investigating Redundant(?) entries in cyclic settings

[Arendellecita]

I found these two bindings in cyclic settings:

CMDS Switch - Aft/Center;

CMDS Switch - Fwd/Center.

I wasn't able to find any information about these switches in the manual, nor was I able to locate them on the actual cyclic grip.

After a further search on the forum, seems like these switches are no longer in use in the Apache simulated in the game:

Quote

From the cockpit pictures released, the cyclic looks the same as a 2005 version.

Only 2 switches were modified on late block apaches cyclics.

The CMDS dispense switch (same button as chaff release but different functions)

And the CMDS manual program switch (forward- aft, allows selection between 4 manual chaff-flare programs)

All of these changes are also related to CMWS equipment, since without those, you would be having a hard time for manually releasing flares.

So are these bindings now redundant? Thanks!

[Hammer1-1]

Also interested in this topic as this is on a few HOCAS controls that I am mapping at the moment. Seems to be a few redundant controls like Missile Cage/Uncage, CMWS, camera jiggle, video record, VCR, WAS Down...

 

Also, in the gunner seat, there are sight select switches in 2 places: HOCAS and RHG. They do the same function, but couldnt they be called upon to do both at the same time instead of mapping them twice? Same goes for WAS buttons.

Edited March 29, 2022 by Hammer1-1

[Raptor9]

The CMDS Fwd/Aft switches should not be there, however, everything else is physically present in the cockpit. Not all of the buttons/switches have functions within the variant being simulated mind you, so these can be mapped or un-mapped without consequence.

Regarding the other commands that are duplicated in the CPG station, these do in fact have a purpose. If the CPG is using the flight controls, he will have access to some functions as well as if he wasn't flying and utilizing the TEDAC grips. These would probably be used for pit-builders, but some players can get away with only mapping one over the other.

However, there are some buttons that are "duplicated" but have slightly different logics associated with them. Namely the WAS and weapons triggers. If the CPG actions a weapon on the TEDAC grip, only the TEDAC weapon trigger is activated for weapon firing. Likewise, if a weapon is actioned on the cyclic, only the weapon trigger on the cyclic is active. Additionally, the only way for the CPG to enter Cooperative rockets with the pilot is to action rockets using the TEDAC WAS.

[Frederf]

Is missile advance device agnostic (collective, RHG)? I noticed there actually isn't a separate control for the RHG. I found out that LHG cursor controller enter and RHG enter aren't the same logic which I want to know more about. Doesn't look like WAS-ATA, CAGE, HDD have any function in this variant. You think VIDEO RCD might have a use later?

[Raptor9]

6 hours ago, Frederf said:

Is missile advance device agnostic (collective, RHG)? I noticed there actually isn't a separate control for the RHG. I found out that LHG cursor controller enter and RHG enter aren't the same logic which I want to know more about. Doesn't look like WAS-ATA, CAGE, HDD have any function in this variant. You think VIDEO RCD might have a use later?

Yes, it shouldn't matter which advance button or Cursor-Enter method is used, or when. If there is different behavior between Enter buttons, it should be a bug. The missile advance keybind on the TEDAC grip is indeed missing, has been from the start.

And no, the air to air functions.don't exist; and the HDD button and DVO switch position are holdovers from the ORT assemblies prior to the TEDACs.

[Hammer1-1]

Redundant buttons should be deleted. If anything it will keep confusion down and reduce some animation CPU/GPU cycles.

[Frederf]

Some people like to see the switches animate when they press them on their $1000 controllers. I mean the switch will still go into DVO position in the real aircraft so mimicking that function physically is just good simulation (including simulating an operator putting a switch in an undesirable state). Maybe some day they'll make an AH-64A (or some future version that re-utilized those functions) and the assets are already made. Keeping duplicate switches (e.g. missile advance) can have value even if for organizational purposes or to model damaged states.

As for LHG and RHG enter, I think I found them acting different (selecting TSD points with cursor) but it might have been a controls issue on my end. I'll keep a lookout for it.