Lynchsl62

Making a single HID will make things easier in another game/simulator where there is a maximum number of HID that the game can accomodate and having 2 taken up is at times inconvenient. Though as stated for DCS this will not be an issue. Main request is that the push function is accessible on all buttons in DCS, especially TMS, DMS, CMS and Trim Is there any update on the F35 grip, that grip has not been reviewed?

The F4 is the best angles Bf-109 I agree, “power” and light weight. I have always had a soft spot for the early G series (and the G10) though The A4 would be in context as would the P-38F and the Spitfire Vb along with the P-40 Flights from Catania or Trapani in Sicily would be amazing during Operation Husky, AI B25 and 110/210 adding to the target environment - Catch22 anyone

Spanish civil war or early Soviet Japanese Conflict in Mongolia that used the I-16 with rifle caliber guns required close in combat with high accuracy and incredible maneuverability as an aside this Interestingly led to divergent approaches the Germans went to energy fighters the the Bf-109 (comparative to the I-16) whilst the Japanese developed angles fighters such as the Ki-43. Japanese veterans coming from the A5m disliked the A6m for lack of maneuverability! rather than develop a completely new era why not give the I-16 some contemporary opposition and develop some early war Axis fighters, preferably the Japanese ones eagerly looking forward to the F4U to add to the warbirds collection, as I mainly fly warbirds, especially the K4 and the early jet the Mig-15. The P-51 and F-86 are fantastic but somehow not as challenging

Being in a B-17 was really uncomfortable for the crew as it was not heated and was so cold everything froze. They were not allowed to take drink on board as it would freeze at altitude and there was the issue of dealing with the “waste”. Reading a book “Mission to Berlin” the overwhelming impression of all the crew is being constantly cold. One of the reasons the P-38 was not as successful against German heartland was again the cold, the heating system was not effective against the extreme cold at high altitude, whereas in the MTO and PTO the combat altitudes were typically lower The P-38 would make an excellent option in the Warbirds and would be a day one purchase for me

Build in Ryukyu Okinawa Islands and this would be ideal for the previous WW2 scenario of USN/USAAF during prior to and during operation Iceberg against the IJAF/IJN Kamikaze using the F4U/P-51 and P-47 and hopefully future Japanese aircraft. This would be in addition to the current/future flashpoint that must surely utilize USA assets from Okinawa

I have watched the gun camera movies of the 8th Air Force, and always wondered why the wings disintegrated. My rational is that it appears to be FW-190 with wing mounted canons, and the USAAF was using API rounds. I can only believe that the wing damage is caused by wing ammunition being hit and self detonating to cause such devastation. When you look at the gun camera footage against the much lighter Bf-109, there is not the same dramatic disintegration, even when external fuel tanks are hit they flame rather than disintegrate. The FW-190 was configured as a bomber destroyer, especially the A-8 with extra armour, whilst in late ‘44 and 45 the Bf-109 were primarily used as fighter in an attempt to protect the FW-190. I don’t think that the wing mounted gun pods were used in this role, as they hindered manoeuvrability and were really intended for attacking bombers when there was no fighter escorts, e.g. through ‘43 and early to mid ‘44 before the P-51 B really destroyed the Luftwaffe over Germany Whilst the picture is of a F4U which was very robust for Naval operations and the damage is caused by Japanese 20mm, I think that this suggests that even a single hit from a 20mm on a wing spar would not sever the spar - however any highs G makeovers and the wing would likely fail due to overload

Axial flow compressors as used in the Jumo 004 are susceptible to surge and stall, that is why they required smooth acceleration. Compressor surge can completely destroy the engine. Allies used centrifugal compressors developed from Superchargers which were more well known and whilst also susceptible to surge and less so stall they are much more robust

The P-80 engine was not that good initially either, the GE engine suffered multiple failures, Maj Bong the leading US ace was lost flying a P-80 due to engine failure. A couple of P-80 were brought to ETO but needed engine modification before going to Italy in an attempt to intercept the Ar-234 recce jets there, but we’re too late. The Me-262 engines lacked the high temperature alloys required in the turbine, Nickel, Cobalt and Manganese which is why the engines only lasted a few hours before overhaul/replacement. However when employed the 262 equipped with R4M was an effective bomber killer, if they survived take off and landing. The 262 was regarded as superior to the Meteor and the P-80 in post war trials, primarily due to its stability. I am not advocate of the late war jets being modelled, but they would be more balanced.

