Dr_Arrow

Thanks for pointing that out, I get it, however it seems that this is not the case of our DCS Mi-24P Hind, as the SAS arrow is moving even when I have feet on the pedals (I am moving the pedals out of the center position). You can see it in this picture, I am depressing right pedal and you can see that the YAW SAS is moving to the left possibly dampening fluctuations (or something else).

Yes Mins, I agree with this, with feet on the pedals heading hold mode is disengaged and the AP does not keep the course only pilot. However with feet on the pedals the AP can still help pilot with yaw oscillations damping.

This is true for the heading hold mode, however there probably are functions of the YAW SaS when feet are on the pedals like yaw oscillations damping. I agree that microswitches should maybe react to changes in the axis values.

Thank you so much for this, I might have found the source of my problems - big curves on pedals, have probably caused that I was fighting the AP. Since I removed the curve from my pedal axis it works as it should (I always leave it on), I also think that it should be always ON as it also provides oscillations damping when the heading hold mode is disengaged.

I think it would be nice and easy to do to allow us to set the weight of cargo/personnel in armament window with the ability to remove it in re-arming to simulate troops/cargo transport. I know it is far from the Hind's primary mission, but it would expand its abilities a bit. Thanks for consideration.

If anyone could enlighten me here. I have rudder trimmer disabled, however when using the yaw AP channel sometimes the AP will push my pedal full right or left and it will stick there unless I completely reset the trim. This usually happens during landing I am doing left final descending turn and AP is pushing my right pedal and I am landing with full left pedal (shouldn't the heading AP be OFF in this case?). If I center my pedal heading AP will fight itself, but the pedal will be stuck right. Any advice for that ? I know I can turn it off for approaches and landings, but I just wanted to understand how it really works to be able to cooperate with the heading channel.

I am sorry, but in my opinion this is just a bunch of over exaggerated general claims based on no evidence, but your feelings, which just shows that you probably have no clue what it takes to create a dynamic flight model. Every point can be easily disproved, just saying that the mass weight and inertia is absent in a flight model disqualifies anything you say about the topic of flight modeling as these are the absolutely basic building blocks of any flight model.

Not the same, trim bug solved for me.

I think it might be a problem with detection range. If I have a wingman and tell him to engage ground targets he refuses and detects them only once we are being shot at.

We currently have command for Petro to switch the weapons on, I think it would be good to also have a command to switch all the weapon circuits in the front cockpit off by him. I know it is mostly only procedural thing and does not have gameplay reasons, but if want to fly realistically we should be able to command him to turn weapons off during fence out. Thanks for consideration.

Aside from possible bugs in the AP. I have some experience with professional Mi-17 sim and the technique that the instructor used was always use small increments with frequent trimming (basically press trim move cyclic a bit, release and again). I used the same technique for flying the professional Mi-17 sim and I use the same technique in DCS with FFB stick. Moreover I have some time in the 17 (3 hours of flight with pattern work) and even 24 (1.5 hours) as a passenger, but was able to observe how the pilots worked with cyclic and it was again the same approach with small increments and frequent re-trimming. In my limited experience I've not seen the pilots or instructors to press/hold the trim do maneuvers and release once stable or move the cyclic in big increments without pressing the trim button.

Nazradu: indeed, it seems that it works this way, thanks a lot, now heading AP is finally my friend. I was always under impression that it reacts to trim, but it is disconnected from the trim completely, but reacts to pedals simulating the microswitches in them. It is just strange why it does not disengage when you initiate a turn with cyclic and then add pedals.

What I found out so far and probably can cause problems is that if you have rudder disconnected from trim in special tab and you use heading AP channel, the heading AP channel does not update when pressing the trim. So it seems that it is best not use the heading channel in this case. This applies to FFB stick (G940).

With 2.7 out, I can confirm that the bug is still very much alive. Makes CCRP when releasing more than one bomb kinda useless

In 2.7 we finally have afterburner smoke fixed.

I cannot imagine you need afterburner to arrest the sink rate. I have maybe some 500-600 landings in the BIS, not once I needed afterburner in any of its FM iterations. Afterburner during landing would be a big NO IRL, as the SPS system does not work with afterburner, in fact afterburner is disabled in the real BIS having the SPS system engaged. You must be doing something wrong with such low landing weight.

The real Su-25 has nosewheel steering (it is modeled), which can be switched off and it also has differential braking on top of it. So it would make sense to have independently axis controlled wheel brakes. Nosewheel steering on/off would be also great (for takeoff and landings), but I doubt we will ever get it for FC3 plane.

Yes it is possible, I know even a story of a student performing one of his first solo flights with fuel pumps disengaged, where he wondered why the empty tanks lights were blinking during pattern flight in turns even though the fuel tanks were full. Only after landing he realized that fuel pumps were off when switching the engine off. It wasn't however Bis version, but the fuel system is nearly the same.

As Frederf said, it is an age old bug. I spent with it countless of hours and MRS is bugged. It works better when the terrain with the target is at 0 MSL, but more factors come into play. I hoped this will be corrected with A-10C II, but apparently not.

Yes, it has been always like this. I also spent countless hours practicing CCIP, trying all different settings and approaches, but it is nearly always X-ed even if you do a perfect by the book run with correct angle, TOF, SEM settings. It is a pity this was never fixed.

Hello, there is a whole thread about it just below yours: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=260199

S-24A and B both produce strange smoke when fired as shown in the screenshot. S-24B works OK with Su-25, but with Mig-21BIS the smoke is somehow corrupted. I have no mods and have tried repair and deleting FXO and metashaders so probably the problem is not at my end - other rockets and missiles work well with Mig-21 and other aircraft. Screens attached.

This is about as realistic as the FC3 module in SP. This is absolutely not how the aircraft is normally operated in real life, so no use of such F-15E in SP for me. Even the now ancient Janes F-15 had a somewhat live AI WSO in the back. Flying a multicrew aircraft like it was a single crew one is a big no go for me in SP. I applaud Heatblur for their JESTER for the best single player representation of a multi crew aircraft ever. I would never fly the F-14 without it.

In the real Mi-24 you can fly from the front seat, but it is meant only for emergencies so in case the pilot gets seriously wounded or killed WSO can fly and land the thing. It is really not meant for fighting, or maneuvering.

Oldfox: I have the same issue, when zoomed in the movement is jerky as in your video. I am also using Warthog HOTAS, TGP slew works ok when zoomed out, when zoomed in it is very jumpy. I always thought that it is a feature :)