Jump to content

wernst

Members
  • Posts

    377
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wernst

  1. There are no potential mistakes in my takeoff procedure . . . provided I have in ME chosen "takeoff from RWY". In this case TO is alway easy and successful. Regardless of "random" or "last direction of travel", the tailwheel in "takeoff from RWY" mode is alway in a position for easy takeoffs. Why is this different to "take off from ramp"?
  2. Differential braking during taxi and takeoff is still an issue. But I have found that, oddly enough, this problem only exists when you taxi from ramp to the runway and then take off. If you build a mission in ME and choose the option "takeoff from RWY", then the take off run is easy controllable. The Mossi keeps almost straight on the center line of the RWY - without any diff brake control. As soon as the rudder has enough wind the plane can be steered with the pedals alone. It seems as if the position of the tailwheel in the "takeoff from RWY" mode is exactly aligned and is somehow fixed in this position during the TO run. In "takeoff from ramp" mode rolling to the runway leaves the tailwheel in a random position when arriving at the RWY takeoff position, even when you try to carefully center the plane. As result the random tailwheel alignment leads to continuous direction corrections during the TO run - compensation is possible with less than moderate success. The diff. braking system can be relatively well used for steering while taxiing. But for takeoff it strongly depends on which option you have choosen in the ME: "takeoff from ramp" or "takeoff from RWY". TO assist alway kept to "0".
  3. That would be great. This braking lever problem has been annoying me for a long time. Does your modification require a 3D printer? (Which I dont have). Electronic DIY is not a problem at all.
  4. You are absolutely right. If the joystick lever has no two-way-switch, which toggles between GROUND and PLUS, so there is no way for what I have suggested. Obviously the "brake is open" position will not be detected by the sim, only "brake closed" when the lever switch is activated. I was hoping it was a two-way-switch. It means, we are as far as before.
  5. Yes, Imp, that could be the point. The piano has indeed two positions, each will be electrically registered. Ground line (wire) + 12 Volt line (wire). If the joystick lever's contact in OFF position is not electrically registered then I'm in . . . the meadow. And, yes, the quality of the switches is essential, bouncing effects would be an issue. (In the E-piano you could hear it). Conclusion: Further practice with the stick didgital lever as it is.
  6. No, the piano is not different. Please learn that I have DIY built electronic organs and I know well that there is dedicated circuitry to measure the time of switching digital keys - no special sensors.
  7. Please read carefully what I have written. My suggestion is that the program should measure the time how long does it take for the digital switch to go from OFF to ON position. And then translate this time to the force of the brake. Example: A digital piano only has digital on / off keys (switches) but can play loudly or silently, the keys have no axes.
  8. Steering while taxiing the Mossi is challenging, because it's done by differential braking. I think it's a lot harder wit the Mossi than with the other warbirds wich have differential brakes. In order to steer precisely, you need to apply more or less force to the wheel brakes - carefully. Binding the wheel brakes to the brake lever on the TM Warthog stick is not sensitive at all. Because it only allows digital ON / OFF braking, it is not an analog brake axis. I tried binding the wheel brakes to the analog axis of one toe brake. The result wasn't great. Steering with both rudder pedals and at the same time carefully apply more or less braking force to the toe brake often ended in the grass next to the runway. My suggestion (to the wishlist): I would like the ED Devs to reprogram the inputs from the digital on / off lever of the TM joystick. The time it takes to move this lever from OFF to ON should be measured and converted linearly into the strength of the braking force. Fast/short = strong braking force, slow/long = weak braking force. Digression: Every good electric piano has a dynamic touch control which controls the volume of the tone linear/analog although all keys oonly have digital actuation (only on / off). It's implemented by measuring the time which takes for a key from OFF to ON: Hard touch = fast/short time key actuation = loud tone, soft touch = slow/long time key actuation = silent tone. The programming of the joystick brake lever actuation shouldn't be that difficult - but I don't know which hardware limitation could hinder this idea.
  9. Thank you, Imp, any helpful advice is welcome. I have the TM Hotas Warthog combo. In the meantime I have tried different options to replace the (digital) on / off brake lever. Analog brakes binding to the rudder toe brakes pedals was an attempt, it was not ideal, it was worse. Rudder input and braking with your toes at the same time is somehow working, but sometimes only. The TDC's small (analog) nipple wasn't a solution either. The control input path is far too small and is much too sensitive. You cannot enter 1/10 mm on the nipple with your fingertips in order to control the brakes smoothly and carefully. In the meantime I have managed to place only 3 of 10 takeoff runs into the meadow. Yes, I suppose it is practice.
  10. I updated 2 days ago from 13436 stable to 15038 stable and I noticed much problems getting in the air even with TO Assistant set to "0" - which I hadn't before without TO Assistant. With ME set to "taking off from RWY" there is no problem at all, takeoff run is smooth and stable. Tailwheel has always been checked for straight position.
  11. I haven't had any issues (e.g. centered tailwheel) before the patch. It took me a while to get everything well done (trims) but finally I manged to get in the air repeatedly, again and again, without issues. Now, after the patch it's not as before. Why are you sure that the "TO Ass" function hasn't changed anything compared to what has been before? Does 0 mean it is the same condition as it was before without TO Ass?
  12. The TO assisstant makes life difficult. Before the last stable update (13436) I finally managed to put the Mossi regularly and safely in the air - and not in the meadow next to the runway. The new update 15038 has a new optional function "Takeoff Assistant" which can be set from 0 to 100. Of course I set them to 0 and. . . now always end up in the meadow again, like at the beginning. Why is the takeoff run with setting 0 more difficult than before without TO ass? Is the setting 0 real or a built-in challenge (no extra points)? By the way: If you set "takeoff from runway" in the ME, the takeoff run is problem-free, then Mossi nicely stays on the runway. Is this real?
