Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TX-EcoDragon

  1. OK,enough work, runing home to try it out :salute:

    That's the Spirit!! I went in to work late, but it's an aerospace company and I can just tell them I was "running some things through the simulation". 


    They don't need to know that what that translates to is: Dora got her first kill this morning, that poor gorgeous Mustang...when I get the MW50 mapped he'll really be in trouble. 

  2. "Oh dear.." is right 



    What happened here?  Was it a visibility issue?  Not being able to see the landing area from the cockpit?  It looks gusty, was that fence marking the edge of the runway and the plane got blown over to one side or the other?


    He got a bit low on the approach and clipped the fence post. Slipping gets you improved visibility, but it also increases your descent rate/angle...he held the slip just a little too long. 

  3. I have not used the ProX, but I have used most other headsets out there. The ProX looks like an ANR specific design that will have some limitations that you should be aware of. 


    It does improve on the old DC attributes though (other than price). David Clark headsets have usually been big, heavy, old school looks and design, reliable performance, and are usually fairly uncomfortable with a lot of clamping force....and they still charge a premium. If you do not need a TSO'd headset, I'd look to another product, or stick to their basic models like the H10-30. The 10-13 series is fairly lightweight, but I think they missed the mark.  A H10-13.4 I owned for a few days was unimpressive. The earcup build quality was poor, the noise reduction was minimal, and simply not enough for the types of aircraft I fly. For the money there were far better headsets from Lightspeed like their QFR series. As far as DC goes,  I prefer the bigger, heavier (uglier)  H10-30 as that is the type of headset that DC does well. It's a fine student headset, and later on, it makes a good passenger headset (which is what mine is used for mostly.  I don't worry about passengers handling it since it's so tough, it's simple for them to use with only a single volume knob on the earcup. I wouldn't wear it very much myself though, because the weight of it, the strong clamping force, and the "only OK" passive noise reduction (PNR) just don't cut it for me.


    Lightspeed makes some nice headsets that are lighter weight, have better active noise cancellation, but are a little more fragile than DC. You'd need to find a used one, but the Lightspeed QFR solo is a cheap, light, quiet PNR headset, and the QFR Cross country added active cancellation - sadly they don't make these anymore, so you'd need to look on eBay or something.  I own the 20XL2 as well as the Zulu. The 20XL is comfy and decent for the pricepoint, the only annoying thing about it is the headpad material and earcup material which need to be replaced somewhat often. The Zulu is amazing, but the passive noise reduction is not great, so keep a spare set of batteries around if you go that route. 


    The ProX appears to be a headset that will really only work so long as the active noise reduction is operational. The passive noise reduction of those earcups is obviously going to be minimal, this also means they need to form a good seal over your ears, as any airgaps will make active noise reduction (ANR) do unpleasant things. In really loud airplanes, I do not like using headsets that acheive most of their noise cancellation via electronic noise reduction....getting a lot of ANR to go along with good PNR is the best (peltor does this well, with their old headsets). I do see how the ProX would be cooler on hot days, and work better when you are wearing sunglasses...but I don't think I'd want to accept the poor PNR and the need to place them in exactly the right place on my ears in order for them to work. 


    My personal headset usage favors the Lightspeed Zulu for your typical travelling airplane flight, but ANR headsets are not good in open cockpit airplanes, or really loud airplanes.  The Zulu has low clamping force, lightweight, great sound quality, and it's quiet.


    My favorite headset though is the Clarity Aloft "in the ear" headset. It's a little more "fiddly" since you have to insert earplugs, essentially (and you want to do this with clean hands, AVGAS/oil in your ears is not good), but the Clarity aloft is simply the lightest headset you can buy, it is comfortable on hot days and during long flights (and I'm sure it's better than the DC ProX which will still cause sweaty ears) for tall pilots like me it's much nicer in tight cockpits like the Mooney, or in aerobatic airplanes where it won't scratch the canopy, or add more weight to my head when pulling/pushing G's, and the passive noise reduction is very good, even in the loudest cockpits....and it doesn't cost you money (batteries) every time you use it!


    In summary, consider getting a decent PNR headset like a Peltor, Sigtronics, David Clark or used Lightspeed QFR  passenger headset and a clarity aloft for the same money (or less) than a single ProX. You'll have the best of both worlds...super light, no sweaty ears or hotspots, quiet, affordable, no loss of headroom...oh, and it won't mess up your new haircut!


