scoobie

Yes, the breakdown apparently shows an early variant, a bit crude The one in the manual looks more "civilized" or polished, so it's probably a later design.

I'm glad if I could be of any help. Yeah, apparently there must have been different versions of this "front assembly". For instance, look at the "black and white arm" from the picture in the manual and its counterpart in the breakdown picture - part number 12. They are different, the former is "straight", the latter has this circle with a hole punched in it, near the thick end where you grab it. Anyway, if you get a chance to get these parts somewhere, or preferably the whole assembly together, we'll learn everything about it

The assembly drawing of the bombing altimeter. Just found it. I wish I had seen it before! I can't see the target altitude needle in the drawing. EDIT: I can't see the "bumper" for part number 12, either. It must be a slightly different variant of the device from the one depicted in Flight Manual.

Just to let you know - I've got a tiny bit of rotation, too, the difference is that I don't care. Maybe we're too heavy-handed on our joysticks, but regardless of that the gimbal on TM Warthog is by far its weakest point. If (if!) the rotation is an early symptom of the joystick falling apart, I treat it as a "chance" - it will give me motivation to buy a new joystick, and there are better sticks out there to buy! I'm too lazy to buy one without such extra motivation Like Art said - if you're really worried and you can see the grip-gimbal connection has no backlash, you may want to disassemble the thing (watch for delicate wires inside!) and see what's going on.

The track files. Both were recorded in Caucasus instant mission "Cold and Dark" for A-10C II. clicky_Hawg.trk Immediately upon the mission start you can hear erratic clicking sound, something like a Geiger-Muller counter. Actually it's the TCN sound volume knob set to maximum, I'm NOT touching my controls (yet). How can anybody fly like that? Then I started turning the axis left and right to show that ANY change of position in the axis generates a click, for example change of 1/4096 = 0,02% of full travel (single "notch" change in a 12-bit controller). All these actions should result in NO sound at all. turn_me_forever_knob.trk This time the axis is "turned off" and instead I'm using mouse wheel to turn TCN knob. The knob turns forever, which shouldn't be the case. clicky_Hawg.trk turn_me_forever_knob.trk

Tracks included in the post below. (I don't have my PC here now, so no track files yet. I'll try to procure a track later on.) DCS 2.7.16.27869 Open Beta introduced this change to A-10C II: "New cockpit switches sound." This hurt Intercom panel operation in the following ways: 1. When using the mouse wheel to change any audio volume on the Intercom Panel (left console in the cockpit, under your elbow), the audio knobs (for example TCN knob, UHF, ILS etc.) turn forever. The volume goes up, then drops to 0, again up, to 0, up, 0, ad infinitum. The knobs used to turn only 360° before OB 2.7.16.27869. (Side note: even 360° was too much, it should be something like 300, maybe 330, but we're not talking about it here.) Suggestion: restore the limit of 360° of turn. Or even better - make it 330° 2. Any change to sound volume controlled by any of these knobs now generates a "click" sound. They shouldn't click at all. While it may seem not to be a big deal on its own, it becomes a nightmare if you bind an axis to any of these sound knobs. Your physical axis (on your controller) may fluctuate a tiny bit, that's quite normal. Even the tiniest bit of such fluctuation will generate a "click" every time, which in practice means you get a neverending "symphony of clicks" in the cockpit, even when you're NOT touching the axis - the Hawg goes "clickclickclickclick" on its own, all the time. Removing the click sound will solve the problem. Suggestion: remove the "click" sound when these knobs are turned.

Hey @NineLine The document I was referring to: T.O. 1F-86F-1, 27 MAY 1960, CHANGE 10 - 30 APRIL 1971. Secion "MANUAL PIP CONTROL SYSTEM" begins on page 4-36 (p. 162 in PDF), the photo of the bombing altimeter assembly is on the next page. My PDF file weighs 119 049 KB.

Gee... It's always fascinated me how come a human eye-brain-hand combo can do such things. Of all things I'm most useless in this particular field, "100% uselessness", formally diagnosed by a brain surgeon. I can't even draw a proper circle. I guess this particular style may be called "linetillism", which would be a branch of pointillism, a branch of impressionism The Camel over the fields is georgous. Or the Tomcat with folks tinkering beneath it and the sun peeking out from behind. Or the guy sitting in the Spit's cockpit (yeah, the blister canopy is flat and probably doesn't match the canopy bow at the front, but it's not a technical drawing, it doesn't matter). Thanks, man - real joy to watch the pictures!