  13. Correct, the real Mossi doesn't have toe brakes. But, it also doesn't have a handbrake lever that simply works as ON / OFF switch. The real Mossi's wheelbrakes are controlled by compressed air. The brake pressure can be gradually controlled by the linear movement of handbrake lever - which unfortunately is not simulated by the digital ON / OFF lever of a TM HOTAS.
  14. Yes, done. I thought I can bind the wheel brakes to one of both toe brakes only. It works far better now as toe brake and rudder input is on the same side (same foot) Good point.
  15. Steering while taxiing the Mossi is challenging, because it's done by differential braking. In order to steer precisely, you need to apply more or less force to the wheel brakes - carefully. Binding the wheel brakes to the pinky lever on my TM Warthog stick is not sensitive at all. Because it only allows digital ON / OFF braking, it is not an analog brake axis. I tried binding the wheel brakes to the analog axis of the right toe brake. The result wasn't great. Steering with both rudder pedals and at the same time carefully apply more or less braking force to only one toe brake often ended in the grass next to the runway. Yes, I know, one answer will be: practice, practice . . . Any other smart tip? (I have the Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog Stick and Throttle, Saitek Pro Flight Rudder Pedals).
  16. That is exactly right. And, one step further: Mount a powerful jet turbine on a piano and install two small flat boards on it as stabilizers - this piano will fly. Unfortunately, it is not possible to steer this beast, but that's irrelevant, right?
  17. Thanks, Bozon. "Never look back" - I like that. The "literal" meaning of this wisdom is a useful tip mainly for start-up. But for the immersion, I love turning valves that I can see directly. On the fuel setting panel there are even more valves, e.g. to the right, the fuel transfer valve, extra oil pressure boost and a some buttons for oil dilution and engine out-cut. I don't want to put all these controls on key bindings. Of course I can also use the hot start, but that's not flying in the DCS world, is it? But thanks again for the metaphorical inspiration.
  18. I'm able to save any snap view from the pilot's seat which is available under key 1. The view of the fuel setting elements is only possible by swapping to the second seat (key 2) and by turning the view 180 degrees. All attempts to save a snap view from this fuel panel view have failed. It's not possible, neither from seat 1 (key 1) nor from seat 2 (key 2). How should I do this? (I don't have TrackIR or any VR item)
  19. Precise calculation of a flight model is essential for a simulation. For this purpose, the interaction between the wings and the air flow must be simulated as precisely as possible in accordance with a given flight model. If the wings are rendered as non-existent, the flight model must not calculate with existing wings. DCS has a pretty good but not always optimal damage model.
  20. I tested whether the simulation makes it possible to launch a Hornet from an aircraft carrier - without the aid of the catapult. Yes, it's a crazy idea but worth a try. The conditions: Hornet on the CVN74 JC Stennis, no wind, carrier speed 22 kts, Temp 20 deg.C / QNH 29.92 No weapons, only built in M61A2 Gun with ammo (1711 lbs) / fuel: 10808 lbs Total take-off weight: 37,606 lbs flaps half, brakes on, full throttle, brakes off Indicated take-off speed at the end of the carrier 146 kts A standard take-off from carrier without catapult seems to be possible when using the full length of the carrier "runway" - in the SIM!
  21. It was the famous DCS Veteran IRONHAND who suggested this special procedure. I've tried his method but apart from a placebo effect in some games after that, I'm now again as far as before. Other than that, any creative idea is welcome, I just hope the devs have them too.
  22. I made the same experience. After all most recent Nvidia driver updates the crashes have gone initially, but only for a short time. I assume that the updates are deleting some graphic settings and memory presets, which will then be "filled" again until the next crashes occur. I'm also at 466.55 and having the same "good old" crashes.
  23. What we know so far: the crashes cannot be reproduced consistently the ED devs obviously have no crashes there are many possible solutions but none last longer than a few days A lot of standard recommendations: OS update, graphics driver update, no mod, no OC, optimize page file settings, clean some folder content and . . . and. . . more excotic ones, but none seems to work truly. confusing OS recommendations: Win10 should be up-to-date, but not too up-to-date, but ultimately only Win 8 comp mode is the most promising workaround for the meantime. The main problem is that any attempt to track down the main fault is made difficult by the fact that the disappearance and appearance of the crash comes completely random in time. It seems that there is a trigger in the program code or in the OS environment which strikes randomly, I call it „trouble trigger“. Perhaps this trouble trigger is not in the program code itself but maybe in Windows 10. The devs may have a particular clean OS which is free from any unwanted trigger. It is their reference system, which is needed for coding in a well known and structured environment. That would explain why the devs did not notice any abnormalities when changing from 2.5.6 to 2.7.xxxx. And it could explain why the Win 8 compatible mode is the best workaround so far as it is free from any DCS injurious triggers. I don't think the devs provided a badly coded 2.7. open beta. Every beta version before was more or less stable, fully usable with only minor cosmetic restrictions, no fatal crashes at all. The devs made the 2.7. open beta in their own, dedicated OS environment, which seems to be a kind of „steril“, which almost nobody of us has.
  24. ok. got it. "Fly" is the button to open the just created empty mission. But what is the point of this "empty mission" procedure step? Does that mean I can load all missions crash free afterwards?
  25. Sorry, I'm a little slow at understanding. I knew how to create and save an empty mission map. But how am I supposed to "Fly" this mission then? Don't I have to bring in any plane into this empty mission via ME later? It would help if I could follow this "solution" step by step. I have the feeling that every single step, no matter how small, is decisive. The devil is in the details.
×
×
  • Create New...