Ala13_ManOWar

I believe updated FAQ says the update can be bought at any time should you opt out of the update right now. Anyhow you can check it there, just in case.

We all have that warning, mods have already said you can dismiss it. As long as the price stated is right, 9.99 or 14.99 depending on your previous map, it's fine. It'd a problem only if you don't see that and it's tagged like a full "new buy" map.

I believe it might be different things, 9.90 is the Normandy 1 + Channel map owner price tag, 14.90 is the only Normandy 1 OR Channel map price tag. Maybe Steam isn't recognizing the double ownership if you have them both. People is commenting on some Steam issues, I guess it might be it.

No way, they're separate and different maps.

You bought/you have in your account is literally the same. I hardly doubt there's a single difference on that.

This +1M .

Yeah mate, we all know single examples of that. The problem is most people refuses to understand singular examples (squad leaders being able to do so, for instance, and the like) aren't the norm. Most people flying sims relate themselves to the "aces" because they've read stories and the like, and those probably could ask for those changes on "their planes" (another lie, the planes usually weren't personal and many people flew them, usually they had no single "owner" let's say). But reality is most people flying sims are average pilots at best, and those couldn't ask for nothing, had no plane for them alone even if some ace could get that, and so on. That's well known, they use factory charts. 1000ft/300 yards for P-51 and P-47 as per original harmonization charts we've all seen, 250yards for Spitfire (wouldn't recall Mosquito but I guess similar, maybe longer distance though), 600m for German planes which is what LW used for mostly nose mounted weapons but apparently also used that in wing mounted weaponry (A8, for instance, but also 109E used that IIRC).

Nope, no dates whatsoever.

They put those in there because people whined so much about Normandy map not having night lights because it's historical on wartime… I've said many times, but I don't envy DCS developers having to put up whit this kind of BS all the time WHATSOEVER . P.S. : I'm sure there will be some kind of workaround for that in ME with whatever option they could come up with.

Has probado algún otro software más para verlo? Me extraña que el contador del propio juego no sea correcto, la verdad.

Don't know about Dora, TBH didn't try myself, I just use right stick together with back stick and it goes airborne relatively easy. BUT apparently Anton manual (real one, I don't know if DCS one does) states the aircraft takes off in a three point attitude… maybe it has something to do with some weird things some people find with Focke Wulfs taking off.

Why does it look like the Spitfire is flown with keyboard?

Quite interesting for modellers, actually. Thanks for posting .

That's where the business is legally set in place so where they pay taxes, Mr Nick Grey, owner, resides to my knowledge in the UK, the studios are "mostly", as you say, in Moscow and Minsk… LOL??

Go tell that to MrP…, not only Russia had that kind of law, they made it even worse not that long ago, including those "obsolete" material you mention. How easy it is to speak when it's not your neck at stake, huh?

Glad you fixed it .

The problem with this is you're looking at really old, really cr@ppy, profile drawings. I believe by the time La-7 was introduced AMT-11 -12 cammo was probably the only standard (not meaning AMT-6 -7 disappeared the next day it happened to be standard, of course, but), while those profiles seen in my grandpa's books (literally, no kidding) are nowadays proven to be mostly fictional and only in some people's minds back in the day those were drawn. It happens with all aircraft, all air forces, not just this. Anyhow, a skin is just a skin, there more probably than not will be plenty of either historical or fictional skins you can use when the module is available.

Some screenshot of the problem?

Some skin in particular, or all of them?

Probably ED is looking for some technology allowing them either to join the maps together, or maybe not join them but load them without pause even though they're separated modules, that besides, or on top of, their World map which we know they're working on. That to say something, I don't know and probably there might be even more technical solutions we aren't even aware of. Of course, I don't think that's something we would see very soon for sure, but if they're actively seeking something on the like, it'd be definitely pointless to model a certain area on any given map twice!! I don't know, we don't know, but given what we do know that's a distinctive possibility, IMO. But no, let's find wild and of course horrible solutions because ED have demonstrated along the years how they don't take care of the end users, haven't them?

It's said in the video you posted itself, stutters aren't from the map but recording software. He says performance wise is literally same as Normandy v1.0. I don't own the map, yet, those are his words but it's clearly said.

Not long ago they said 55Gb, but subject to grow even more.

While that's true, and they have already said they're working towards that, they've also said it's a really long way yet, not to mention they haven't the faintest yet on what kind of technical hurdles will they be facing down the road. Most probably, technically they don't even know yet how could that even work, or how to do it. "Mixing maps" is only a thing we the players toy with, but that's way, waaaaaaayyyyy easier said than done. Currently "mixing maps" isn't a thing whatsoever, and even if it happens in the end, who knows when and how that'll work.

That kind of things aren't usually stated anywhere beyond the 5 minutes limit and so. Think it'd be almost impossible to pinpoint all the infinite variables, what speed you where, and are now? in what atmospheric conditions, Temp, wet, pressure? what time did the engine spent at any regime and what speed you had those moments? All of that can be logged in a PC game, but IRL it's really hard to check every variable and reduce it down to a simple table like you can be 10 minutes, 45, or 2 at @xxxx revs. I believe it's, for the most, part the pilot's job to bear in mind the conditions you're in at the current flight and guesstimate using your experience and judgement if you should run the engine that extra minute after a long run at 30ºC on Summertime while mowing the lawn, or maybe in a Winter's day at 30.000ft escorting bombers, so one can figure out to some extent what to do or not.

No, the fuel pressurization isn't "automatic", you have to switch it on (perhaps open the knob, better said) whenever you climb to that kind of altitude. As with the supercharger, since it's atmospheric pressure dependant, it's not always the same altitude you should have to use it as it's not always the same altitude when auto supercharger kicks in second stage. You could check the electric fuel pump either, since its not mandatory when the wobble pump is used to start the engine, but again at altitude you might need to use it or pump manually all of the time.