Jump to content

cw4ogden

Members
  • Posts

    280
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cw4ogden

  1. @gonzolofogous Mast bumping almost always implies a negative G situation. Best way to visualize mast bumping is to picture pushing your rotor shaft upwards into a tilting see saw. If you push hard enough, the rotating see saw eventually will tilt enough that it contacts the rotor shaft, aka mast bumping. What I see in your video appears more like some kind of structural failure. I guess that could be how they have mast bumping coded, but I'd suspect over G or some kind of other limit being broken. If your G loading is above Zero, as it looks in your video, it's almost certainly not mast bumping.
  2. I think it predates this patch. You can try F8 groundcrew, then i think f9 request launch, occasionally it works. But once the ground crew bugs out, probably need a server reset to fix it.
  3. Thanks for the quick reply. I am in the U.S., Eastern Oregon to be more specific. My provider is a local service called Anthem Broadband. Traceroute to the DCS website hangs on an IP address of 10.100.0.2 or similar. I was suspecting either my provider is having issues or possibly my IP was banned by mistake by ED? Those were just my best guesses as I can get through when I enable the VPN, but DCS still fails to authenticate.
  4. Currently getting the DCS offline error in combination with being unable to access the main DCS website. I can access the forums, and my internet is working fine otherwise. Attempting to load the DCS website times out. Attempting to load the game results in authorization failed. After following every troubleshooting guide I could find, one recommended to try enabling VPN. This worked for accessing the DCS website, but not the game. Any Ideas why I would need a VPN to connect to the website, and can't connect at all to the game?
  5. Arguably true. I meant from my own stable of aircraft, I prefer the dedicated role aircraft versus the jack of all trades, i.e. f-18, f-16. From a purely subjective standpoint, if I want to bomb I prefer the Av8b. If I want Air to air I like the tomcat, even though the f-18 is in many ways better. I'm only down on the f-18 in the very subjective way that is whether you like a module for it's more intangible qualities. Sound and ergonomic design as well, in particular not liking McDonnel Douglas's set of audio and various instrument layout etc. That said, I recognize it's role historically and it's role as one of the DCS flagship modules. Just trying to put a reason to why it's one of my lesser used planes. The A-10 is the exact same phenomenon, but three times worse. I've tried repeatedly to like the A-10 and I just don't.
  6. If DCS was Dungeons and Dragons, the F-18 would be the druid. It can do everything, but is the best at nothing. I find it odd how finicky I am when it comes to liking a module or not liking a module. That said, I agree with the original post, the F-18 to me just feels bland. To me it's like choosing the camero, when you have access to Jay Leno's entire garage. That said, I recognize it is a fantastic DCS module. Absolutely one of the best picks for anyone starting out who wants bang for buck.
  7. It's a long thread so forgive me if this has been said before but, running a HP reverb in VR, when closing, contacts are a blob and easy to see, until they become rendered. When they are rendered they become all but invisible and are incredibly difficult to see, even using VR zoom feature. So on a sliding scale instead of being difficult to see at range, then easier as you get to medium ranges, and easier still as you get very close, currently It's very easy to see distant targets, virtually impossible to see medium range targets, and easy to see, and difficult to identify all but the closest range targets. For my two cents: the middle ranges are the most broken, though near and far could use improvements. Far away, the blobs could use to be smaller. I don't have a suggestion to fix near, as identifying is a different issue that seeing / spotting. I do think Identification is too difficult, even using silouettes and tactical identification techniques. I'd guess 30-50% of the time during a merge, I can't tell what just flew passed me. And nearly 100% of the time I can't identify in time for a safe head on attack. Given the wide range of gear and 2d versus VR, I know balance is hard, but in my humble opinion playing in VR puts you at significant disadvantage, especially in the WW2 thru cold war era. Edit: there are also issues with whether or not a specific plane or ground target are even rendered. Depending on where the player looks, there are occasions when you can not see something in your central vision, that is plain as day in your peripheral vision. Meaning: to see a plane or ground target, sometimes you can't look right at it.
  8. Forgive me if it's been mentioned in the 16 previous pages of posts, but it seems like the main complaint is balancing dot size amongst various screen resolutions. Is there any reason DCS can not look to see what resolution the player is running and scale the dot appropriately? Preferably with the ability to tweak it slightly for variations in gear, i.e. screen size.
  9. You should probably go for the BF-109. The A8 is arguably the worst ww2 "fighter" and the Dora gets nerfed into being painful to play on 4ya's ww2 server. If they even have a dora slot, it's so far from the action, likely you'd eventually just submit and fly a 109.