    PROOF: here's my Clarity Aloft in action on haircut day:



  4. anyone remember pink and green trails that ruled but people used to cause lag in old il2?


    I remember using them an awful lot during formation aerobatics and not having any lag problems, even when I flew on a team comprised of international pilots: 

  5. In my 16 years of multiplay sim combat I've encountered a few "exploits" but generally nothing that would really count as a true cheat. In original IL-2 there were things like prop pitch cycling (auto-100%-auto-100%) which allowed for a steep climb angle that would allow the exploiter to gain more altitude than usual, and of course there was pitch trim on a slider which was not much help in some planes, but in planes like the 109, you could dramatically improve the high speed pitch response by using trim while flying. Then there was the netcode stuff like the lag switch, or hitting the print screen key which would cause a momentary lag spike. Oh, and then there was the "speeder" cheats which I hear did something to the local PC clock rate vs the server side clock rate. 


    Each of these issues was sorted out (well, as much as you can sort out lag) in original IL-2.


    In RoF an exploit that you'll see some people use is landing in the middle of a fight and turning off their engine to deny you of a kill, this is one of the most rampant ones I see. A change in the kill algorithm could sort this out. 


    As far as actual cheats like you see in first person shooters? I do not think they exist. My personal experience is this: I've never flown against anyone in a sim I regularly flew who I couldn't beat more often then not, and so I guess that means that if they are using some exploits, well...it doesn't do a whole lot, at least not enough that good combat tactics won't beat. Ultimately, I don't know what someone might be doing, or how low on fuel they are, or whatever, but I have absolute control over what I do. Within TX Squadron one of the only required components of squad membership is that our members fly with integrity and good sportsmanship, and when you recruit pilots that are really passionate about these sims, that follows naturally. The same is generally true of most people here...we're not the same crowd as the first person shooters. We're passionate flight combat flight sim pilots, we're pilots, we're veterans, we're historians, we're reenactors, etc. 


    So the message here is this: fly with honor, train, practice, and seek out the challenges that a skilled adversary will provide, and when you see someone you think surely must be cheating, pay close attention, record a track, and learn from them...99.8% of the time, it's just that skill cheat that was mentioned earlier. If it's something else, share the track here, and with documentation, it'll get squashed. 

    • Upvote 1
  6. I don't remember particular stats, but yes, "fighter pilot neck" is a real worry! Damage to the cervical spine and disks is likely to occur if caution is not used during flight at elevated G's. Turning your head while pulling high g's can cause physical contact that would not normally happen, as well as increase the friction between the disks and vertebrae. 


    While in a close quarters dogfight you sometimes have no choice about where and when you turn your head, but during non-combat maneuvering and/or aerobatic maneuvering I, and many others, advocate for keeping the head perfectly still during the high g periods of the maneuver. For example, good practice dictates using only your eyes to look up while not moving your head during the first 60 degrees of pitch to a vertical upline, as would happen initiating a loop or hammerhead etc. This helps the competition pilot to detect any yaw or roll corrections required during the pull as they strive to draw that perfect line, as well as reducing the damage that may happen from turning your head earlier, when the g loads are highest.

    You can also differentiate "good form" from "bad form" under g by how the pilot handles the horizon...do they try to level the horizon by rolling their head opposite the angle of bank, or do they keep their head and neck perfectly vertical? Leveling the horizon while under g not only reduces the precision of aircraft control, but it increases damaging stress on your neck and spine. 

  7. Having only a moment to post, I'll simply copy paste my thoughts on this from the CloD forums. In short, as an experienced aerobatic, formation, and mock dogfighting pilot, I'm going to agree with those that have stated that headshake implementation very quickly becomes arcade, and detracts from the realism of a sim if much more than belt stretch is modeled (eyepoint moving up under negative g) and lateral accelerations when in uncoordinated flight. Here's my posts from over there (Where the head shake is horribly implemented and should be disabled for the greatest realism): 


    Yes, the headshake is on the short list of things that bother me. I'm an aerobatic pilot in the real life, and what we have in game is what a passenger would experience in the airplane, NOT what the pilot would experience. The pilot will anticipate and compensate for the accelerations of the airplane, while the passenger will be at the mercy of the accelerations.

