P1KW

My diet is very varied. Eat everything. But there is something beyond the capacity of my digestive system. "Business decisions." I regret putting the discordant note, but what is this inconsistency? As a potential customer, it seems a waste to have two developers doing the same plane. Simply escapes my capability neuronal. I understand that ED should be more regulated third party development. Greetings!

朋友你好。 非常有趣的图片。 他们是这么好心地提供更多的信息？ 它是一个“MOD”？ 它是项目为“DCSW”吗？ 您好！ Hello friends. Very interesting pictures. Would they be so kind as to provide more information? Is it a "Mod"? Is it a project to "DCSW"? Greetings!

Hi guys, a update. I put two videos (poor quality, sorry) with the latest update. The old system was fine by the extreme simplicity of the assembly. But (there's always "buts") had several ideas that pushed me to improve. The 1st, the need to turn them over for use in a conventional manner. My poor table, long since not table, cockpit is, thus, to get under them around was a nuisance. 1st solution = to 1 disadvantage. G940 pedals are close together, more like a helicopter than a plane. As I mounted the helicopter to the sides of the plane that had left me to go together separate (heli) and vice versa (aircraft) but hey, it's a minor inconvenience. The 2nd improvement was the angle of the pedals. In the original cut, the foot was returning too upright, it was pretty easy to fix, but here comes the 3rd improvement ... The 3rd. Spring, friction and backlash. The bad (good) was opened to remove the dock and discovered that the main axis pivots on a bearing. With the previous system operated by friction, (actually totally acceptable) and "eating up" the slack pivot system differential brake, also negligible. But I'm sure in a real helicopter there is zero backlash, and since departed center bearing, homemade rods did you see in the video. 4 bearings, 4 hose clamps and threaded rod 6 mm, very homely. The idea was to transmit directly from my foot to the central bearing, frictionless, and without gaps. To act with the rods I had to replace the original screw on pivoting brake differential by other longest, is the only (easily reversible) modifications to the original pedals. The connecting rod system, and the angle of the pedals helo, has forced me to mount these more advanced than the pedal plane, another minor inconvenience. Finally the spring, the spring of discord. Ah! And the viscosity of the yaw axis. The original spring G940 is about 5 cm in diameter and 2 laps. When you push the right foot, tense the 1st round, and with the other foot backwards, turn opposite the spring. The downside is that there is a point at rest center, good for fixed wing, but bad for helos ... I also wanted to outsource the spring, that is, put it and remove it from the outside, in this, the solution has been by chance, with no preconceived idea of how I would do it. I put two springs longitudinals in each pedal, with only one strain is very soft, it is perceived more as viscosity, and there is a slight indication of the central point (well to compensate for the Ka-50) but not perceived step through the center, great for helicopters. It is equivalent to not using spring. With two put springs, tension is greater, not excessive, and the central point is clear and definite. Although a single spring serves perfectly, is the choice for fixed wing. And that's it. The truth is that I had a hard time the issue of the rods, but have been great, looking like "monster", but very smooth and precise mechanical level. One more point, G940 pedals have no own electronics, another substantial improvement has been not connect to joy, I have connected to Leo Bodnar card type, in a panel that had only buttons. I've gone from 256 to 4096 steps. Greetings!

The G940 is a good joystick for the Ka-50 ... but there is always a but ... You will need moding to get good performance. Should first extend the stick. It is not essential but highly recommended. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=84793&highlight=g940 You will also have to replace the electronics that control the throttle and rudder. As the above is not essential but recommended. http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3541231/1.html If you are willing to take this job, you will have the best HOTAS for the Ka-50, otherwise you will have a great HOTAS but with minor problems. If you pilot WWII aircraft type (DCS: P-51D Mustang) would say that is the best possible option. In any case, neither option is perfect for the Kamov. Neither Logitech, or TM, or CH or Saitek, but everyone flies with them. Greetings!

Lock the slide (if I understand correctly) and use the differential brakes is an option, but has the disadvantage that the toe brakes can be operated simultaneously, but the rudder pedals in a helicopter balance pedal on the pedal opposite. You would have to modify the behavior of the two main axes to turn into one. I think my solution is the most simple and effective, but I appreciate your comment. :smilewink: Greetings! Edit: Add a small video.

Well, I add a photo (sorry, low quality) with a practical example in the G940 pedals. Although it can be applied to the pedals from Saitek. I have not used bearing or similar. The friction is not relevant. The angle of the platform is very important, depends on the position of his leg in his cockpit, but extended almost vertically, and with more leg flexed greater angle of inclination on the platform. The assembly is very simple, especially if you already have made ​​the platforms, as was my case. The control is quite different, much more precise. Now I can make a coordinated turn with stability at the Ka-50, but I must start learning from the beginning. Greetings!

If you drive your car to 120 km / h, (please do not try it) and try to brake smoothly, using the leg, instead of the foot, you will find it impossible to get a smooth braking. This is the reason why many helicopter pilots felt uncomfortable with the typical fixed-wing rudder pedals. We need the precision that gives the foot and at the same time be able bring the pedal to the extreme with sufficient agility. For that reason real helicopters rudder pedals are more together, with less travel, and actuated by the foot, not leg. Based on an idea of ​​Javisim, Helibelula Patrol, I thought of the following mod for rudder pedals typical in simulation, Saitek, Logitech and CH. It has the drawback of using 3 hinges or joints and 1 bar, also lose the possibility of using the conventional way for aircraft. This design is much easier, and also maintains the option to use in fixed wing simply turning the pedals. The inconvenience is the friction between the actuator and the end of the pedal, although the tests work very well. And this is what I mean perfect, add bearings, or some rollers on the top of the pedal to eliminate friction. It's more complicated but is the goal. I hope soon to be putting practical examples with Saitek rudder and the G940 rudder pedals. :thumbup: Greetings!!!

