ZQuickSilverZ

Username455 I frequently play with an actual helicopter pilot. He told me that in real life when you are flying forward at speed you actually don't have to use rudder that much because there is kind of a weather vane effect. The air rushing past the helicopter help to keep it aligned. Rudder is mostly for lower speed to counter torque (not a problem in a Ka-50) and to rotate the helicopter. The following is my opinion. For fixed wings it is a bit different. Your flying the aircraft as a whole. They have wings that are attached to the aircraft. I don't think fixed wing get the weather vane effect. Whereas in a helo your actually flying the roter not the aircraft as a whole. The roter is just kind of dragging the helicopter body along. That is why you get the weather vane effect. Using only rotor at hover = rotates aircraft Using cyclic at forward speed = like turning a car Using cyclic AND rudder at forward speed = doing a sliding turn (drifting)

I was speaking specifically about the Ka-50 actually.

Username455 trust me, you are using the twist function more than you think. It is just that it is so natural and second nature to do it you do not even think about it. Make a track you will see what I mean. When you go to pedals all the sudden it is not so natural anymore. Maybe it becomes that way in time but after 5 months or so flying with pedals it does not feel natural to me yet. Do I have more control..... you bet. It is easier to do purposeful things but when I am just flying "off the cuff" it is much harder. I would request and most appreciate you coming back to this thread after you get your pedals and share your experience with us. I suspect after you get them you will realize just how much you were actually using the twist function. Looking forward to hearing from you.

I disagree. This is coming from someone who has pretty recently used both. If you go from twist to pedals you WILL have to learn to refly. You are more than likely using rudder whether you realize it or not when using a twist. After I went pedal I realized just how much I was inadvertently twisting the stick. Hit RCTRL ENTER on your keyboard and watch your rudder control on the orange HUD. I guarantee your inadvertently using rudder. On the other side sometimes when I am really concentrating on something I am holding down the rudder pedals and don't even realize it (its easy to do when you trim rudder on the KA-50). I just get so laser focused I kind of forget. I never had that problem with a twist. So to me it is more natural control (stick) vs greater control and being more realistic (pedals).

Good ideas. We need more of these. +1 to both of you.

I have been trying to get people to use this for years. Though I use Game Commander 2.

Where there is smoke there is fire.

I would be very intrested as well. Does the map have target plotting? Does it have the ability to track other players? If it does not do you plan on adding it?

andysim let's set a time to get onto TS and maybe we can fix the problem.

Seriously lets get a a group together. Come on, I KNOW there are more SH3 fans out there. This is your chance to get in some SH3 mulitplayer.

I could navigate with the North Star to but I would prefer a compass. GGTharos I agree with you bullseye does have a use. As I stated earlier though it is more of an "in the neighborhood system" We (War Hawks) have used bullseye to great effect. We would use KA-50's to spot targets (at a distance!) then use the ERBL system to give an exact bearing and distance from bullseye to the target. Using this system we could do fairly precision bombing runs. Smoke, although somewhat far from the target area could help also (smoke is its own bullseye :)). Believe me I know the usefulness and accuracy that bullseye can provide. That being said the jets as offered now can not provide this as well as a helo as they don't have the benefit of the ERBL system, to make a target waypoint, or even get GPS information. Take this example. Lets say I am flying a Ka-50 and another pilot is flying the A-10C. I can feed him GPS coordinates and he can make a waypoint. I can litterly tell him right where a target is. I would only like for the Lock-On jets to have the same opportunity. With the map system you could punch in GPS coordinates and the plotter could place a flag for you. I just think that this system would greatly benefit Lock-On. It would help "even them up" to the DCS airframes. Thanks for the screenshot Riptide.

Do you have a link to the program? What exploits did people fear? Do you think the system I described could be exploited? If so, how? I know of the bullseye system. I do not think it is very efficient however. It is very prone to pilot error and is not in any way pinpoint accurate. The bullseye system is less of a "right here" and more of a "in this neighborhood. I suppose you could use bullseye but personally I would prefer an abris like device. If bullseye was that great the military would have never been interested in moving map systems and target waypoints. It has already been established that the A-10A has this capability. As far as the Su25T.... who knows?

Moa could you post some screenshots? I would love to see the system.

Does your moving map system have a target waypoint ability? I did not think you could export target data that is why I came up with the timer system. If that system would be beneficial to your map system feel free to implement it. I look forward to seeing this map when it is available. That is if you are considering a public release. Oh and Moa, stop thinking of my ideas before I do:megalol:. By the way what do you think of my new avatar (giggidy)? Bonus points if you can guess who she is.

