black shark 1, any good ?

[m1tp2king]

hi. i stopped playing falcon 4 allied force because it kept giving me the same boring missions time after time.

i am thinking of stop playing lock on because my A.I. wingmen die easily with any enemy encounter.

does black shark 1 have any serious flaws that irritate you.

i plan to play it in simulation mode.

let me know anything that you feel is important.

thanks.

[skydanny]

You should join the DCS World. There are modules for each weapon you want, I guarantee you'll love it now.

I'm looking forward to the earliest version of the F/A-18.:D

[joey45]

Best get Blackshark 2 as that plugs into DCS World.

[m1tp2king]

thanks for the responces, but you didn't tell me if black shark 1 has any major faults like flacon 4 or lock on.

[Devrim]

Join DCS World and examine all modules. I guarantee too, you can't look at other sims...

 

Edit: Directly buy Black Shark 2. Read carefully modules page. And I can say that, DCS World system is alittle different. There're some issues about BS2, but with updates they'll be fixed.

[Home Fries]

Get DCS World for free, see if the Su-25T works for you, and if you like the mission editor and system, splurge for Black Shark 2. Without knowing specifically what major faults annoy you, there is no way for us to answer that question.

[Pikey]

BS1 is deprecated. For BS2 I couldn't spot a fault if my life depended on it but i don't think you mean faults, i think you mean giving a personal opinion on how we enjoy it.

For me, it is still the most enjoyable flight experience I ever had online, but being a helicopter, before I had rudder pedals it was harder to fly.

 

Your only answer is contained above. Get the free DCS World.

[Lizzard]

..and you should know Black Shark 2 is pretty much the same as Black Shark 1! Just a few minor tweaks, but BS2 has the ability to log into DCS World. DCS World is the Benchmark nowadays. And for the Missions..hard to tell...I enjoy them..but you know DCS World has a pretty powerfull Mission Editor..so you can build any Mission you want, if you don`t like the Stock Missions delivered with BS2.

[Maverick-X]

BS1 is quite fine, although it doesn't make a good deal for multiplayer as it is not supported in DCSW.

 

I try to get into Falcon BMS, but didn't spend much time on that til now. I read about the dynamic campaign, wich is a thing you could miss in DCS. The custom made missions / campaigns delivered with the game still are fun. If you already have it, give it a shot. If not, perhaps mind to get BS2 as the others suggested. Way better in terms of multiplayer!

[Katmandu]

BS2 has much better AI and tweaked flight model and graphics, otherwise it's pretty much the same as BS1.

[OGREMAN]

Black Shark 1 vs 2 Issues

 

Hi have a little time so I thought I might offer my observations,

1st off I have been an avid active Blackshark flyer since it was first published, I fly an average 2 to 5 hours each day in that Sim so you might say I am "experienced".

 

In general the KA50 is a fairly difficult aircraft to fly (especially if you don't know rotary wing flight) but its systems while only moderately complex are very effective, so ... easy systems - hard aerodynamics.

 

Black Shark 1 v 2

BS1 = Excellent modelling and the flight program is rock solid stable to use.

The slightly more simple flight model provides a "crisper" responsive performance, in truth, the difference would not be noticeable to a rookie flyer/user. It is also true that the general environment graphics are noticeably less richly detailed in BS1 and all other aspects of the program are less sophisticated. That said ...... it still posesses massively better graphics than the Falcon program.

 

BS2

The main negatives,

1- for reasons that completely elude me, DCS altered the HUD/ Laser targeting display behaviour in the BS2 model to something that defies reasonable logic, its not a game breaker but it is a constant and highly visible (in your face) irritation when operating the KA50 laser guided missiles.

2- since the change to BS2 the KA50 rudder is tied as (permanently fixed) to the trimmer causing incorrect trim behaviour (this is a big deal on a Helo because the rudder is in constant aggressive use).

3- in order to properly enjoy the BS2 ka50 flight you will inevitably have to apply a couple of "community created" MOD FIXes, this is especially true if you gained your "wobbly wing" skills in the earlier BS1.

 

 

 

4- other more general problems ie with the wider program (DCS World)include

• unreliable repair process.
  
• radio comms for ATC largely a joke
  
• constantly changing flight model behaviour due to program patches and updates (DCS fix issue a - only to introduce error bug B,C,D, etc)
  
• Missions you enjoy may well be completely useless (broken) as a result of the next patch.
  
• almost all of the most useful (sometimes essential) community created MOD/FIX will have to be re-applied after a DCS patch.
  

