Jump to content

Herc79

Registered Users
  • Posts

    266
  • Joined

Herc79's Achievements

Super Simmer

Super Simmer (5/7)

  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In
  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare

Recent Badges

10

Reputation

  1. It'll come. Maybe real soon, maybe in years. Thing you'll begin to see is that there's a LOT of different airframes, and developers usually pick one that they can make AND really like. And that will sell well and be well received by FS virtual pilots.
  2. Interesting! Canadian Sabres had their own jet engine, more powerful and thus used for world records. And there was a Navy Carrier capable variant known as the FJ-2 Fury (and seeing the Wiki, apparently an FJ-3 as well!!) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_FJ-2/-3_Fury
  3. That's one thing I've learned over the years: sub-variants of various vehicles sometimes had incredibly minor differences, and other times had such profound changes that you wondered why they weren't considered a full on variant by themselves!! Also, give yourself a break: even the people who worked on the real example are often surprised decades later about differences in variants that they never even knew about when they were actually working on them! One example: British F-4 Phantoms made in England with the Rolls Royce Spey turbines, were SUBSTANTIALLY different from those made in St. Louis by McDonald Douglas... the airframes and wings didn't even have the same dimensions or even same shape to the point of affecting it's aerodynamics and some performance., the nose gear was different on Royal Navy variants because they needed the nose pointed at the Moon... I mean, ultimately they too were flying F-4 Phantoms, but the maintenance crews knew there was differences! https://forum.dcs.world/topic/294489-british-phantoms/ http://tailhooktopics.blogspot.com/2012/05/spey-powered-phantom-changes.html
  4. Helicopters seem to be VERY sensitive to the control inputs you offer the simulation. And along with that, there is a HUGE difference between someone who uses a quality and expensive rudder pedals, that have lots of precision and a large amount of pedal travel... Vs someone using joystick's "twist" function to accomplish the same thing. No, I'm not gonna tell you to spend $400 on new pedals. Instead, I'll tell you to get whatever rudder controls YOU can reasonably afford, and then experiment. Experiment with the controls settings in the game. Sensitivity curves, dead zones, that kind of thing. Try different things. Then go out and fly a bunch. Then a bunch more. Try hovering exercises. Then go back to tweeking the controls settings. At first, you'll probably get a bit frustrated. Then a bit more frustrated. Then you'll start to get used to it a bit. And then, things will start to come together. And after a while, you will have developed your muscle memory enough from flying many helicopters in FS, that you won't be as dependent on hardware or software, you'll be just "flying"! That said, there are a few hardware tweeks you can make yourself for pennies, to inexpensive hardware. In helicopter simulation one of the biggest, is to reduce or eliminate the effect of springs on the joystick, because that spring pressure is unrealistic for helicopter use. Some people use dampners from R/C cars or actual motorcycles. Often this involves giving a big extension to the joystick too, cutting the stick and adding a steel pipe to add maybe half a meter, so that it sits right on the floor but reaches above your thighs... the effect is to give you a LOT of precision for your inputs, and also nearly eliminates the "spring return" effect, because you have a lot more leverage. Casmo TV has a youtube channel where he shows how he did this to his TM T.16000m, he was a former military helicopter pilot mostly flying the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior, but also the AH-64D Apache Longbow, and now flies B-737's. Another is to make your own collective, or extensively modify a PC racing simulation "usb handbrake" for such purposes. And finally, some will buy an old inexpensive set of rudder pedals, and remove the centering spring. Maybe they'll invest in upgrading the sensors for more precision.
  5. Hovercontrol is missed, no doubt! Maybe with the rise of rotors in MSFS-2022 maybe they'll resurrect the site?
  6. Very far from an expert on anything piloting related... but i seem to recall that there is a specific trim setting for takeoff in many planes. And big heavy or high performance planes have different takeoff trim settings for different takeoff weights. Meaning if you have partial cargo and partial fuel at takeoff, you'd possibly select a different trim setting, than if at max gross weight. You probably knew that already, but figured mentioning it for new virtual aviators!!
  7. More at the link: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/25521/behold-arguably-the-most-spectacular-photo-of-nasas-shuttle-carrier-aircraft-ever