Hey. Excuse my poor English, and poor video quality. It is an ATI 6990 with 5 monitors in Eyefinity configuration. Is running in windowed mode, the current driver version has lost performance in crossfire mode and DCS. In other simulators are indifferent window or full screen. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=78759 Greetings.

Hi, :smilewink: Greetings!

I think it is a persistent problem in 1.2 The missions created with the v1.2 have the same code that show up. I understand that it is reasonable to limit aid to the Mustang and CA, in MP missions. But the method of trimmer is not an "aid" as such, simply a choice of each pilot and its hardware. Greetings!

In SP the mission using your "options.lua" but MP use "options.lua" of the author of the mission. The only solution for now is that the author edit the mission open with Winrar and change the "options.lua" containing the file (mission.miz). But it is a bad solution, since not everyone used the same set of trimmer. Another solution would be to delete that line. But I have not tried. This is the part of "options.lua" affected; ["plugins"] = { ["Ka-50"] = { ["altTrimmingMethod"] = false, }, -- end of ["Ka-50"] ["P-51D"] = { ["assistance"] = 0, ["autoRudder"] = false, }, -- end of ["P-51D"] ["CA"] = { ["ground_aim_helper"] = true, ["ground_target_info"] = true, ["ground_platform_shake"] = true, ["ground_show_cursor"] = true, }, -- end of ["CA"] }, -- end of ["plugins"] Greetings!

Fantastic work, Peter, always inspires me. I am enclosing a picture of my prototype wheels for trimmer. The arrangement is not like the original at the Mustang, but is more intuitive. In addition, the three sides without a wheel, are valid as a base or anchor point, giving versatility. Excuse the poor quality of the image. Greetings!

Sorry for the joke. I understand that Coretex Designs is the pseudonym of a known developer. I imagine he has a product on the market that does not hurt. And if I keep imagining, I get VRS. Although he has been denied, but dreaming is free. Greetings!

Do you itch, curiosity? Do you stings, impatience? Try this: http://www.coretexproducts.com/ Greetings! :megalol: ...sorry :P Please Coretex, give us a little introduction. :thumbup:

In BS1 trims well. In BS2 the trimmer does not work well. In BS2 in DCSW returns to work well. The FM is different in all three. In BS1 the helicopter has more inertia than DCSW: BS2. In BS2 the pitch axis is more nervous. DCSW: BS2 is more rigid, more artificial in my opinion, although I have never flown a Ka-50. Greetings!

Hey. It can be done. Need a switch, ON-ON-ON, but can also be done with an ON-OFF-ON. You also need the controller to send a key command in the connection and another disconnection. We assign a key to the command, such as "Z". For an ON-ON-ON: -In the up position of the switch: Connect >>> "Z" Disconnect >> nothing -In the middle position: Connect >> "Z" Disconnect >> "Z" -In the position down: Connect >> nothing Disconnect >> "Z" Moving down the switch, the controller sends: Z> Z In the simulator: up> middle. In the simulator: middle> down. Moving it up, the controller sends: ZZ> ZZ. In the simulator: down> (up)> middle. In the simulator: middle> (down)> up And the switch in the simulator is working properly. Even doing "double movement" It's sloppy, but fully functional. The controller I used is this: http://www.u-hid.com/home/overview_board.php Greetings.

And with 4 brackets or angles? So it is very stable. Greetings

The guy can not work in Kamov. It is impossible, I'd be asking for a video of the Ka-52. :D Greetings. Nice initiative.

Possibly, the list of candidates for a hypothetical expansion, this here: http://fighter-collection.com/pages.php :book: Greetings.

for an accurate position of the trimmer, select * 20-50% sensitivity in the XY axes. Below 50%, the trimmer is less accurate. Above 50% the Joy is too sensitive. collective axis, sensitivity * 50%. (edit) rudder pedals, sensitivity * from 50% to 0%. better close to 0%. (*) sensitivity in the Logitech software Do not change the curves in BS. At Logitech software, FFB Force, 50-75. Do not fight a hard joy. In BS, FF Tune, not swap axis, and Trimmer Force value to 100. Greetings.

Make sure you have selected a sensitivity of 30-70% in the Logitech software, on the axes X, Y. Ideally 50%. Do not touch the curves in DCS. With a high sensitivity, the point of trimming is more accurate but harder to control the helicopter. Greetings.

Before, my FFB setting was 50-75%. Now it is 60-80%. It is enough FFB. In BS improvement has been dramatic. Like in CoD and FSX. Obviously want precision in the control. But what is most impressive is the improvement in immersion. In BS I have better control, but as a pilot, I'm the same. :smilewink: Have you ever shot down a tanker? hmm ....:D Greetings.

Negative FlankerOne. It occurs in all WP. Greetings. If someone confirms that the names in those fields, is appreciated.

Desde que se anuncio solo ronda una cuestion en mi cabeza... ¿Te gusta volar? :pilotfly: :D La leche, un Mustang con el nivel de DCS. Saludos.

Thank you! There seems to be something interesting for the G940. Greetings.