Sealpup

Exact same problem here. Blackbird no workski. EDIT: Blackbird workski now. Seems like a case of lack of operator head space on my part. I let it install to default directory the first time, which ended up being a directory that did not previously exist, called 'Lockon 1.1' or something like that. When I went to manually select a directory to try again, guess where I pointed it... Ooops. Actually told the installer to go to the correct directory this time, and it works now.

Do a search on 1.11.

I would think they would 'T-handle' the engines just before smacking the net, at the least to prevent from FODing the engine (which could blow it up!).

Dont want to argue...but I guess I'm in the mood for it ;) The 'Chopper Popper' you're talking about was in a desert. Not alot of ground clutter, and a Hind is a fuggin BIG helo. It stands out anywhere (probably shouldn't even bother camoing the thing). Next, on notch: No, I'm not suggesting sitting still when attacked. I am suggesting sitting still when the SPO starts making search noises. Once the attack is on, sitting still will get you killed, I agree. Terrain: Well, yes, the aircraft can go to a higher angle to attack, but thats when he finds the chopper. My idea was simply avoiding the engagement, which is what a helo SHOULD do. AAWs: Yes, the Shark would only have Igla's or Strela's, if carried at all. But, the Shark also has IR suppression, combined with rotor downwash to help cool and disperse the exhaust gases. The advantage of an R-73 or AIM-9 might (keyword there) be negated, and it might turn into a shoot first situation, or maybe mutual destruction. I guess I should of made the point that my ideas were for avoiding the fight primarily, not tactics when the missiles fly. When the fight is on, your best tactic is to, as you said, frustrate the pilot and take a missile shot when able.

Well, if you look at it as an E engagement of helo versus 'fast mover', then yes, the helo is screwed. HOWEVER, the helo has alot of things going for it that a fast mover doesnt. 1. Terrain: Unlike a fast mover, helo's can hide behind things. Trees, buildings, bridges, SAM launchers. If it's taller and wider than the helo, the helo can use it for cover. 2. Clutter: This fits in with terrain. Being able to fly so low allows a helo to take better advantage of terrain for cluttering radar returns, making it harder to detect. 3. Notch: The helo is the ultimate machine for notching someone's radar. Just hover! Bam, you are now part of the terrain, and filtered from their radar returns. Fighting a helo would likely be a visual engagement, with IR weapons in use. The fast mover would need to make strafing-like passes to attack, and the helo would just need to pivot to face in order to fire. IR missiles used for both sides, with the fast mover having the option of guns. So, are helo's affraid of fast movers? Yes. Are they helpless against them? No.

Well, seeing as one of the rotor disks will have blades at a higher AoA than the other, that disk would suffer retreating blade stall more severe than the other disk. Also, the other disk would be suffering LESS blade stall on the opposite side, and also be generating less lift on the side that is stalling for the previous disk. So, at least going on the theory, what would happen in foreward flight is the helo would roll to the outside of a flat turn. However, since you're already in foreward flight, you likely wouldn't do just a flat yawing turn, you'd likely roll into it and add some collective for a coordinated bank. So, that -shouldn't- be noticed. But, then again, knowing the psychos that live on this board... ;)

The Ka-50 should be a fairly easy ride compared to other helo's. The coaxial design creates 2 major advantages that other helo's dont have: 1. No torque! And, in addition, no vulnerable anti-torque rotor in the tail (for those wondering, yaw control is accomplished by increasing collective on one rotor-disk, and decreasing it on the other, causing an increase in torque in one direction or the other) 2. The stacked rotors move the center of lift up higher above the center of gravity. This creates a natural tendency for the aircraft to want to return to a neutral orientation at all times (depending on the lateral/longitudinal location of the CG, of course). A properly balanced coax with direct mechanical controls (no computer stability) will hover safely hands-off. IMO, Eagle has picked a fine helo to give you spoiled fixed-wing pilots something to learn in. :D

The only new US aircraft I'd want to see in this game is da bug. Other than that, Vodka-rockets 100% of the way ;)

Ok, I was just curious. Thanks for the answers!

I dont think the Shark opperates off of the Kuz. However, I think the Russians have a few helicopter carriers (Something like the US Wasp and Tarawa) that they might be ble to work off of.

Question to our navy-ish folks: Isn't it standard procedure to light the burners as soon as you crash onto the deck? Just incase something like that happens? Or could the wire of slowed the plane down too much before it snapped?

No after burners, and clean it can get fairly close to mach 1...but defintely not over.

Easty, thats a problem with starforce and not FC. Eagle can't fix it.