  10. I think part of the problem is the channel map's relevant period of the war isn't supported by the aircraft pool in DCS. Meaning no early Bf-109s, hurricane early spitfire etc. Channel seems fitting for Battle of Britain era, but I'm not a historian by any stretch. Given there are only one or two populated WW2 servers at any given time, and they tend towards "realistic", they choose normandy because it's more time period appropriate to the stable of WW2 aircraft that currently exist. I've tried running a WW2 channel map server and my takeaway was there isn't enough interest to make it feasible. Until ww2 fans can populate more than a single server, options will be limited to flavor of the month which is Normandy.
  11. If you get to my last sentence it reads: "...I'd guess it occurred within 30 to 40 seconds..."
  12. @Moxica In addition to the relatively new flight helmets (late 90s) that upped the sound protection game, army pilots typically use something called a CEP or communication ear plug, essentially wired airpods with wire to the back of your helmet. I don't recall them being noise cancelling, but the combined effect of the helmet and the ear plug makes the ambient noise really low. I actually preferred not to wear them as I couldn't hear the ambient noises of the aircraft well enough.
  13. As a civil and military pilot in the U.S. and worldwide, I can also confirm that there is no requirement to call anyone prior to starting your engines. The only exception was when operating at U.S. Air Force bases. There is no FAR or military regulation requiring communication to start your engines. I've seen in in the Area Planning manual as procedure for specific airfields, almost always U.S. Air Force, but otherwise and for 99% of all flights, (can't speak for the airlines) there is no requirement to call anyone until you are ready for clearance, and or taxi.
  14. Fair enough. My apologies, you are exactly right, I let my emotions regarding some non DCS <profanity> taint my response to you. I'm sorry for that. There aren't a lot of shortcuts and you seemed to be wanting one, but I get your point. Glad UncleStains suggestions and to a lesser extent mine helped. My perception was you seemed to be asking for a magic solution to a complex task that people spend years mastering. But that's no excuse either so again, sorry for the tone of my other reply.
  15. Here: is the most dumbed down primer I can offer you in lieu of you doing your own homework: As you transition from forward flight to a hover initially you need to dump the collective because the upflow from tilting your rotor disk into a decelerative attitude will make you climb if you don't Anticipate it and correct for it. As you transition from above ETL(effective translational lift) to below ETL that upflow transitions from an upflow driving your rotor system to an induced flow, i.e. down thru your rotor system which causes you to now need lots of collective as you transition to a hover, the most inefficient and most power demanding state of flight for a helo. So initially as you slow down, drop the collective. At around 30-35 knots start to bring it back in slowly to compensate for the inefficiency of hovering flight. There's a lot more going on aerodynamically, but based on your post this is the most immediate thing to wrap your head around. Decelerating is causing you to NOT need power followed by a huge power demand as you drop below ETL. The slower you make the deceleration process, the easier it is to control power. A VMC approach to a hover is one of the hardest basic tasks there is in helo flying. Seems to me like you want to go from novice to competent helo pilot, but you don't want to do the bookwork. There are reasons the aircraft is doing what it is doing, that until you understand, you can only react to. You need to be ahead of the aircraft, not behind it. And until you know why it's doing what it's doing, you can only react. Familiarize yourself with some basic rotary wing flight principles, specifically the numerous sources out there specifically on the topic of "transitioning to and from hovering flight". You are complaining you can't easily do something that's very hard. If you're just here for everyone to pull out their violin and play the helicopter flying is hard song, we get it.
  16. Another very general suggestion, not Apache specific is to make sure you are flying with elbow support. If your elbow is not supported you are using biceps, triceps and shoulder muscles to achieve fine motor movements. It can be done, but when you fly with elbow support, (a kneeboard or just positioning your joystick differently) you change to forearms and finger muscles which are much more precise.
  17. You've got a lot going on aerodynamically when a helo transition from forward flight to a hover and vice versa. Suggested reading would be effective translational lift and translating tendency to begin with. Right now you are reacting to forces you aren't aware of. Once you know what's going on aerodynamically, you can anticipate, versus react to what's happening.
  18. I've had the problem I described for quite some time. Yours just sounds like the same thing only it's not as a result of switching views. I'm trying to wrack my brain for things I tried. I am in VR too, but it sounds like you are not? That would rule out all the VR settings right out of the gate. I fly A LOT of night. When I run my server it's called "Cold, Dark and Miserable", so It's kind of my thing. 99% of DCS online is daytime flights. This is under the radar because so few people are seeing it is my guess.
  19. Just curious if this happens to you after looking at the F-10 map or external view? I get the very dark cockpit at night pretty frequently and it's always after cycling thru external views or looking at the map. If this is your issue, for me it usually self corrects in 5 to 10 seconds, or you can toggle external view / cockpit view a couple of times and it resets to cockpit gamma levels.