By 1944 pretty much all Luftwaffe aircraft were targets for the Allies look at the loss data http://don-caldwell.we.bs/jg26/thtrlosses.htm The planes were largely obsolete by Allies and even Soviet standards with the exception of a few rare types such as the G-10,K-4, D-9, Ta-152, Ju-188 and of course the Ar-234 and Me-262. Pilot training was totally inadequate just feeding inexperienced pilots into the USAAF meat grinder. Of course there were experten who represented a challenge but even these were being reduced by the meat grinder. This does not even address the logistical and quality issues of fuels and materials etc. Late war planes/scenarios with the exception of the jets, Luftwaffe, RAF and USAAF will always be either unrealistic or one sided and whilst flying exotica could be fun I for one would prefer to fly ‘43 scenarios and planes when the air war was less one sided - my personal perspective

Realsimulator released a preview video of the F-35 Linear Throttle through lowblow. A big fan of Realsimulator withe FSSB R3L Base and the F-16 SGRH-CE and the F-18 CGRH grips. Superb accuracy and build quality. Interested to know the price, which sadly for Realsimulator I know will not be cheap, and future grips, especially the EFA make it expandable for future modules. https://realsimulator.com/ https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1151652728 Any thoughts.....

The Me-410 would theoretically be more equivalent to the mossie, a multi role bomber and heavy fighter, however it was a total failure - faster but less manoeuvrable than the Bf-110 and much disliked by the crews. Both aircraft in the ‘44 Normandy scenario are merely targets to P-51, P-47 and the Mk XI as well as the future mossie itself. It is a real shame as the aircraft looks good - having visited the surviving example at RAF Cosford several times For the era I would much prefer the A-26 Invader as a light bomber, which also was equipped with a solid nose ground attack

R.I.P to all the brave young men and women

To attack the B-29 the Japanese recommended an inverted vertical attack from above aiming at the nose of the B-29 to target the must vulnerable elements - the flight crew. This was apparently trialled again B-17 in the South Pacific. The challenge was to be higher than the B-29 which considering the operational altitude was not easy especially for the Ki-43 and A6M. Somewhat better in the Ki-44, the J2M3 and the Ki-84. If executed in the Ki-43 or A6M it must have been a one shot as they were not emery fighters

Nealy got shotdown by being over zealous, possible fatigue, and was caught low and slow after attacking some Japanese bombers - he knew the jug was a sitting target when low and slow. He was shot down by the superb airmanship that the Japanese pilots, early war, had with superb marksmanship - he actually wounded and balied out but died i think in his parachute snagged in the jungle. There were many tens of superb Japanese pilots at the end of the war and they could secure victories against over zealous pilots that either were not aware of the situation and got jumped or did not follow the rules of never engage in a turning dogfight, boom-n-zoom only. However against the onslaught of the USN/USAAF they were way to few and far between. Sakai even claimed to have downed a B29 (B31) after the end of hostilities in a Zero I always wondered how the underpowered, lightly armed (the Ki-43 never had heavier weapons than 13mm) could shoot down B-17, B-24 and B-29 when the Luftwaffe had to rely on at least 20 20mm hits to destroy a heavy bomber and even with the MK-108 it was 4 hits 06:40 The wingman was lost to a Zero on the way home - though USAAF plane recognition was an understandable problem

The FAA Corsair did perform a couple of operations along the Norwegian Coast, during operations against Tirpitz, however they encountered no opposition, before they relocated to the Pacific. I think the Corsair would dominate the FW-190 A8 but would be roughlu equal to the Bf-109 K4 and the FW-190 D9 - some US reports indicated that it was considered as more maneouverable than the P-51 - and with the R2800 with the two stage 2 speed superchargers should be have a good altitude performance The FAA Hellcats introduced in 1944 did encounter opposition, though as you state they were mid war Bf-109 and FW-190 A3/4. They were also used in the Mediterranean The F4F/Martlet were used against the Luftwaffe during convoy protection and also during Operation Torch with the USN against the Vichy French and also against the Norwegian shipping before being replaced.

It works very well with the Chuls Arduino workaround, with the caveat, only for the warbirds, Mig-15 and the F-14. For the other hydraulic actuated and/or electro-mechanical FBW then the only FFB is the movement of the stick to trimming input, e.g. in the F-86 the stick actually moves as the aircraft trim is adjusted. Heartblur clearly implemented the FFB for the F-14 module and it is good, but TBH I mainly fly the Warbirds/Korea War jets and the early cold war jets. No idea about Helo's as apart from the pre-ordered Hind I don't have any and waiting for the Hind to mature before investing time in learning it, i.e. I am too lazy

Personally I enjoy the destructive power of 6 x 0.50’s when on target, so looking forward to the F4U though there is no real historical opposition, after the F4U I would really like the F4F or the F6F the latter was a real game changer. After the 6 x 0.50’s then 4 x Hispanic’s are real shredding power so that would be the RAF Typhoon (balanced for Normandy) or the Tempest though that is a far away dream. For the Luftwaffe I would prefer to see the MG-151 equipped BF-109 G series or the mid series FW-190 A6/A7 better equipped for fighter to fighter engagement, higher velocity and more rpg, especially when the outer guns were removed in the A6/A7 For the VSAAF I would really like to see the Yak-3, Yak-9U, La-5FN/7 all equipped with nose mounted weapons - late 45 scenario such as Robert Conroy - why not? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Inferno:_1945 IJAF/IJN clearly I would like to see the Ki-84, Ki-100, or N1K1-J, J2M3 though that will never happen