    Many of the aircraft that I fly have roll rates exceeding 420 degrees per second, they have minimal roll inertia so they are able to stop rolling or go from rolling one way to the other extremely fast....much, much, faster than anything we have in CloD...and yet, with experience I can keep my head where I want it in real life. If I take a passenger, even if they are a fellow aerobatic pilot, I  must avoid max rate roll transitions as these would likely cause the passenger to slam against the canopy/cockpit sides because they can't anticipate the accelerations. Of course our in game headshake should simulate the pilot experience, and in planes with far slower roll rates. 
    What we have in Clod is the pilot's head rolling right when the plane rolls left. 
    Watch this video and compare what the pilot in the rear seat does to what the passenger in front does...you will see that our virtual 109 pilot in Cliffs of Dover has "The Passenger Experience." This is why it is not correct to model headshake in sims by forcing the pilot's head to roll opposite the direction of roll, even though the physical forces might suggest that is correct. An expereince aerobatic/combat pilot will anticipate, and compensate.
    I'm all for maximal realism, but the headshake stays off on my machine...only trouble is, it's on in the servers I'd like to fly...
    It could be modified to be more realistic, but the current implementation isn't there at all.
    I would be happy to provide helmet camera footage if that would be useful for any of this (but understand that what your head does still amplifies what your eyes actually see, they are pretty good image stabilizers).




    OK, I've put together a quick comparison of the headshake we have in the  Cliffs of Dover 109 in the current mod version, to what my helmet camera sees in a Pitts S-2C.
    Note that I wasn't actively trying to hold my head still with respect to a fixed point, as I would be if I were aiming at a target. Also be mindful of the fact that the pilot's eyes further stabilize the image vs what the helmet camera conveys.  
    Here's one more...
    You can see that the 3 cabane struts which just happen to line up with the line of sight of the camera move laterally with respect to each other only slightly - I was not trying to keep these 3 narrow struts lined up (like lining up a bead and ring sight) but despite that, they stay more or less in plane with each other.  Worth mentioning too is that the motion that these types of wing rocks have a moment where you are somewhat uncoordinated and will feel yourself leaning towards the ground somewhat - a perfectly coordinated turn will be smoother with even less lateral displacement of the pilot torso. Oh and there's mention of shoulder belts...we always wear them loose - shoulder belts are only to keep the pilot from hitting the instrument panel in a crash. The lap and crotch belts are tight, the shoulder harness is kept fairly loose - otherwise you will hurt your back during negative G, chafe your neck something awful with all had turning, and not be able to move to check six, get full forward stick deflection, reach the radios/fuel selector etc.
    • Upvote 4
  8. Video still from a flight in the Pitts S2-C 




    5 meter Thermik XXXL hucked off Mt. Tamalpais:





    When I lived in a hangar apartment at KDWH in Spring Texas. I miss that place, an RV6 taxiing by my C6 Vette. 

    That's an Extra 300L!

    • Upvote 1
  9. Type of improvement: Graphics


    Explanation of proposals: Eliminate the whiteout effects even when clear of clouds. In the current version of BoS the clouds obscure vision inappropriately, sometimes even when hundreds of meters away from them. You can fly a path on which you have unrestricted visibility, and suddenly find yourself in whiteout conditions (and other players can see you just fine, even though are blind). The range of this white out effect needs to be seriously reduced to happen only when some distance within a cloud.


    Benefits: Realism, fairness, immersion etc.


    This is what it looks like when flying near and through the edges of clouds in the real (and beautiful) world: 


    • Upvote 3
  10. Is there a working player roster and stats page? I couldn't find anything.


    I flew three sorties in Il-2 single seater. The first two the server crashed and in the third one I managed to get above the enemy base and got in a scrap with few 109's at 2000m. I saw the wing fly off one of them after a deflection shot, but I don't know if I hit him or something else, as there was no message. All I saw was that he went in without a wing. There were no other friendly planes nearby.


    Then his buddies messed up my Il-2 and I had to ditch it. :)


    Were you flying as JAWS? I saw an IL-2, using the vertical at 2K working over a 109 and I was cracking up, and telling my fellow TX'ers - I instantly had a fair bit of respect for him, but that didn't stop me from shooting at him!  