Despite the above shameful litany, without doubt this (BS2 & DCS World) is the better version to fly for the simple reason that all aspects of the environment, graphics, modelling, AI, mission planner logics and flight dynamics are noticeably better.

 

To sum up, if all you want to do is fly the Black Shark in single play and or value stability over the latest "eye candy" then BS1 will provide all you need.

If however you want a cutting edge experience and want to fly in a squad or regular on-line group then BS2 & DCS World is the way to go.

Take it or leave it, that is my humble opinion.

Edited October 31, 2013 by OGREMAN
cosmetic for clarity

[Flagrum]

Hi have a little time so I thought I might offer my observations,

1st off I have been an avid active Blackshark flyer since it was first published, I fly an average 2 to 5 hours each day in that Sim so you might say I am "experienced".

 

In general the KA50 is a fairly difficult aircraft to fly (especially if you don't know rotary wing flight) but its systems while only moderately complex are very effective, so ... easy systems - hard aerodynamics.

 

Black Shark 1 v 2

BS1 = Excellent modelling and the flight program is rock solid stable to use.

The slightly more simple flight model provides a "crisper" responsive performance, in truth, the difference would not be noticeable to a rookie flyer/user. It is also true that the general environment graphics are noticeably less richly detailed in BS1 and all other aspects of the program are less sophisticated. That said ...... it still posesses massively better graphics than the Falcon program.

 

BS2

The main negatives,

1- for reasons that completely elude me, DCS altered the HUD/ Laser targeting display behaviour in the BS2 model to something that defies reasonable logic, its not a game breaker but it is a constant and highly visible (in your face) irritation when operating the KA50 laser guided missiles.

2- since the change to BS2 the KA50 rudder is tied as (permanently fixed) to the trimmer causing incorrect trim behaviour (this is a big deal on a Helo because the rudder is in constant aggressive use).

3- in order to properly enjoy the BS2 ka50 flight you will inevitably have to apply a couple of "community created" MOD FIXes, this is especially true if you gained your "wobbly wing" skills in the earlier BS1.

 

 

4- other more general problems ie with the wider program (DCS World)include

• unreliable repair process.
  
• radio comms for ATC largely a joke
  
• constantly changing flight model behaviour due to program patches and updates (DCS fix issue a - only to introduce error bug B,C,D, etc)
  
• Missions you enjoy may well be completely useless (broken) as a result of the next patch.
  
• almost all of the most useful (sometimes essential) community created MOD/FIX will have to be re-applied after a DCS patch.
  

Despite the above shameful litany, without doubt this is the better version to fly for the simple reason that all aspects of the environment, graphics, modelling, AI, mission planner logics and flight dynamics are noticeably better.

 

To sum up, if all you want to do is fly the Black Shark in single play and or value stability over the latest "eye candy" then BS1 will provide all you need.

If however you want a cutting edge experience and want to fly in a squad or regular on-line group then BS2 & DCS World is the way to go.

Take it or leave it, that is my humble opinion.

What do you mean with point 1? The Crazy Shkval effect?

[MTFDarkEagle]

What do you mean with point 1? The Crazy Shkval effect?

 

No. What Ogreman's talking about is the latteral (left-right) compensation of the laser sighting. I.e. the laser is looking straight ahead, and the missile is fired parallel to the airframe, so theoretically it will never intercept the laser (read: THEORETICALLY). To compensate, the nose is pointed slightly left/right to get the missile into the track.

So if you are firing from the LEFT wing you maneouvre the nose RIGHT, and vica versa. The HUD indication for this is seriously overdone I think, unless someone can provide proof it's correct :)

[OGREMAN]

Hi Gents :-)

 

TINTIN has got it in a nutshell, the "LEAPING LASER INDICATOR" is IMO severely over done, the whole Idea of it uses a flawed logic..... there is only one laser beam and it is being emitted from a point 6m in front of the beam riding missile. The circle that represents the effective "cone of effective guidance" completely departs the supposedly illuminated target area as each missile is launched, forcing the helicopter to slew a large distance from left to right for each new launch.

[Pikey]

No one mentioned the future introduction of EDGE or Nevada which BS1 won't have but BS2 will do. Thought that was a compelling reason to go BS2 despite irks.

[Flagrum]

No. What Ogreman's talking about is the latteral (left-right) compensation of the laser sighting. I.e. the laser is looking straight ahead, and the missile is fired parallel to the airframe, so theoretically it will never intercept the laser (read: THEORETICALLY). To compensate, the nose is pointed slightly left/right to get the missile into the track.