Grafspee +1

To date there are no real viable opponents, just the Ju-88 and maybe the FW-190. Most nightfigters in WW2 were designed to oppose bombers and due to the weight and complexity of equipment were invariably twin engined, some single engine F6F were used by USN in the pacific. The Luftwaffe were quite successful with Wilde Sau Bf-109 and FW-190 against the RAF, surely as these already exist (without gun pods) then having an AI opposition such as the Halifax, Lancaster or Stirling (very manoeuvrable) would be better - the RAF also performed daylight missions in support of Normandy landings - so why not add these to the asset pack my thinking is, if there is a need for a twin engine aircraft then there are better more multi role alternatives that would be more balanced, not least the P-38, Me-410 (very poor aircraft when challenged by single engine fighters) and the pre ordered Mosquito. So rather than go for an aircraft with no real opposition such at the Lancaster or the Me-410 for the 44 Blitz then the widest interest would be to develop the P-38 - but again that really needs the Pacific or the Mediterranean theatre. Anecdotally the highest scoring Me-262 was alleged to be a nightfigter fighting primarily against the Mosquito- is this another case for the Me-262 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Welter#Aerial_victory_claims

That is realtively easy, in the controls screen for the selected aircraft click on the button "Make HTML". This will create a HTML download folder in: C:\Users\XXXXX\Saved Games\DCS\InputLayoutsTxt\FA-18C_hornet Like this I then opened the keyboard file in the webroweser seledcted all, CTRL+A and then pasted into Excel DCS Keyboard Commands.xlsx

The year of late 1942 through in 1943 were the pivotal years when the Allies were finally able to contest air supremacy from the Luftwaffe, though the Schweinfurt raids demonstrated that was localised due to range, in the Channel, North Africa/Mediterranean and the Far East in China and New Guinea. The Allies developed competent planes but superior training and resources to ultimately take on the supremacy of the Luftwaffe, IJAF and IJN. The planes that would best represent these pivotal battles in this era are for me: F4U for Guadalcanal (Blacksheep squadron) F4F for Guadalcanal / North Africa in Operation Torch P-40 for New Guinea / China (Flying Tigers) / North Africa / Russia A6M Zero for Guadalcanal/ China Bf-109 G2/G6 for North Africa / Russia / Channel This would cover so much of the peak years when the Allies were able to contest the supremacy of the Luftwaffe and IJN across multiple scenarios and as such be surely this would be the most intereresing and pivotal period of WW2 The other pivotal period was the destruction of the Luftwaffe in early 1944 by the 8th Air Force over Germany with P-47 early variants and P-51 B/C, none of which we have but would also be useful as the early P-47 operated in New Guinea battling Ki-43 and the P-51 B/C operated in China

I ordered and received the Cubesim in 2020 before the pandemic really hit. I would say that they were late but they did arrive and add so much.

The Guadalcanal/New Guinea campaign is the most important campaign in the Pacific, this is when the Allies with the F4F, F4U and the P-40 were finally able to contest and challenge the IJAF and the IJN after which the Allies were in strategically in control. Based on this I would like to see the next WW2 plane, assuming the F4U will happen as: F4F for Guadalcanal P-40 for New Guinea A6M Zero for Guadalcanal The P-40 would also be historically accurate for the Flying Tigers and ifs at all possible against the 1943 Luftwaffe in North Africa/Mediterranean, where again the Allies were strategically in control thereafter even though the Luftwaffe may have had superior planes and individual pilots. This would possibly give us the Bf-109 G2/G6 and maybe the FW-190 A4 which would be useful in Channel campaign against the Spitfire Mk IX - though the Mk V would be more appropriate Based on this the wish list for me is: F4U for Guadalcanal (Blacksheep squadron) F4F for Guadalcanal P-40 for New Guinea / China (Flying Tigers) / North Africa / Russia A6M Zero for Guadalcanal/ China Bf-109 G2 for North Africa / Russia This would cover so much of the peak years when the Allies were able to contest the supremacy of the Luftwaffe and IJN across multiple scenarios. This surely would be the most intereresing and pivotal period of WW2, other than the destruction of the Luftwaffe in early 1944 by the 8th Air Force over Germany with P-47 early variants and P-51 B/C, none of which we have

Another video from Greg on t he BMW 801 engine released today, indicates that the 1.58 ata was for the 1st speed at low altitude and the 1.65 ata was at the 2nd speed at altitude. I am an avid follower of this Chanel on YouTube and it is really informational and puts a lot of the engine development into perspective I bought the book Secret Horsepower Race by Calum Douglas but just started reading it so not got to the late war engines/fuels https://www.calum-douglas.com/current-book-the-secret-horsepower-race/

The P-51 WEP was limited to 5 minutes with the 150 Octane Fuel whereas the MW-50 was 10 minutes, though I am sure that the Luftwaffe pilots would be less concerned about a failed /damaged engine over Germany than the US Pilots. Excellent video from Greg’s regarding the P-51 versus D-9 confirming the altitude advantage of the P-51. The D-13 would be interesting to compare against the P-51 and P-47 at altitude