All Activity

Not sure how you are calculating that. I get about 330mph true, when converting 283 KIAS to True airspeed and subsequently converting to mph, 20 mph less than the quoted 350 mph, which is also low depending on sourcing. ... And that's leaving aside how artificial it feels trying to actually accelerate to that speed in level flight. To achieve 283, I'm diving to 300 or so, then holding level flight to see when the airspeed stops bleeding off. I've yet to get it above 265 knots or so without needing a dive to get over the "invisible wall" this module feels like it has with respect to acceleration.

You either need to have your canopy open and engines off (so they can hear you talking), or you need to talk through your Intercom while the WSO is on hot-mic (or was it cold-mic?). The Crew Chief plugs in from outside into the WSOs Intercom channel. Details in the manual, cheers. Make sure you are actually using the "Jester Wheel" and not for example trying something through the DCS default menu (or do you want to rearm/repair?)

Not sure why you need the overlay when you can just look at the lights on the tanker. Yes they’re a bit dim but I can still see them clearly in this small screenshot. They appear well enough in this example

feel free to add a short track replay, but as mentioned I did say less likely to defend not unlikely.

To add, I was just reading how when Galland was asking for more fighters with the expectation of increasing bomber group sizes, that funding instead went to “terror” weapons like the V1 and V2 and how Hitler was still insistent on building bombers to strike back at the UK.

I have no problem with the changes in terms of security for the general DCS user. I have a HUGE problem with this being just dropped on all of us who run or help manage servers with no notice. This should have been a preview build weeks (preferably months) in advance for us to be able to make changes and be ready for. Instead we're stuck with our players going "why isn't the server updated" and we have to tell them "ED broke stuff again, we will get to it when we can."

Couple others I know didn't either.

No. No pod available.

Will the F1M be able self lase targets..?

Great research Calvin - haven´t found that reddit article... It is SSAO - disabling it removes the grey veal. MANY THANKS!

So, you're agreeing with me that GM1 wasn't operational in Fw 190As. I'm focussing on GM1 because people are requesting it (same as MW50), while it was never used, as it (unlike MW50) quite blatantly sucked in handling. You had to know before starting the motor if you were going to need the additional boost above critical altitude or not, which quite obviously is a BS system. It also couldn't be stored for very long, so logistics - especially on dispersed airfields - was a nightmare. Erhöhte Notleistung made way more sense, as is was simpler and worked across all altitudes. It was available in about mid July '44 and the kit-installation could be identified by a small yellow ring fwd of the left triangular windscreen. There were other, obvious and relatively simple solutions the RLM messed up: 1) External supercharger inlets. A 15-minute sheet metal job, providing ~700m more critial altitude. 2) Sitting on their hands concerning Jumo 213 development in 1942, leaving the Luftwaffe without a proper counter to the P-51 for the better part of a year. 3) Not being able to call a winner in the whole Jumo 213 vs DB 603 affair (let alone the infighting with Mtt and their raggedy-a$$ aircraft). This alone cost another significant amount of time in high altitude Fw 190 development. 4) Wasting time in development of the 190B up to a fieldable aircraft (with GM1), but stopping just before it was ready. Do you need even more examples of RLM dropping the ball in program steering, aircraft development and procurement? You think that pragmatic solutions were going to be easy? Seems to me you have yet to meet proper german bureaucracy - let alone one mixed with a nepotistic centralized planned economy. You're sticking to semantics on one behalf, while assuming stuff on the other. The Einbauvorschrift above states the injection nozzles of GM1 and possibly MW50 (poor wording) being in place. It also mentions that appliances and the actual implementation of the systems are to be carried out by the airframer. It then gives a couple of instructions about the routing of the associated lines. It does not say there was an operational GM1-system "coming with the motor", besides the injection nozzles being in place. So were the MW50 nozzles apparently. What's more interesting in that regard is that both systems can't be built into the same airframe at the same time, as they'd need different tanks, taking up the same space inside the fuselage. GM1 would need the 85l tank, MW50 using the 115l tank (see MW50 installation on the Dora). It shows that BMW was providing Fw and the RLM with a motor that could use either system, but ended up with Erhöhte Notleistung in the field. Focke-Wulf Entwicklungsmitteilung from 3 August 44 states that the TU motors had been delivered fom "circa June". It's got the same power output as the D-2 (including Erhöhte Notleistung), being 60kg heavier. No mention of a GM1 system. Looks like "provisions" of the RAE actually means nozzles only. Again, what are you trying to prove? You're arguing GM1 was available/ cleared/ operational. Without a tank (which is not actually stated in the report), it factually is incapable of GM1'ing. The report states "Provision for GM1 power boosting installation, the routing for the GM1 tank being in the position previously occupied by the FuG 16." Farther down, it's stating it (obviously) was equipped with Erhöhte Notleistung. There is no differentiation between the 115l tank and the 85l tank - the latter of which would be required for an operating GM1 system. The former one being a stock installation in the A-8. What's the story of the 190A-5 GM1 wing installation you showed earlier out of that Beladeplan dated 3 November 42? It hints at an outboard wing installation, replacing the MG/FF. A similar wing installation IIRC was tested in the 190B initially, but it never came to fruition in either way.

