RvETito

As EB said, the team is not aware of any bugs in the autopilot's heading channel and the trim system in the release version. The patch will add more features to those elements, no need to fix anything. Well this so called "GAME" is a result of a years of hard joint international effort. I'm proud to be part of this effort and when someone steps into the scene and shouts aloud "What you've done is all wrong!" I expect to see some good argumented statements about what he (you) thinks is wrong. I'm sorry but I have to say that you failed to make any valid point of anything "wrong".

Watched it. Few things: - why the heck you turn off autopulot's heading channel (HEADING HOLD)? No wonder the helicopter drifts left-right. Try with pitch, bank, yaw channels engaged and you'll see the difference. ANY heavy helicopter has at least 3-channel autopilot whose primary function is damping and stabilization around all the 3 axis. They all become very hard to fly when this system is inoperative because unlike airplanes helicopters have much worse selfdamping. Hint- have a look in the manual more carefuly. If I 'd had to attest you in this flight I'd fail you ;) - dig this forum deeper about the trim, you'll find tons of info. I don't wanna repat myself countless times, however here's what u gotta understand first- this is a force trim system, it doesn't generate any control input. It only cancels the artificial feel on the cyclic and the pedals so the pilot doesn't have to fight those forces all the time and get tired quickly. During maneuvering trim is used very intense- once every 2-3 sec. In steady flight I fly hands free in BS and have seen the same IRL though not on Ka-50 (but on Ka-32 which shares many common systems). Both the real thing and my Ka-50 in BS fly straight like hot knife through melting butter. - about the mechanic having loosen something on the controls- as a maintenance engineer I might feel ofended of someone having such an attitude toward a coworker ;) But just because I read it here and after watching your track it make me smile. Get serious ;) So relax, it's a false alarm.

With all due respect regarding your age, the only idea this member got is to find out how much time you've spent with Black Shark, not with flight sims in general. I'll have a look at your track, evaluate it and post my observations of your flight.

Like it was already posted scaled flying models can't be used as criteria to compare flight dynamics, mostly because of the different Raynolds and Mach numbers. I'm not going to question your R/C experience but just out of curiousity- on how many actual flight hours of 'manual' flight in BS you base your conclusions?

А что такое самолет? :D

Me too... :(

You bet, but not only pilots especially in the chopper area :P

With or without LRM comrade Tito will get you. But he feels better when he gets you with LRM :P Reason is very simple- LRM helps me better understand why I'm succeeding or failing. But as a rule I never fail, I just fall in some world conspiracy traps from time to time.

Just has a look at your pics, Case. Strange to see the polish MiG is flying with external tank- that limits it to maximum G of 5.5.

It is modelled correctly and it does matter, I assumed it by default.

Here's a track I just made- 1 engine takeoff, climb to 200m and landing with 100% fuel. Generaly, Ka-50 is more than able in 1 OEI operation- the main thing you have to consider is the airspeed. You should keep it between 120-150km/h, best is around 130km/h. At this airspeed the rotor requires minimum power to maintain horizontal flight- maximum ratio "available power-needed power". Also, jettison the external stores and be very gentle with the collective, especialy when you're pulling it. 1OEI.trk

Ok, but such thunderstorm will be visible outta space, what's left for a plane flying straight to it? Such a powerful CB can smash anything daring to fly through it's core. And it's not the lightnings but rather the turbulence and hail that could cause structural damage. All pilots worldwide train to recognize and avoid such atmospheric phenomenas, if they've had a 50k feet CB wall in front of them they should have tried to go back.