  11. Hey guys, just an update to let everyone know that TX-Squadron is recruiting! 


    As I said earlier, membership in TX Squadron is contingent upon a good personality fit with our existing members and overall sportsmanship more than any particular combat skillset.


    If interested in applying for membership, please send myself or any other TX member a message. 

  12. .... the instant transition from no sign of cloud approaching to instant white-out (when on the cloud edge) is annoying. It is also a bit daft that you can't see out at all but the guy on your tail still sees you plain as day....




    BoS clouds obscure vision inappropriately, sometimes even when hundreds of meters away from them. You can fly a path on which you have unrestricted visibility, and suddenly find yourself in whiteout conditions. The range of this white out effect needs to be seriously reduced to happen only when some distance within a cloud. This is what it looks like when flying near and through the edges of clouds: 


    • Upvote 3
  13. Yeah...some people know my tendency to review flight sim hardware and not be all that easy to please. 


    It doesn't seem like it should be all that hard, but nothing I've used really feels much like real control sticks and rudder pedals....I've already modeled a design for both that I think would be awesome, and have some plans for serious FFB with the option to run realistic levels of stick forces. Oh to have the time to actually start producing them! 


    I could probably have them made at my company, if I could just convince the bean-counters that it wouldn't cost us too much. There just aren't that many people out there that want this hardware. 

  14. It's all a matter of timing. A good basic technique to remember for active spin recovery techniques in *most* airplanes is the PARE technique (aka: NASA standard method)


    The following must be done in order, most critical is that the elevator input comes last, after the yaw rate has started to decay.


    P-Power Idle

    A-Ailerons neutral

    R-Rudder Opposite the direction of rotation (which you determine by looking directly over the nose, and through the prop disk (resist the urge to look towards the ground when inverted, you can look across the axis of rotation and detect the direction of yaw as being opposite of what it actually is)

    E-Elevator through neutral. 


    While you will be able to use forward stick to recover from upright spins and back stick to recover from inverted spins, you can also use these same inputs to accelerate the spins...and not only will you accelerate the spin, but you'll also shield the rudder and decrease its authority, potentially enough to prevent spin recovery. Why can you get it away with the forward/back stick sometimes but not others? Order of operations. 


    For example, here's how I fly an airshow style inverted flat spin: 


    Enter a conventional inverted spin by stalling the airplane with a negative angle of attack by pushing the stick forward, and at the same time (or slightly before) start applying right rudder (in aircraft with a CW prop rotation). The spin will commence, and it will take a few turns to stabilize, after a turn or two (you're still holding full forward stick and full right rudder), you will then want to simultaneously increase throttle and add right aileron to flatten the spin (think about gyro action of the prop driving the nose up, and adverse yaw caused by ailerons increasing the yaw rate) and the last step to drive the yaw rate even higher is to bring the stick back. At this point you are in an inverted flat spin that is very flat, with very little roll component and a lot of yaw component. Throttle full, the stick in the bottom right corner, and your right foot holding all the rudder she's got. 


    This is something we use to demonstrate how critical order of operations is to spin recovery, because at this point in the spin, you can actually apply opposite rudder, or move the ailerons around, or (to a lesser extent) move the elevator around and see less change in spin character than you might expect. It's possible to panic and start second guessing what you need to do to recover because you won't see the behaviors you expect if you're not aware of the proper way to leave the aggravated spin mode you've found yourself in. You can sit there pulling the stick back all day long in an inverted spin, and never see the angle of attack come down....first you have to reduce the yaw rate. 


    To recover: 


    Power Idle

    Stick Neutral

    Rudder opposite

    Elevator through neutral (ie slightly back once rotation rate has started to decrease, and the spin has begun to develop more roll character, and less yaw character). 


    Oh and I've done a couple spin sessions in BoS thus far, but really want to check it out again! Thanks for posting that video!

  15. Yeah, it looks great when correctly used as a photography/cinematography tool, but it doesn't really work in sims because it would have to know where your eye is actually looking, and at what distance you are focusing. Like I said in the linked post "You will notice that even if you look at some text at the bottom right of this forum post that you can probably not reliably read the authors name...so there's not much reason to further blur the offcenter portions of the screen. 

    In short - it was removed from the GUI (of RoF) for a reason."

  • Create New...