing wrong? Or what can be wrong? As I understand, with collective brake depressed AP channel should be off and I should be able to change rotor blades pitch freely. Thanks to everyone for their answers and time.

It would be nice to have the weather updated according to real-world weather similar like it is in FSX. I am usually using only the standard weather and set it to the weather I see outside the window :) I am not able to set the dynamic weather to reproduce some realistic weather, it is usually either clean sky or brutal winds :)

This means that you can have only one type of bombs (you cannot combine FAB-250 and 500 on the same aircraft), or one type of laser guided missiles or one type of rocket pods. You can however combine bombs, rockets, guided missiles with some limitations.