Assuming the aircraft has dissappeared/crashed in international water it's all under French BEA's jurisdiction. It's the french analogue of NTSB in US. Forget about the lightning, it can't hit it at FL 350. Even if so, the flight control computers will not go nuts all together. I'm not familiar with the 330 but the 319/320/321 have 7 dual-channel primary flight control computers for ailerons, elevators/THS, spoilers and yaw damper plus hydro-mechanical control of the rudder and mechanical backup control of the trimmable horizontal stabilizer (THS). So even in case of total electrical failure there is still control. Also, they've reported short circuit- a lightning can't cause a short circuit. Instant overload/damage of some systems might occur but not fire. Since they've been able to transmit this message (assuming the info about it is correct) that means they've had the time to do it. Electrical failure leading to short circuit is possible, also a fire as a result is quiet possible as well. Or like the TWA 747 I posted- short circuit of wires in the center tank- BANG! This is much more possible than this lightning story. I expect both Air France and Airbus will blaim the weather until otherwise proven. Air France will not admit that their flight/ground crew have made a mistake, neither Airbus will admit that their airplane is faulty. Not until they collect any useable data of what actualy has happened. If they find anything at all...

Incorrect, most are due to pilots error.

Some pictures from me from aboard of Ka-32, alt 300m, Turkey 2006:

The MiG-25 is rated at Mach 2.86 sustained (~3000km/h at alt). It has flown faster but I assume only in certain conditions like test flights and stuff. The engine intake panels which form the shock waves work rather good actualy, you can see the same system on the F-15 and F-14 later on. The R-15 engines are designed with very weak compressors- only 5 stages I think, and the engine is supposed to give maximum thrust at high supersonic speed where 80% of the air compression occurs in the air intake. Almost like a ramjet. That's why the MiG-25 has been so unsuccessful when tried to fight at subsonic speeds. Regarding the service of the MiG-25RBT in Bulgaria I've never heard of any time limits regarding Mach number, except for fuel cunsumption- at that speed the engines eat the fuel like crazy. Oh yeah, one more thing- at Mach 3 the turn radius is such that my country has barely fitted that beast:D Materials are also not an issue since the MiG-25 aiframe is made of welded stainless steel exclusively.

Think twice ;)

All this is a great example that LO community is not only alive but it's actualy getting stronger. Too bad I can only spectate... :(

The right stuff! The rotorcraft group takes-off for the parade over Moscow.

I'd say those numbers are pretty realistic. Since the ЕOS picks up IR emmisions (opticaly invisible) it's detection range depends only on that, and external conditions of course. An aircraft is mostly IR emmiting in the rear hemisphere, that's why the EOS will "see" much more heat from behind. Especialy if the target is using afterburner- it can easily pick it up at 50+ km in chase. This range highly depends on the power settings of the engines of the target. In one word, the EOS doesn't care about the aspect like the doppler radar, it only picks up IR emmisions. Therefore it's operation depends so much on the external conditions- day, night, clouds, moisiture. In clean night at high altitude it should be able to pick up an afterburning target in chase at maximum range. In order to track the target the EOS needs range, it takes the azimuth and the elevation by itself. Like Darkwanderer wrote, the radar can be slaved to it and it is the source providing the range. The radar sends very short, low power output discrete pulses that are so weak that I suppose can be picked up only by the most modern RWR, if possible at all. What is more important in this mode (partialy modeled in LO) is that in case the EOS loses track of the target (for example it goes into a cloud) the radar will automaticaly turn on in full emiting mode and will look at the last known position of the bandit (datalink EOS-radar). Once the EOS picks up the target again the radar goes off again, automaticaly. This how a maximum "stealth" attack is made, I mean with minimum use of the radar. The EOS indeed has a built-in laser rangefinder which AFAIK works within 10km range (as per MiG-29 combat manual) and in that case the radar goes fully passive. That's the most hidden attack.

I use small correction inputs with consecutive trimming on the dive. This is all prior shooting. When I shoot I even hold my breath :D

WIP.

Ka-50's targeting system doesn't provide CCIP/CCRP or any other data for aimed bombing. The circle that you see on the HUD is nothing but a fixed sight. So bombing is made exactly like in WWI style- pilot's feel. I'm using the following procedure: - level flight (or slight dive) at 200-300m AGL; - max speed; - I put the circle on the target and steer my helicopter to have the target in the middle of the HUD; - at the moment the target (visualy) goes (disapears) under my nose (bottom HUD) - bombs away! Seems to give satisfactory results.