I had a great idea to make LOFC2 (and possibly 3) much more capable. A major problem we have that the DCS titles do not is the capability for target data sharing. If the GPS coordinates can be exported through LUA this could work. First thing would be to find a suitable map. This map should display in full on the monitor so that panning would not be necessary. The map would display your aircraft only (unless in a wing group, more on that later). This would show you exactly where YOU are located on the map but no one else. It would display your GPS coordinates on the bottom left hand side. This is where it gets interesting. For people that have the map but are not in your flight group use the manual mode. When you ask for the GPS location of a wingman you hit a start button. The start button starts a timer. He gives you his GPS location, heading, and speed. After you enter the speed you hit a stop button. It takes the time you took to enter the info and automatically adjust to show you his current location. This gives you the capability to know EXACTLY where your wingman is. After the map displays the location the software starts a five second timer. This gives you a chance to input the target bearing and approximate distance. Once you hit the first button for input it starts another timer. It times how long it takes you to input the information and cross references it with the wingman location data and adjust the target location (since by the time you get the bearing and distance info and hit the first key the aircrafts location has changed by a couple of seconds). If no info is input within five seconds it goes back to wingman location input mode. For people in your flight group you would use automatic mode (maps online connected). This would basically be the same effect as using the Ka-50 abris. The map software would assign your wingman (and yourself) an ID# and constantly update all flight data from your wingmen. For obvious reasons the maximum amount of maps that should be simultaneously connected should be four or less (to simulate a wing group). After a certain distance wingmen would disappear off the map (to simulate loss of signal over distance) to find a target you would only need Wingman ID# (since there can be 3 wingmen) bearing and distance. What do you guys think? Would this be doable and useful? Note I can NOT program. This was just a what if. Do any of you Mr. Wizards think you could pull this off? It would REALLY change the sim.

I will have to get back to you. Some of the mods the flotilla use are proprietary. I do have the stock game patched to 1.4 also. I will not be available until about 11pm Friday Centeral Standard Time.

Looking forward to hearing from you. Anyone intrested in SH3 GWX online play please PM me.

hog driver111th would you consider getting SIlent Hunter 3? It is only ten dollars.

I saw your message Krebs20 in Steam. I did respond but I guess it was too late. I would love to play online with you sometime. I wish more people would consider trying this game out. I started every sentence in this post with the word I.

I have recently joined what they call a flotilla. The 17th Flotilla to be specific. Playing Silent Hunter 3 really is a blast. These guys are very helpful and professional to. Playing Silent Hunter 3 a lot like sniping. What to know what I mean? Join us for a game and find out. Silent Hunter 3 is cheap to. Direct2Drive has it for $9.95. It made game of the year in 2005. Much like IL2 it has been modded to a great degree. For that price why not take a chance and try it out. It is good. I promise. See you online. http://nordfront.org/xvii-forums/index.php

Yeah your right Boberro. I should have just posted that to another thread. As for what it has to do with Lock-On. It shares some of the same instruments and avionics as an Su25T. I thought some of the 3D modelers might want it. Did you at least like the pic?

I thought you guys might like this. Enjoy.

I still like the stock aircraft just fine. But, I am not THAT into FSX either (or commercial aviation really). I mean I am not hardcore into it or anything. I will take some screenshots and put them on my Nook Color (I WANT A NOOK TABLET) and see how they match up (were not supposed to have cameras at work even though every single cell phone seems to have one...). I have never flown an actual aircraft before. FSX behaves like I think one might handle. I get the feeling of flight and interacting with an aircraft and that is good enough for me. I guess my expectations are low. The only payware I have used was the Alphasim KA-50 Black Shark. Comparing how it flies to DCS Black Shark.... well it is a lot different, I will just leave it at that. As for the cockpit, the UV-26 is on the wrong side, that is noticeable right off. The cockpits do not match up (in several ways). So you could say the Alphasim version is not very realistic. However if I had never played DCS Black Shark in my mind I would be flying a Black Shark, and that would be "good enough" for me. To explain it better I made this easy to follow flow chart. But only if you have not flown DCS: Black Shark. Otherwise you feel like your in a Ka-50. How do you get the big pictures to show without posting thumbnails?

Well Yskonyn it is like this. I do indeed see them often but, you can see something a thousand times and never really pay attention to it. You know what I mean? Honestly, I have only been interested in aviation for a couple of years now. That may seem odd for someone that works for an airline and plays aviation sims. I did not target employment at AMR it just kind of fell in my lap. I actually started AMR doing revenue accounting through a temporary service, after that contract ended I got on actual payroll. DCS Black Shark is what pulled me into aviation. I had FSX, X-Plane 9, and IL2 before that but to tell the truth they just sit mostly unplayed for years. I am more active in those sims now though. Right now I play these games the most in this order. DCS Black Shark IL2 Sturmovik Team Fortress 2 Silent Hunter 3 World Of Tanks Conan (just started this) And I have had FSX on my mind lately.

I am.