Whisper

It's STILL not corrected???! That's a joke.... Half a year of unusable options in the ME, soon. They better simply remove the option.

The 109 reputation as difficult at take-off comes from the earlier models (very early models) that lacked tailwheel locking. And tbh the free tailwheel is the only thing on the spit that make it look difficult. It took me the same amount of time "mastering" take-off & landing on both birds, tbh.

And there has been no measurement of how much is missing from "full deflection" at low speeds

That's not "alternate" for me, that's my normal procedure since day 1 :) Works like a charm

The real control in the 109 is in form of 2 buttons on the throttle that move the "prop pitch clock needle" up and down. It's not an axis, they are push buttons in the real plane, you should bind them on adequate controls on your HOTAS :)

11:30 @2500RPM manual prop pitch is the setting I use for taking off as well. I don't set a fixed ATA, I try to keep the RPM at 2500, they vary a bit during the takeoff run.

About this, it could be VR people. When label dots are activated, with the level of supersampling going in a VR headset, the get blurried and kind of magnified. As soon as I activate labels in BS, anything inside label range (which is fortunately rather short) becomes hugely visible. If downward visibility wasn't so awefull in DCS, I'd avoid labels. They are "all or nothing" in VR. That said it's countered by the fact that target identification is screwed up and impossible before touching range

Damn, Solty, you're doing all this without trackIR? :O /respect!

That's the stuff I have. It's not going to be an immediate game changer, but in the long run, definitely. This thing is just awesome.

Perhaps make sure you fiddle with the right powering knobs in the right triangle panel, if I remember well. There's something here that powers up ARC system. Not in front of PC right now, I'm really not sure about the location, but maybe something is not powered?

Not too sure on this one. Hitting very few bullets for low effect and warning your target may not be advisable. Hitting when at convergence range has devastating effects. I'd be of the opposite opinion :) I think waiting for convergence range is more important

Wow, strange, I never got this effect! I wonder what kind of settings make some of us immune to this

I find hardware quality and settings to make a world of difference. Overcoming the oversensitivity with a bit of curve and/or saturation can do wonder. Adding a stick extension too. MFG pedals and similar quality products are of a huge help, even in the first hours you may not feel it. I use MFG without spring for choppers, and it's amazing how precise I can go. This boost your confidence in what you are able to control, this is a big help And then there's VR. Again, it's another world, I've botched 2 landings in 109 with the Rift, since then, everything is easy. Even the crosswind landing from the 109 campaign (well, it's noe "easy" but really feasible). Since hardware quality & settings goes along with passing time inside the cockpit (for example, to find the correct settings), there's a moment where it simply clicks and everything becomes smooth.

AFAIK it's the same guy behind the DCS original AFM/PFM concepts and IL2:BOS FM. So don't ditch IL2 FM as being not accurate enough THAT quickly :) There's far more in terms of modelling than "for beginners", tbh. And I'm not going into damage modelling. It's a bit fast & easy to treat one sim as the mature adult one and the other for children.

Actually, to emphasize what Vampire said, I got seriously in search of a CV1 because of IL2:BOS implementation. I hadn't made the move before, even though DCS had already it activated. And the IL2 guys did an absolutely tremendous job when integrating VR, it still has the inherent VR issues with current tech (long distance blur, screen door effect, god rays), but it is amazingly smooth and clear. Just a point on detection : It's a non issue even with current VR. I detect with as much ease as anyone else (or I only fly with myopic people, because I'm often the one calling for contacts the first when flying online :) ). The VR problem is about identification, and really present in DCS, I'd say. Target's shape doesn't stand out before rather short range.

Not DK2. Get a CV1 from reselling, for example. That's what I did. Even though I'm completely in love with my CV1, I would not have gotten it @current nominal price. I don't think I can return to screen siming now, it's so.... flat :) But a CV1 is worth imho 400$ max. So find one for this price (I know I saw a lot of opportunities, it looks like many ditch them after trying, finding the low price one is just a matter of patience). Not DK2. Or wait a bit for more reviews (mainly using it in DCS/ other sim), if you're only into racing/sim games, then check out PIMAX 4K.

looks like a mission specific communication, it's on the right side

Taking off and going for hard left turn is a sure sign of taking off wayyyyyy too early. Trim -1 before take off run, wait for tailwheel to go up by ittself, let the plane run some more, then pull. Not before.