  20. Yes. You essentially race the dust cloud forming behind you, and once you're ready to land, you transition to a rapid deceleration, trying to simultaneously bring airspeed and altitude to zero or near zero, before being engulfed by the dust or sand etc. One crewmember calls the dust cloud's location, the other aft wheel height, sometimes it's just one crewmember doing both. Nothing else requires the kind of split second timing dust landings do or did, prior to the F model. I hear the F model can do it for you, but in the D model and prior, it's akin to a carrier landing in terms or sheer sketchiness. It's a controlled crash. It happens as fast as you can read this: "Aft gear is off, 50, dust cloud forming at the ramp, aft gear is off 25, dust cloud mid cabin, aft gear is off 10 feet, dust cloud cabin door , off 5,4, 3,2,1, contact" the last two to three seconds are often flown totally blind, just relying on everything looking good at the moment you get swallowed. The danger being spatial disorientation, once you are engulfed in the dust, you damn well better be on the ground or very near with no side drift, because even though you have an artificial horizon, it can't show you drift. You can be straight and level and sliding 15 mph sideways, with no real indication. That's how accidents usually play out, botched approach resulting in a completely browned out pilot who can't see the sideward drifting which becomes a rollover accident on touchdown. Here's a few good videos. Video number 1 is a textbook dust landing. It's just about perfect in terms of getting down with the least amount of forward motion before the dust swallows them. Versus in number two, you can see the bird is enveloped for up to three seconds before they actually touch the ground. Not sharpshooting the pilot, as they could probably see thru that level of dust, to some degree with the NVGs. But that's the difference between what I'd call a good dust landing and a bad one. It's subtle, but notice on the day video, the back wheels contact BEFORE being engulfed. The second video, not so much. The third is a pilot's perspective but it's an F model, so likely this is an entirely different approach profile flown with and relying on hover symbology. And it's of course daytime. The approach is much slower, very controlled feeling, and provided mostly to illustrate what the inside of the dust cloud looks like. Cheers!
  21. As another former 47 guy, I’ll confirm pinnacle / ridgeline landings look way cooler than they are hard, or require skill and or a great cyclic touch. On the other hand, getting that huge SOB down in the sand or dust at night with NVGs, that was incredibly close to the edge flying. Don’t know many guys that NVG dust landings didn’t give them at least a bit of the heebie geebies. That’s how you knew you’d made it to the show, we’re in the club etc, when powers that be trusted you with 50 heroes in the back, going into the green void on a moonless night for God and country! NVG pilot in command is where the rubber meets the road in army aviation, everything else is some form of copilot.
  22. Since then, I've gone out of my way to repeat it and nothing. Full mw50, emergency engine handle, low speeds high AOA just abusing it and nothing - it just hums right along. But yes, whatever it was I finally saw it, it had a sound associated with it, and no rhyme or reason why it should have quit.
  23. @oncomms @Hobel My apologies to you both, I was able to reproduce the bug. Sorry for being skeptical, but in the video it looks like engine mismanagement. My conditions were about 30 minutes into a mission, both temperatures around 100-110C, level flight. I engaged MW50, needle moves, started a clock figuring I had at least 3 to 10 minutes before anything would start to overheat. Engine made a sound I've never heard, loss of power followed by and subsequent total seizing of the engine. I'd guess it occurred within 30 to 40 seconds of what I'd consider "proper" mw50 use. No useable track file as I was 30 minutes into the mission.
  24. Ok I see the MW50 engage at your timestamp. Your temperatures are at the high end of normal when it engages. From there, they rapidly exceed the temp limits. Regarding the engine time limits, I've read up to 30min with mw50 and 3 for 3250 rpm without mw50, but I have not tested those. Either way, those time limits are dependent on keeping the temperatures in the proper ranges. Meaning 30 min of MW50 might be possible in less demanding situations, but throw in a sustained climb or high power, high AOA, low speed flight, and the 30 minute limit is superseded by the harder and faster temperature limit. There's a bit of a hierarchy to these limits: Time limits are softer limits, if you will. A 30 minute engine oil temperature limit would be designed to prevent sustained heat damage, reduce wear etc, but it is very very secondary to the keeping the oil temperature within its range. Oil temp is a hard limit, it has a gauge and a number, probably because it more important than the generalized time limitation. In summary, I think you are treating the 30 minute limitation like it drives the train, when in fact, its the other way around. You can get up to 30 minutes - IF you obey the other limits. Are you adjusting the thermostat or leaving it in the default position?
×
×
  • Create New...