So if you are firing from the LEFT wing you maneouvre the nose RIGHT, and vica versa. The HUD indication for this is seriously overdone I think, unless someone can provide proof it's correct :)

You are talking about the reticle that is always left or right of the center line when designating a target? Hrm, interesting, I wondered about this behaviour for years ... :o)

 

BUT ... the laser projects a grid so the missile can distinguish wether it is too far left/right/above/below the center (which points to the target). The laser is therefore not just a single dot, but is moving and projecting a cone. At least that is my understanding so far of how (this) beam rider works.

 

(Hrm, I tried to argue here that the amount of offset is plausible ... but while typing, I am realizing that such (wider) cone would be even easier to be incertecpted by the missile and therefore the big reticle offset is even more unplausible ... hmm.)

[Irregular programming]

2- since the change to BS2 the KA50 rudder is tied as (permanently fixed) to the trimmer causing incorrect trim behaviour (this is a big deal on a Helo because the rudder is in constant aggressive use).

 

This is exactly how it was in BS1, it's correct and hardly a big deal.

 

There is zero reason to get BS1 today other than possibly nostalgia.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Irregular programming

[MTFDarkEagle]

You are talking about the reticle that is always left or right of the center line when designating a target? Hrm, interesting, I wondered about this behaviour for years ... :o)

 

BUT ... the laser projects a grid so the missile can distinguish wether it is too far left/right/above/below the center (which points to the target). The laser is therefore not just a single dot, but is moving and projecting a cone. At least that is my understanding so far of how (this) beam rider works.

 

(Hrm, I tried to argue here that the amount of offset is plausible ... but while typing, I am realizing that such (wider) cone would be even easier to be incertecpted by the missile and therefore the big reticle offset is even more unplausible ... hmm.)

 

The missile will always try to fly on the beam (lasers diameter are too small to be significant for aiming/guiding I think..). The laser is just a dot. Don't forget the missile looks BACKWARDS for the laser! Not forward! The HUD offset is just to get the missile to intercept the beam, but the AMOUNT of offset is too much IMO.

 

This is exactly how it was in BS1, it's correct and hardly a big deal.

 

There is zero reason to get BS1 today other than possibly nostalgia.

 

Correct? So the Ka-50's rudder trims IRL? Proof?

The fact it's "hardly a big deal" is just valid for you! I'd rather have it unbound from the trim.

[Flagrum]

The missile will always try to fly on the beam (lasers diameter are too small to be significant for aiming/guiding I think..). The laser is just a dot. Don't forget the missile looks BACKWARDS for the laser! Not forward!

Yes, yes ... what I meant was: the laser as such has a small diameter, but my understanding is that the electronics moves the laser beam to "paint" a certain pattern in the distance. Like a disco laser. :o) And the missile flies within this pattern (yes, looking backward, seeing the laser) and can determine by the type of patern where in relation to the center of the pattern it is located.

 

Something like this (don't laugh at my artistic [dis]abilities! :o)

 

Missile sees horizontal pattern: it is too high, must fly downward. Vice versa for vertical pattern. If it sees the continuos pattern: too far left, dashed pattern: too far right.

[Irregular programming]

Correct? So the Ka-50's rudder trims IRL? Proof?

The fact it's "hardly a big deal" is just valid for you! I'd rather have it unbound from the trim.

 

:doh:

 

Yes the rudder trims in real life, and I am not gonna spend time to dig up "proof" of it when it's not even remotely a disputed fact. It's also exactly how it worked in BS1 so I can't understand what you are on about.

 

Also, why on earth would I care what you have done to mod your game? You'll end up with a much less stable aircraft but that's your loss, not mine.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Irregular programming

[MTFDarkEagle]

Flagrum:

 

I see what you mean. That would be a very illogical way to guide a missile if you ask me. Though possible off course. That method would require substantial laser maneouvring as well as serious visual processing power to detect the patterns (don't forget the missile is twisting in flight). What would make sense to me if the missile just tries to keep the dot of the laser in the center, regardless of a possible emitted pattern.

 

:doh:

 

Yes the rudder trims in real life, and I am not gonna spend time to dig up "proof" of it, when it's not even remotely a disputed fact. It's also exactly how it worked in BS1 so I can't understand what you are on about.

 

I know that's how it worked in BS1. I've got the original Russian DVD somewhere..

But that's not the point. Point is if the REAL ka-50 has a trimmed rudder or not. You say it is and there is proof, ok - cool. Could be possible, I simply don't know.

 

Also, why on earth would I care what you have done to mod your game? Unless you have also modded your rudder pedals you will get a much less stable aircraft but that's your loss not mine.

