ARM505

.....DCS World\Mods\aircrafts\FW-190D9\Sounds\EditorMusic\MainMenuLoop.ogg I know you know, but for those who don't want to rummage around :)

Ok, ha ha....but seriously, during the landing/taxi as the aircraft bounces, and also when the aircraft spawns at mission start, just the impact of the aircraft plonking down as it spawns causes him to give the high G heavy breathing. During the landing roll, I thought I was scraping something, but it's the breathing noise coming on and off it seems?

Cold start (only had to find the key to move the throttle to idle!), taxi out, take off, two touch and go's, armed weapons, strafed some huts and an airport fire vehicle, climbed to about 4000m, dived to off the clock on the ASI, climbed back up playing with cowl flaps and coolant temps, dived back down, landed and taxied to original parking, shutdown. No aircraft breakages! And I only skimmed the manual.... Only watched Wags' videos, but having played the IL2:BOS 190 did help with the taxi and takeoff/landing I reckon, because this one is easier to taxi, and it got me used to the tailwheel locking mechanism. Very nicely done, it definitely feels nice to operate, very different from the P51. I really need to read up on the engine limitations, I took it to maximum power and played with the MW50, but I was very gentle with the engine in general though. Good fun, and very nicely done to ED. Edit to add: The track is 8MB - seems pretty big! I did fly around for quite a while, but still...

Thanks, nice links and info in general.

Without debating what the exact speeds were, I'm curious as to what gap was sealed. I'm aware of performance packages for modern aircraft (for example flap gap seals, sealing door lines etc in 172's etc) but I don't know what or where the 'engine gap' in a 190D would be?

Not that great a shot, but I did!

Can you elaborate? I know what they are and do, just can't really figure out where they would put one in a 190D? And why the gains would be so big?

Ok, I'm boasting again, but here's my rather grubby legs in the SA FW190, you can see the instruments more clearly, some replacements from the original I suspect:

I still have fond memories of tearing through a herd of Mustangs on the old South African SGS IL2 servers, cries of 'Who's that!' over comms following on as Ponies fell from the sky.....(hey, it happened, even if only once!) Looking forward to this one, the 190 remains my favourite.

Hey, that's my brother - he's got the good eyes in the family! :D

Oh, don't ask why Oh, don't ask why :D Ah, good to see the traditional FW190 cockpit bar discussion progressing here too (was just at the IL2:BOS forums :) ) It's not just the bar, it's the perceived depth of the side bars surrounding the thick front windscreen. Just so we're all clear on what's been happening there. The first thing I saw when I stepped into the BOS 190 was 'Gosh, look at those massive bars obscuring my view to the sides of the windscreen!' Thick glass makes those (as well as the lower bar) look thinner when looking through the windscreen, so it doesn't seem like you're staring out through a metal valley :D :D

Just as a trial run, I set a 4 Ship Mig 15 AI flight against a 4 ship Sabre flight, then a 4 ship F15C flight, then a 4 ship F16D flight (all gun only of course). The Mig 15's won each fight 4 -0. Yay, beta! And AI being odd of course :D

Ok, fine, fine, I'll buy it dammit! :D

Funnily enough, Steel Beasts was made to work in combination with VBS, the professional version of ARMA. The infantry dudes saw VBS, the tank guys saw Steel Beasts. So it is possible. But yes, we can only dream. I'm glad somebody mentioned Spintires, that has epic mobility challenges - really makes just driving around a challenge, and is surprisingly good! Wish we could match that one up with SB or ARMA.

I actually the whole situation rather frustrating - here we have sims like ARMA, Steel Beasts, DCS, Combat Mission, IL2 CLOD, BOS etc etc etc all trying to duplicate a lot of effort in so many common areas, and one of the biggest is plausible, intelligent infantry behaviour. With so many fails along the way. I've just been scratching my head while playing the ARMA 3 campaign at some of the occasional AI oddities, although for sandbox infantry it's still the leader, as it should be given it's focus, with the individual soldier as it's core unit. It's funny really - each sim treats the AI mechanics along the lines of it's original 'theme': In DCS, AI unit pathing and behavior was built around aircraft (an aircraft could never stop and engage), in Steel Beasts, the logic is built around armoured vehicles (infantry are retarded but can function), and in ARMA it's built around individual people (witness the truly abysmal attempts when vehicles were trying to follow roads in the beginning, thankfully a lot better now!) It's almost like we need some kind of common AI OS or plugin, something like PhysX for AI. But right now, ARMA infantry in DCS would be EPIC - and impossible really, given how long BIS has been working on them I doubt DCS infantry would ever be comparable. And it's a pity really, because CAS units really need plausible infantry.

*sigh* *Fires up latest version of IL2 1946 again* So many aircraft in one package. Maybe in another 50 years time....

Detonation.

It must be a Russian thing :D Play World of Tanks enough and you get to experience the magical power of the KV series of tanks, with special AP ammo-eating Stalinium armoured tracks which chomp your rounds so they do no damage ;) Maybe it's the same for some heli's?

It's definitely not out yet, don't even bother checking.....maybe check in, say, an hour or so? *evil laugh, continues to enjoy high download speeds!*

Wow, but I want a cloth to wipe that thing down before I get in! Can I have a factory new one please? Those shots are sort of like the ones I've seen rotting quietly away in corners of Angola. Give me a can of virtual paint!

I still think this is a failure of the core DCS world blast model (mentioned before many times). It's like the engine just considers the shotgun type fragmentation effect and ignores the giant explosion that just occured right next to the helo. Watching the replays in slow motion, sometimes it seems odd to have the helicopter disappear in a giant fireball, then come out the other side with some holes in it, trailing a bit of smoke or something (admittedly this is one the rare-ish side, but weird things do happen with the current model) Especially if it's hit tail-on or something where the warhead's effect seems to get 'eaten' by non-critical structures.

• Corrected HE warheads for unguided rockets. Hmmmm....reckon this is a better HE blast/frag model for HE rockets, or just some kind of balancing with the current model? I'm assuming the latter, I guess a new blast/frag model is more engine related and less individual weapon related? Won't get my hopes up. As usual, nice change list, F15 AFM and SU25T 6DOF the icing on the cake of course...

The trim tab 'flies' the control surface - it's correct. It's not that you get more than you put in, it's like a kind of aerodynamic boosting, the same as control surfaces where part of the movable surface is placed ahead of the hinge line to reduce stick force.

You could do that too, but the previous suggesting is to delete only your control (and other) setups - upon starting DCS again, they will be regenerated with the newer additions. This would save you having to download the entire DCS again.

I must say, RAIM prediction warning must surely come pretty far down the list in terms of whats needed in a combat sim. ED don't plan on doing all the coding for genuine RAIM warnings do they? Cost/benefit analysis would say no, but who knows...