Tiger-II

Great!

It would be great if we could equip external fuel tanks. Seems strange we can equip other helicopters with tanks, but not the Mi-8. null null null null null

I don't use trim for takeoff/landing. Make sure it is set to zero before you takeoff/land. Why do I say this? The way real helicopters are flown is by memorizing stick offsets, and stick positions for various phases of flight. The rotor system is highly dynamic, and as such the stick moves around as conditions across the rotor change (differences in lift across the disc). In a stable hover, the stick position (cyclic) is right and aft of center, with right pedal, with the aircraft rolled to the right slightly to counter-act the thrust produced by the tail rotor. As you decelerate through and below translational lift speed (about 50 kph), you will need to increase collective ("pull pitch"), simultaneously add right pedal due to the power and pitch change of the main rotor, and roll to the right to counter-act the tail rotor thrust that becomes significant at low speed, especially below ETL speed. By knowing where the cyclic should be in this regime, it makes it much easier to translate from foward flight to a hover (and vice-versa). Try practicing picking up and setting down the helicopter to a hover at 5 m, then transition to forward flight, and back to a hover. You will soon understand what control inputs need to be made and when in order to bring the aircraft to forward flight and back to a hover without losing or increasing altitude. It will also help you to better understand the changes in rotor behavior across different speeds and regimes. Try this exercise with an empty config and light fuel load, and a max gross weight. The difference in handling is quite pronounced. It should really be centered, but you seemed to do a great job lining up with the line!

Hi, I noticed this evening that sling loads can only be moved once. Once they've been placed somewhere else and released (not damaged), it is impossible to pick them up again. Is this a bug, or by design?

Where can I get this livery?

It's a buggy mess, and only half-implemented at that (it is WIP, after all). A TP is purely for the nav system to allow the aircraft to fly a turn to then track direct to the selected waypoint. It is a special waypoint that should always be FROM point, not selectable, and deleted any time any other waypoint action is performed (e.g., overflying the next waypoint triggering the next waypoint to be sequenced). If you ever flew a decent Boeing in MSFS for example, it should operate the exact same way in this regard.

Why didn't you state it was modded earlier? Mods are known to break DCS in very weird ways, as you have discovered!

Fantastic!!

This is fantastic! I'll have a look this weekend!

Talking generally, some doors do have operational limits, both on operation, and even how far. Some aircraft in the real world would need to be re-positioned before certain doors could be opened. These doors are relatively large in area, and relatively light (160 lbs/door).

No issues here. Check dust protectors, icing, and that you didn't take damage or over-torque them, either.

It is a fallacy to suggest physical proximity results in faster transfer. The internet just doesn't work that way. I'm geographically closer to Europe but it is always faster for me to access US servers because of how it is connected to the USA vs. Europe. Europe also always under-estimates the infrastructure required, and doesn't invest in the backbone or sheer number of servers required for fast access.

Mi-8 or Ka-50. Apache is great (I have all the rotorcraft) but I started out with Ka-50 back when it was the stand-alone Blackshark 1 and you can't beat co-axial rotors. The Mi-8 is the best handling conventional helicopter of them all. Several RW Mi-8/Mi-17 drivers say it has all the quirks of the real thing, as well as accurate behaviors and handling. The sounds are next-level. It brings firepower, cargo, and sling loading. In order, my faves are: 1a) Mi-8 1b) Ka-50 2) Apache 3) Huey 4) Mi-24P (still issues with this one that are preventing me buying it - some panels are not as functional as they should be, and the audio is severely lacking compared to Mi-8 despite them having the same engines, APU, and gearbox). I can't recommend Polychop. I have the Gazelle, and I'm still waiting for them to update the flight model. I'm currently debating the CH-47F. This is what Mi-24 should sound like:

Wait...you need to consciously move the pedals back to center? Why do you need trim at all?

People need to learn to think a bit more. A vertical autorotation may not be the best thing, but it can be done. It says nothing of the crash, only the result while falling! In autorotation VRS is not a thing because the motion of the air drives the blades. VRS only happens under power with pitch, because the net thrust is higher, forcing a cusion of air out in front of the rotor system with a negative velocity. Like a ship encountering bubbles in water, this downwards accelerated air increases sink rate. Autorotation can't do this. Helicopters reach a point of equilibrium, and settle in a stable sink rate during autorotation, regardless of forward speed.