 

Uuuuuhm... where exactly did I mod my game again?

 

Because I said "I'd rather have it unbound..." does not mean it actually is. Assumption is the mother .. (you know the rest :P )

 

:doh:

[xentxo]

There is zero reason to get BS1 today other than possibly nostalgia.

This is factually incorrect. - BS1 works reliably under Win XP. BS2 not.

 

Some words to BS2 multiplayer:

In particular helicopters are dependent on invisibility because they are slow. But in DCS there is a constant cheat possibility: exterior view on all airports + free roaming (even possible when first person only view is enabled on server). So some fighters are sitting in their plans on runway, scanning the area with free roaming keys before start to pick up locations of helicopters. The result is: helicopter position is compromised and you are released for discharge.

[Flagrum]

Flagrum:

 

I see what you mean. That would be a very illogical way to guide a missile if you ask me. Though possible off course. That method would require substantial laser maneouvring as well as serious visual processing power to detect the patterns (don't forget the missile is twisting in flight). What would make sense to me if the missile just tries to keep the dot of the laser in the center, regardless of a possible emitted pattern.

The laser itself would not have to move at all - just some sophisticated optics, perhaps with movable mirrors to reposition the beam. The processing power needed for detecting and interpreting the received pattern in the missile ... I don't know. Might depend on the actual pattern that is used (mine is only a very rough illustration!). Perhaps a dot pattern with different dot sizes for each quadrant?

 

This idea is no my own - I read it somewhere before (simhq? here? can't remember). Such a pattern approach makes, to me at least, more sense than just trying to keep a single laser dot in the center: rethink, what you already just said yorself: the missile is spinning and not even flying straight - how can it possibly keep the laser dot centered?

[Fishbreath]

But that's not the point. Point is if the REAL ka-50 has a trimmed rudder or not. You say it is and there is proof, ok - cool. Could be possible, I simply don't know.

 

As I understand it, the reason the unchain-rudder-trim mod is popular is because people remove the centering springs from their rudder pedals. There are three behaviors here:

 

1. With rudder centering springs and rudder trimmed:

Press/release trimmer. New center points set. You have to move your feet back to the rudder center position, but the rudder isn't centered anymore, so your feet no longer correspond to the rudder position. On the upside, the pedals have a centering force, which strikes me as probably correct when the helicopter is at a decent speed, and possibly not correct when the helicopter is slow.

 

2. With rudder centering springs removed and rudder untrimmed:

Press/release trimmer. New center points set, but not for rudder. You just leave your feet where they were. This is more nearly how an actual helicopter works (or at least one with trimmable yaw?).

 

3. With rudder centering springs and rudder untrimmed:

Wrong, IMO; you have rudder pedals which don't behave like helicopter rudder pedals, and you aren't using the game's recenter-controls modes to help mitigate the disconnect, either.

[Flagrum]

As I understand it, the reason the unchain-rudder-trim mod is popular is because people remove the centering springs from their rudder pedals. There are three behaviors here:

 

1. With rudder centering springs and rudder trimmed:

Press/release trimmer. New center points set. You have to move your feet back to the rudder center position, but the rudder isn't centered anymore, so your feet no longer correspond to the rudder position. On the upside, the pedals have a centering force, which strikes me as probably correct when the helicopter is at a decent speed, and possibly not correct when the helicopter is slow.

 

2. With rudder centering springs removed and rudder untrimmed:

Press/release trimmer. New center points set, but not for rudder. You just leave your feet where they were. This is more nearly how an actual helicopter works (or at least one with trimmable yaw?).

 

3. With rudder centering springs and rudder untrimmed:

Wrong, IMO; you have rudder pedals which don't behave like helicopter rudder pedals, and you aren't using the game's recenter-controls modes to help mitigate the disconnect, either.

 

The most realistic variant would be: rudder trimming on and no center spring. If the feet are removed from the pedals, it stays in position as it was trimmed.

 

The problem usually is, that removing the spring isn't an option. Therefore, with rudder trimming on, one had to keep exact pressure on the pedals all the time. Very uncomfortable.

Or a solution like we have with non-ffb joysticks: return the pedals to center after trimming. But this easily leads to adding up of trimming "errors". E.g. rudder trimmed 100% to the right, pedals are centered. Now you press right pedal ... what should the rudder do? Go to 200%?

 

The compromise is your variant 2: unchain the rudder from the trimming logic. Rudder is not affected by trim and corresponds to the pedal positions all the time (whenever they are depressed or centered by the spring).