OT here: A guy I went to FAR 147 school with, who was a former Cobra mech, told me that one. It was an Apache sim, I believe, and they were trying to program in some local wildlife for the local scenery so they could sell it to Oz. Someone had the brilliant idea of using the exsisting infantry AI and sticking a kangaroo 3d model on it, and tis what they did. When doing a 'test flight' through the new scenery, with some high-ranked Aussie officer in the pilot's seat, they buzzed over a big bunch of 'roo's, which realistically scattered and high-tailed it behind a hill. The programmers, and the officer, were quite pleased with the reaction... Until the kangaroo's popped up from behind the hill they were hiding behind and started shooting stingers at the simulated Apache. They used the infantry AI, it seems, but forgot to change their loadout! However, it had the desired effect that they wanted to give: It taught the student pilots to not overfly the local wildlife! :D

Noone said you cant fight at night, without the aid of the Squall camera. Just use it like the plain Su-25. If the HUD layout of the Shark is anything like the Su-25T, you should be able to drag the designater box around, ground stabilize it, and 'walk' it onto the target without even turning the TV on. Laze, fire, boom.

Compared to fixed-wing aircraft, helo's by their nature are a handful to fly, just because they're so different than what you are used to. However, coaxial helo's are inherintly much more stable than conventional designs. Changes in collective do not need to be balanced with the tail rotor. And a higher over all center of lift causes the weight of the machine to have more of an effect in righting itself when the controls are released. I've seen images of Gyrodyne coax's hovering hands-off... Do that in any other helicopter and you're asking for Bad Things . Having said that, you still have alot more to worry about in flying a helo than you do an aircraft. Speed limits need to be closely watched, and you need to know what maneuvers you can and cant do at certain speeds. In a coax, something as simple as kicking the tail to a side with the pedals when strafing something at a high speed can cause a rotor collision (due to how coax machines control yaw). Harder to control? Not really. Just a pain in the neck in it's own special way.

I was wondering about that picture with an R-73 as a Ka-50 weapon. Stacked Igla or Strela makes alot more sense than the R-73. All I want to know is, would such a setup be given its own hardpoint, like the Longbow and its wingtip AIM-92's, or will we need to sacrifice a normal hardpoint for air-defense capability?

Wow! That IS very well done night vision. Looks exactly like some of the first-gen scopes I had. If they REALLY want to make it look like real NVGs, though, they'd add some random black spots about the picture. To simulate the imperfections in the light-amp tubes, but that's just me knit-picking ;)

You guys know, for a new sim or LOMAC expansion, they would not need upgrade the exsisting graphics engine. It already brings an FX-51 to its knees, and in 2 years the state of the art might be able to run this thing at max settings :D

You just crushed my widdle ego. You bad bad man!

Actually, the Russians have perfected the K.I.S.S theory and turned it into an art form. Simplistic avionics and computer systems increase survivability, as lower tech systems tend to be more robust. I'm reminded of a story I heard about a pilot who defected to the US, and brought his MiG-25 with him. Western designers laughed when they cracked that puppy open, and found the Russians were still using vacuum-tube based systems versus transisterization... Until someone pointed out that tubes are impervious to nuclear electromagnetic pulse effects... If WW3 would of happened, the Russian birds would still fly, ours would have fried computers! Then we can also use the A-10 as an analogy. We have soo few high-end systems on the 'Hawg that you can shoot it to swiss-cheese, and it keeps on flying. Many Russian aircraft are in the same vein. Just enough technology to get the job done, with the rest left behind. Ok, I'm starting to ramble now, so I'll shut up :D

Hey Wags. Think you could ask the ED guys about the eastern med area in their later project? Mainly, will it be a brand new map, or will they just extend the existing one 'down and to the left'? If it's the latter of the two, it could create some very interesting scenarios beyond a potential Arab or Isreali conflict.

You do, and the flapping hinge design is critical to keep a stalled blade from whapping into it's un-stalled down-stairs neighbor. Kamov limits the vertical travel of the blades via the flapping hinges to keep this from happening under normal conditions... But if you get going fast enough and try to pull too hard a maneuver, you would still risk a blade collision between rotor disks due to blade flexing. EDIT: You were probably refering to control problems, though. In a coax helo, there is no change in handling due to blade stall, with the exception of a bit of a loss of overall lift (countered with extra collective). You just have other problems to worry about ;)

Yeah, with phrases like 'Translational lift', 'blade-tip mach', and 'retreating blade stall'.

Great... You just gave them what they needed to make an aircraft spoof of the now-infamous 'badger-badger-badger' flash-video. I hope you're friggin happy.