  8. I never actually tried the sextant, never really got the time to learn it, so I’m not totally sure if it works 100% properly, but I do recall that there was a claim it worked… might have even been an ad that pointed it out! I’m sure there are easier/faster/cheaper ways to get FS9 / FS2004 “A Century of Flight”, but I got a copy for cheap from Kijiji ads in my local city. Kijiji is basically similar to eBay but done more like “want ads” or “newspaper classified ads” and little in the way of bidding. In this case, $10 got me an immaculate, complete (even with all the advertising brochures, keyboard control list, the startup guide) in the very attractive tin case that the early editions were sold! Funny enough, I was so “drowning in coolaide” about FS9 that when FSX came out I rushed out and installed it… and was pissed about it for months! Every criticism that you can imagine, and more, I had used to describe it! After a few months of fighting with FSX I finally uninstalled it. So when this thread was started, it reminded me of my own reaction to the early days of FSX, the fair criticisms and the outlandish unrealistic opinions I held about it. And clearly FSX grew popular, and was effective, and a very positive experience for millions of people… I just wasn’t one of them, and there’s nothing wrong with being on either site of it! There WAS two things I quite enjoyed, albeit briefly, about FSX, one being a few missions in the DHC Beaver, the other thing was the gliders, something I never ever thought I would like, yet within minutes I started to LOVE that!! But I was fighting a losing battle in a horrific war against framerates, stutters, missing textures, CTD’s and it was just making the whole thing miserable. Ok, thanks for the explanation of geology as relates to FS, somehow I didn’t “get” the original point of the post that mentioned it! Yes, clearly with this level of ground detail, we can really start to properly see the beauty of this world we live in! The Grand Canyon, Bryce and Zion Canyons… amazing, the Swizerland at Lucern, a castle in the Black Forrest, the Rocky Mountains, Icefield Parkway in Alberta…
  9. I like using the Thrustmaster Airbus Sidestick... it's basically the newest of the T.16000m sticks, but looking a bit more professional and less "gamer alien", but with a much nicer feel in the hand (the stick itself is shaped differently) It has lots of buttons on the stick and also on the base, has a "rudder/tail rotor" twist function, has a nice hat switch and so on. Not too expensive, good quality, and lots of tutorials online to modify.
  10. Well, "hardcore simulation" actually means different things to different people. To some, that means using a G1000 and ignore steam gauges because "that's old and gone". Which it's not, but I digress. To some, the navigation is limited to GPS with no waypoints, just A to B. At destination, dive to the ground, and zoom to the runway, as if landing a fighter on a carrier... To others, like myself, I like to use VOR instruments, NDB's and stopwatch. Not referencing any GPS or even the map function... just hoping like heck I didn't lose track of which leg and freq I needed! But spherical triangles and aircraft nav? Yea, I've no idea. Keep in mind, FS2004 featured sim accurate star placement... no, not "SIDS STARS", but actually the distant stars in the galaxy, would be placed accurately above, for the season and date, allowing navigation the same as old sea mariners, using sextant! And if memory serves, I think one of the default aircraft even had a sextant for this purpose! I wonder how few FS2004 users ever tried it? Geology? Like the type of beach rocks I'm landing on with my tundra-tire bushplane? How about expanding on this, since you seem much deeper into this sim business than some n00bs like myself?
  11. Ok, sounds like you added a bunch of airports yourself, shows dedication! But it's not exactly fair to knock the new sim, especially since FSX had a massive headstart, and making scenery, airports and planes for FSX was basically the same since probably FS98 or something... but that ALL changed for the new sim, both for scenery and for aircraft, so there's a big learning curve for developers of freeware and payware to overcome. For the graphics, well that's about as stonkin' a vid card as you can get, but I suspect strongly that you'll get much improved effects after spending some time optimising in-game settings and maybe your card settings too. Just curious, what's your internet connection speed and dependability? If that's bottlenecked, it could dramatically hurt your graphics as it's not just your own hardware, a lot of data streams to you. Just a thought. nothing wrong with going between sims! You might also find some enjoyment with DCS perhaps, it's military aircraft, in a battlefield environment... many who flew these aircraft in real life swear it's pretty good in realism. Some even do reviews and tutorials, mixing real world annecdotes with their instruction. Basically, two terrain maps are free, two planes are free, there are some freeware mods that are good to great, but most of it is payware aircraft and payware maps. No, it doesn't model the whole world, right now there's the Caucasus map, Syria/Lebanon map, the Nevada map that includes Las Vegas Area 51 Nellis AFB and Fallon's Naval Strike Warfare Center ("Top Gun"), Guam and the Mariannas Islands, a couple small European maps one over the English Channel and the other is.. Normandy? They have modern Hornets and Apaches, WW2 birds like the Spitfire and P-47, helis like the UH-1 Huey and so on. Even if it doesn't sound like it would appeal to you, you ought to at least check out the website and a trailer vid: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/ Nice freeware for DCS : the A-4 Skyhawk, AH-6 Littlebird
×
×
  • Create New...