jumphigh

But what's the correct behaviour of a helicopter??? As a RC helicopter pilot I know the old way of mechanical stabilisation and the new way with electronic gyros. It's the same with modern "real" helicopters. They have electronic flight augmentation systems – even an old thing like the Gazelle. You can't compare their flight with much more older non-stabilised models like the Huey. Our Gazelle might be wrong for the real thing but not impossible for helicopters in general.

You're one year too late...

Turbine damage off means no random failure, not that the turbine is immortal. And rudder trimmer isn't an auto rudder, it simply holds a control throw to move your HW back to zero to lessen your fight against spring loaded pedals (or sticks). Have a look at the Huey, its trimming (of all inputs) is more crucial than that of the Gazelle. The Gazelle mostly flies almost centred on stick and pedals. Have you tried global game mode of DCS?

Is it just me and nobody else thinks that DCS' 3D projection is wrong? Have a look at the second picture above! I know that a AH-64 is a giant but I'm in doubt that you're sitting that high above the top of the mast of the Kiowa!? The Kiowa isn't a toy like on this image. Have a look at this view from a Huey cockpit, too. It's the same but inverted with the Huey: Embarking soldiers next to the UH-1 appear to tall. Nobody else has this occasional feeling of disproportion?

Do you use the controls indicator? Have a look on it! Maybe there was an auto-binding of another joystick axis to cyclic pitch control. My pedals have a differential break function (2 linear axes without centring) and that was bound to cyclic function. No fun! DCS grabs every new input device and makes ridiculous choices on axis binding. The Gazelle can be flown with cyclic centred mostly all the time. If an axis is more than a small amount out of centre there will be a constant roll on this function. Thus your nose might drop.

I'm using it in 2D too! I'm playing at 2560x1440 without any antialiasing modes. With mipmaps gauges become unreadable, the modded cockpit can be read better. I don't give a dime on jagged lines or unwanted highlights. Sorry, but your solution has it's own faults! Some areas are better, some are worse than stock/without mipmaps. Have a look at the labels e.g. "High" or "Beacon Marker". For me stock looks better because it's readable and not blurred due to mipmap downscaling. As I told you I prefer readability over prevention of every unwanted artefact. And again: I don't see disturbing artefacts on stock. Please tell me: With mipmaps added what's looking really better now? Maybe if you look at still images with a spyglass... but in the sim?

A mipmap is a downscaled texture. Different levels of scaling are used for different view distances because with the full scale texture many texels will collapse which might lead to undesired view effects. And without AA – like I'm doing – the mipmap levels trigger to early and you can't tread the gauges from normal seat position. So I decided to go without AA and with full scale cockpit textures only. There are some jagged edges but the gauges remain readable. But ED's standard cockpit has several levels of mipmaps!? So what's the point of this mod?

Correct. It's a lot easier, you don't have to fight Windows' user rights or ED's integrity checks.

Don't mess with the install folder, just use your profile! I have several cockpit mods installed that way and choose one of them inside special options. Mainly I use a no mipmap mod or vivid color (civilian) and with it I have the the red mark at 125 knt. I think these mods are based on (livery template) versions from years ago – but still working.

I'm flying at 2560x1440 and installed a special cockpit mod to get rid of the mipmaps because otherwise you can't read the gauges when sitting back in normal seat position. Are you sure you really want a low res cockpit just to get rid of one or two jagged lines?

Just type "zoom" into the search box and you'll get all bindings with zoom functionality. That's easy! Myself I never had a problem with the auto pilot modes of the Gazelle. If you want to control a 3-pos-switch with just 2 keys you can't choose a binding for only 2 functions out of 3, can you?

Hobby modders can do better than ED.

Looks like "vivid colors civilian". Maybe I'm wrong and it can be set server side (or mission wise in general) with a livery and is overriding your special settings? Beside the VSI it doesn't look very different compared to standard pit?

You have to switch to that cockpit inside of special options menu. I use the mod "gray dash", but I don't know if it is provided by Polychop or Devrim (from above).

I don't think so! I don't play online but I'm in doubt that a server mission can replace your cockpit textures. It's not like a mission-dependent livery! You have to do it yourself: Copy the cockpit mod in your profile folder, switch to in special options. It's the same with the English cockpits of SU-25T or SA-342 Gazelle.

As far as I know cockpit does not change with livery, you have to set it inside of special options. There are special cockpit mods beside of liveries which have to be installed inside of "Liveries\Cockpit_UH-1H" in your DCS profile. For example I have the cockpit versions vivid colors vivid colors civilian Rabb-UH-1H-NoMipMaps All 3 available as user download, the second could be your choice.

There is something wrong with the 3D projection of DCS. I thought it all the time, now everybody can see it in the screenshot of @ddc196. Huey is hovering in 1 foot, pilot's head is higher than the rotor disc of a Kiowa!? Also when droping troops out of the huey: In my opinion they are too tall when standing next to the chopper.