That's not the point I was making, but please keep getting fixated on this and let's resolve this most important and absolutely shameful issue. People are making reports on other, normal flight envelop issues, but the one most talked about is the extreme ecample of something nobody would do anyway, like fixing this would make the chopper perfect. No, fixing normal behavior is more important imho

If you do, then head over Belsimtek forums, because from the same pilot tale, the UH1 behavior is not responding correctly for more than 20% of the flight envelop. Our simulations are far farther from real than you seem to think, I'd say.

I can do impossible things in many DCS (and any sim for that matter) aircraft. I don't see the logic in trying to fix things outside of normal flight enveloppe, that will not help the actual FM. If Poly do like BST did, ie make the chopper break in some way, before reaching the odd behavior, what do we get? The SAME FM, with conditions hidden behind barrier that hide you the issues. Will you stop complaining? Obviously, since you can't test. But.... that's the same FM (just a physics change that make something break). We glorify BST, but maybe they also have hidden some hideous FM issues by making the blades go away on UH1 when you test the FM too much.... If I have to point out a problem in Gaz FM, I'd point out the extra stability when not touching the cyclic (though the fact that we play with perfect centered non moving, ie, unreal, cyclic, certainly doesn't help the chopper depart from stability). I'd point out the complete lack of backblowing torque effect. Is that real? I'd point out the very little, if not absent, effect of 1 axis on the other 2 (at least, zero effect on cyclic) like I've read EVERY helicopter book outline. I'll point out the VRS. Maintaining long negative G ? It's impressive, it looks bad, but I don't care much, if that get fixed, that won't make the FM any better to me. We need to look, first, at the issues of the FM inside the normal flight envelop. And you gotta admit that the Gaz is pretty damn good in this, apart from a few points that I (and I may have missed some, ofc, I don't pretend to be an expert at all) listed above, and that makes the gaz feel too on rails to me. Though, I tend to not see the cyclic stability on takeoff as much important, because I play with a VERY loose stick that will not stay stable on takeoff anyway. That issue may be more visible for Warthog users, for example.

Actually, no. From reports outside of devs I got (for example, on french CheckSix forums), directly from pilots, that "good shape" of Gazelle FM seems confirmed and the issues shown here blown out of proportion, though I'm pretty sure they do exist. Just on this relatively recent topic for example, 2 gaz pilots posting in it : http://www.checksix-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=465&t=196343 What do they say? That the gaz' FM is responding like real in 80% of the flight enveloppe, that it doesn't seem to be the case for every other helos in DCS (he pointed out the UH1, that he also flew, that seems too assisted for him). They find the Gaz FM bashing way too hot.

So now we're fixated on an fm abuse way outside the normal flight enveloppe that has no applicable use? Great, the gaz fm will be top notch when it won't fly inverted for too long! Thank you, forum experts!

That's the problem, people are bashing so insanely hard that you'd think the thing is 100% broken. It's not. I'm sorry if that offends some here, but to me, the fact that every single return from actual Gaz pilots are saying that it's very near the real thing is showing that, despite its obvious flaws, the DCS Gaz is getting it. Some choose to focus on the flaws. When you don't, the chopper behaves (mostly, I agree there are little missing things) like it should. OTOH some response from Polychop portraying an ideal FM that does not need a single change, is indeed worrying. That said, I don't know myself what I'd like to see best, multicrew fixes, or FM...

From what I understand, no, there isn't much communication, not of this sort, at least. For example, Poly discovered the new network engine (which broke their multicrew) AFTER it was released and the Gazelle was unusable by then. Everybody is hitting on Poly, but everything isn't that black & white.