If the RADAR code did deliberately modify functionality after a certain date, then this is indeed a "time bomb". Let's break it down very simply: Time: it is deliberately programmed to do something on or after a certain time Bomb: the behavior is deliberate by the software dev and unexpected on the part of the user. There is no other way to describe the existence of such a feature as anything but malicious. There is no other reasonable explanation for its existence. I don't care if you have a different definition - this is literally the meaning. Expiration dates on software are not malicious, and are often published (Windows) or expected (beta testers for companies will be aware of and/or should know such mechanisms could exist in beta software). Trial software does not include "time bombs" as it states on the tin when it expires.

As always...lowest bidder wins.

By default, the sound the RWR makes is the current threat surrounded by a diamond. When you use handoff, it should change to that of the selected emitter.

New GPU or new computer...I know which is cheaper. My $0.02. Look at this way: if the new GPU doesn't help, you only need to buy the rest of the computer. Absolutely nothing is lost. 4070 Ti Super is a great card, but be sure to get the Ti Super. There are so many 4070 models, it is confusing as hell. ONLY the TiS shares the same GPU core as the 4080.

The 1080 is the problem. I had an i7 9700K @ 5 GHz paired with a 1080 and got maybe 60 FPS with the Mi-8. I changed it a couple of months back to a 4070 Ti Super, and now get 250 FPS. The CPU isn't the problem; the GPU is! No, I don't run the BS "frame generation". That junk is turned off!!!

It's way better than the Viggen in that regard! We even get Bullpup missiles. Equivalent to the RB05 on the Viggen.

I didn't try a slam acceleration. That is too fast.

RADAR is just a microwave transmitter. AFAIK this model has fixed power output, so with that in mind, think of it like this: To detect an aircraft (for the signal to be strong enough to be detected), the target must reflect a certain amount of RF energy. How much energy is called the sensitivity of the RADAR set. If it requires a large percentage of the output power output to be reflected back, then it is not very sensitive; conversely, if it only requires a very small amount of that transmitted power to be reflected back, then it is considered sensitive. How much energy reaches a target? The power output of the RADAR is spread over the area being scanned. There are two parts to consider: the output in the direction and cone angle the RADAR is looking, then the combined power in the area where the scan areas overlap. The beam can be narrowed, which increases the power being transmitted to that area, meaning power reflected back from any objects is stronger, meaning they are more likely to be detected. This includes detecting the same object but at a further distance. As you already stated, wider sweep angles mean you cover more sky, but that takes time, and reduces the overall power being beamed at a target. Targets therefore generally need to be a bit closer to you to be detected this way. If you really focus the beam (no sweep, narrow beam width), then you pour much more energy into an area, as well as greatly increase the detection rate in that area, meaning targets you missed previously, could now be detected. This effect is so great, it can effectively double the detection range of the RADAR, but you are only looking at a very small cone in the sky. Tracking a target is a different matter. Later aircraft with more sophisticated RADAR sets employ verious techniques to do this, but in the F-4, the way it is done is by nutating the RADAR head slightly to "search" for where the signal is strongest, then using additional logic, it detects the relative bearing of the strongest signal, and steers towards it. This is the essence of how it tracks a target. The stronger the signal and the more frequently it updates, the easier for the RADAR to detect the target and follow it. This becomes more critical the closer the target is. Imagine a target close-in and maneuvering; its relative motion to the RADAR beam is very high. It can be so high, the target leaves the LOS of the RADAR before it can move to keep with it, thereby breaking lock (most extreme example is flying perpendicular to the RADAR beam at very high speed). There are other effects from this, but that is the basic premise of tracking.

That makes more sense. I knew the first part (rotation technique) but thought it was trimmed for a slower speed (e.g. 200 kts to help with preventing gear overspeed).

They can only see certain RADARs, so ensure you're selecting the right type. As for losing track - that is pretty accurate. The HARM-88 even has problems if the emitter shuts down, and the AGM-45 is a generation or two older. The emitter needs to keep radiating pretty much until impact, otherwise probability of a miss is high.