Ja doch, etwas schon. Bei der Huey fordern regelmäßig Leute eine bezahlte Neuauflage mit Grafikupdates, deren Standard u.a. du setzt. Aber viele Nutzer beschweren sich auch bei jedem neuen, gut aussehenden Modell über unterirdische Framerates – selbst mit Grafikkarten, die ein Vielfaches an Leistung meiner RX 570 haben. Wenn ich aber die Wahl zwischen guter Fliegbarkeit – bei Hubschraubern steuert es sich erst ab 50 FPS wirklich "glatt" – und einer Modellierung jedes Niets an der Außenhaut, die ich im Flug aus dem Cockpit niemals sehe, habe, dann weiß ich, was ich nehme. Den vollbeweglichen Kopf sehe ich als Pilot nicht. Sicherlich kann man den Aufwand treiben, so dass jemand im Multiplayer mittels Optik eines Combined-Arms-Fahrzeug dem vor ihm stehenden Heli bei der Flugvorbereitung zusehen kann und daraus ein Cinematic schneidet. Aber als Pilot wäre es mir weit wichtiger, dass das LOD funktioniert und nicht jedes versteckte Polygon des extrem guten "Standmodells" mit gerendert werden muss. Aber das LOD von DCS funktioniert nicht! Ich schraube den Scenry Detail Factor bis ganz nach unten, die Umgebung sieht teilweise wie Gunship 2000 aus, aber ich bekomme kein einziges FPS mehr?! Deshalb frage ich mich, wie sich das super Modell denn verhalten wird, wenn es in einer Mission in der DCS-Engine laufen muss und nicht nur im Viewer des CAD-Programms? Erlaubt es die Engine, dass du auch noch ein Lower-Detail-Model erstellst, was "gut genug" aussieht, dafür aber auch für schwächere HW verkraftbar ist? Falls das nicht geht und sich auch die GraKa-Preise nicht wieder in vernünftige Regionen bewegen, werde ich wohl in Zukunft als Käufer neuer Module generell ausfallen. Für eine Handvoll Flugstunden im Monat werde ich jedenfalls keine 1000€-Grafik kaufen.

Progress news show a good locking mock up, nothing more. I'm asking if it's over the top, since polygon rivets don't make a better pilot out of you. Nobody knows how hot render graphics performs in DCS. Judging from other new modules like the Apache I have low expectations. Now it's your turn!

Maybe. Of course a spinning rotor head will be replaced by a special animation but there are users in the Huey forum who want polygon rivets on a UH-1 overhaul. I'm asking if you fly better if such details are made of high res polygons instead of bump maps? Flight model, weapons and system functionality are crucial, not a good looking mock up of a BO 105 PAH. I don't see me buying any new module because of my old RX 570. I got 55+ frames on the old 2.5.6, now I'm glad if I can reach 45 fps with 2.7.9. But as a low flying heli pilot terrain isn't looking that better than before. If you need a RTX 3090 to get more than single digit fps with the Apache there is something wrong with DCS. If there's LOD management it isn't very effective. Sorry to say but I do not see a bright future for DCS. At least not for me.

First of all it looks great. But to be honest for what it is worth? Especially the details on the rotor head may cause a FPS drop while nobody can see it when inside the cockpit or from outside when the head is spinning. I want to fly the bird, not watching it as a show case model. It's the same with the Apache. Great details but nobody can see it when using it like intended: Sim flying from inside the cockpit. For me it seems to be the wrong direction of DCS, helicopter models are going over the top but the low level scenery doesn't improve much. Towns and buildings remain sparse and empty and the poly count stays low.

@Pappy2 Is it real? What a shame, some hobby modders can do better than ED itself.

@CYPHER11 Thanks, you got it! And I see the same problems like I have: When slowing down and trying to get into a hoover the Gazelle climbs too fast. For me height control is much more difficult than e.g. with the Huey. On the Gazelle I even don't find a stable collective setting for IGE hoover. First it climbs than it suddenly loses height – all with the same collective.

@CYPHER11 Irgendwie hast du mich nicht richtig verstanden. Gerade das aktuelle FM erzwingt doch, dass man den Stick praktisch nie außerhalb der Zentrierung halten muss. Somit ist die Trimmung im Großen und Ganzen momentan bei der Gazelle kaum nötig. Weiterhin ist das Einblenden der Controller-Anzeige völlig unabhängig vom Setup immer eine Hilfe. Denn gerade in dieser Anzeige sieht man die Funktion der Trimmung bei der Huey, Gazelle oder Mi-8 am besten – das würde dein Erklärung enorm aufwerten, sie ggf. erst verständlich machen. Nach Ansicht von Video 3 gehe ich eher davon aus, dass du diese absolut sinnvolle Funktion von DCS überhaupt nicht kennst. Warum sonst versuchst du in epischer Breite die Steuereingaben zu erklären, wo auch ein einziger Blick deiner Zuschauer ausreichen würde? Ein Grundsatz von Bewegtbildern ist: Show, don't tell!

Ich habe nun mal Folge 6 kurz angezappt – und dann voller Ärger gleich wieder aus. Wenn man schon die Trim-Funktion im Verhältnis zu federgelagerten Sticks diskutiert, warum macht man dabei nicht die Kontroller-Anzeige von DCS an??? Praktisch jedes Tutorial unterlässt das und zeigt nicht, welche Inputs gerade gesteuert werden. Geht es noch einsteigerunfreundlicher? Zusätzlich frage ich mich ernstlich, ob du eine andere Gazelle fliegst als ich? Wozu braucht man in DCS die "große" Trimmung über den Trim-Button, wenn doch dank der Fehler im Flugmodell die Gazelle praktisch immer mit zentriertem Stick geflogen wird? Jeder größere Ausschlag führt zur Dauerdrehung und ist somit nicht auf Dauer zu gebrauchen. Eine Trimmung mag allenfalls beim manuellen Schweben nötig sein – nur sind selbst da die Ausschläge so klein, dass man besser mit dem Trim-Hat arbeitet als groß den Stick aus der Mitte heraus zu bewegen. Du steckst in die Videos sicherlich viel Arbeit hinein, aber trotzdem bleibe ich ratlos zurück.