I don't agree with points 2 and 3 here. The Aliasing does not look like intentional ailasing in the pod image rather it just looks like game engine Ailasing. I.E. something you are not fixing without increasing performance requirements even more. I can't see what you mean by the thickness changing between the PiP images. I'm looking at the water tower legs in the DCS image and it looks about the same thickness as it crosses from the tv to the thermal image.

A friend and I are having trouble with servers. I select a mission and create a public server without a password. When my friend tries to connect to that server, the message "Server offline" appears. I have no problem connecting to existing servers. There were no problems before. We don't use any mods.

283 kts IAS is 342mph TAS at 500ft. That's very close to the 1D's rated speed at sea level (350mph). That could easily be the difference between being even slightly out of trim, or just a bit nose up.

Since there is no response from the Team, I suspect it will be this way for a while.

I think only the original image can tell us the truth. If only somebody has it

Oh I agree it looks odd on your screenshot. I was just referring your description of a "huge fireball". It doesn't look like that on my end, though. Perhaps clearing shader cache (both DCS ones and the driver ones) might fix it? Alternatively you could try a different LOD setting as Draconus suggested.

I'm not assuming that, it can be very well a problem in the litening magnification. Which again, is a separate issue from how good the resolution is on its digital zoom.

Seltsames Verhalten von WW 2 KI Flugzeugen: Die C 47 sollte so nicht mehr fliegen können, kein Heck, Besatzung abgesprungen, RPM 5%. Sie fliegt aber weiter, auch wenn die Triebwerke aus sind. Geschwindigkeit und Höhe konstant. Im rebriefing wird sie als zerstört angezeigt, fliegt aber munter weiter. Gleiches Verhalten mit B-17 und A-20G. Lustig ist, wenn ich sie ramme ist es vorbei, leider auch mit mir. Kennt das jemand? Es sind Flugzeuge, die ich über trigger spawnen lasse. .

Hi Raven, as i watched the vid , it STILL looks like a nice rounded cone, if u ask me. Not the whimpering flagged fireball i see on the DCS jet exhausts. Have a closer look when you fly at night or dawn when you see an AI aircraft taking off before you...... ridiculous it looks.

2020s fic CVW-11 set wip

Your assumption that there is a problem with the magnification of the Sniper Pod is based on the assumption that the Lightning Pod is implemented correctly. I would rather assume that the Sniper Pod is implemented correctly and the Lightning incorrectly. In addition, a very high (certainly digital) magnification at some point no longer brings any added value, because the image quality is then so poor that you can no longer recognise anything. This is not even taken into account in the current Lightning Pod.

The JF does not have the best radar. The target, aspect, and radar settings also play a part:

Have you noticed it on other maps? This is caused by the image being so low res, as you noticed I am sure, activating XR cleaned it up. I'll have to test with other maps to see if a similar effect is seen.