Just wanted to say thank you, Bailey! Bought the F1 the other day, and - surpise! - instead of spending hours in lua and SD software, I just downloaded your profile for F1 and that's it - it works. I find these especially great: 1. The icons for those "pushable pegs" in F1 (e.g. NWS sensitivity "peg"). I couldn't figure out how to draw icons for such a control, but your icons are just perfect for that - those half-disks - upper or lower, great idea! A quick glimpse and I know whether it's high or low sensitivity. 2. Pipper depression calculator (tables) - this is wild! It took me a second to realize what I'm looking at on my SD. Press buttons to pick attack run parameters, read the mills! Amazing idea! Hats off! Thanks a lot for this and all your great work in general!

Do as you like, but starting at 1500 meters AGL is very high (5,000 ft), so are you practicing landings or approaches? IIRC there's an instant mission... in Caucasus (I think) for Dora, where you start hot on the runway. I used this mission to touch-and-go until I bled from my nose It's a nice mission because the runway is huge (long and wide) and you can make all sorts of mistakes and still get her on the runway, at more or less ridiculous part of it, until you get better. And you fly slow all the time, so you can fairly quicky get the feel of how she handles. For example if she's "muddy" (can't remember myself, haven't flown her for quite long time), then she'll become "familiarly muddy". I remember Dora was difficult for me to land, I think most difficult of all warbirds, even the Spitty, so at least you're not alone I've no idea why I found Dora difficult. I was either landing too fast or she was dropping from the last 3 meters down as the piano, or a block of concrete. It might help you "self-diagnose" yourself if you quickly glimpse at the speedo, for example at the Rwy threshold, every time - you may be inconsistent in speed (I was!). But don't worry, you'll get it, no question about it. Each DCS warbird is from slightly to significantly different on landing - which is fantastic! Oh, and yes - the Pony is the easiest of them to land, at least to me (and you, it seems), so this would explain why you are surprised with Dora. Throw in the track file(s), so the gurus can take a look. I'm a semi-noob, but others have thousands of hours clocked in (neeerds!)

Don't quote me on anything below, but: 1. It's not a radio compass, but a "normal" magnetic one. Isn't it? 2. You're right about the manual, it reads as follows (page 70): I wasn't even aware it was supposed to work like that! I wonder whether this is a mistake in the manual or in the simulation. German compass repeaters get stuck beautifully, you never know where you're going I mean... it's the compass that gets stuck, the repeater on the instrument panel only reflects that fact. Was RL Pony any better in this regard? No idea. I doubt it, but don't really know. 3. Regardless, I just look at the DG when maneuvering, then cross-check with the magnetic compass when straight and level again.

Thank you @Big-foot, much appreciated! I just wonder if what you say means the whistle is gone or the Donkey simply didn't whistle at everybody in the first place. It might have been a "selective" bug - some got the whistle, some didn't. Damned magic EDIT (7/25/2022): For the record - the whistling bug is gone on my PC. I'm running DCS 2.7.16.27869 Open Beta.

Sorry for bothering, but would anyone be so kind as to check if the whistling is gone or still present in the yesterday's Open Beta? I-16 went out of EA, release notes don't mention it the whistling, I know, but maybe? I'm still in the no-free-trial period for the Donkey, can't check myself

FC3 planes are here because they were already pre-made to start with. Now, making Lo-Fi versions or separate Lo-Fi warbirds will partly choke the current "throughput" (sorry for such ugly word!) of the WW2 team, which according to at least a few folks (or many?) is a bit lacking already. Yes, a small team, I get it, but still... I'm just a customer, so I can only vote with the wallet, but I don't like the Lo-Fi warbirds idea, simply because I'd like more Hi-Fi WW2 stuff instead. Besides, unlike FC3 jets, in WW2 realm there's the other popular sim, quite cheap "per plane", so why turn DCS into something that already exists? I'm looking from a customer's perspective - I can just buy it, if I want. (I don't, but that's a different story.) I assume we're not looking at it from "module complexity" perspective, as that wouldn't make much sense to me. Warbirds are simple, some do have a few bells and whistles (e.g. the Mossie), but others are dead simple (e.g. the Anton). Yes, "press E to start her up" (if it was "E", I can't remember) is even simpler, but come on - Anton is as complex for the driver as your car is. For the same reason MAC worries me a bit, because personally I'm not a customer for MAC (nor FC3, sorry) and I'm afraid it will divert a substantial number of ED people to that, so... if I get the maths right... would this mean fewer folks to work on DCS? Sad They'll do what they want, business is business, but I'm just anxious.

EYE FATIGUE WARNING! Amazing campaign indeed! I wish I spoke more English so I could do proper justice to the quality and immersion that Reflected's campaigns offer, the Wolfpack Campaign included. I guess I should have got used to it by now, but I haven't - each time it surprises my how much effort is put into these campaigns. Let's talk for a moment about the thing not commented here, at least not often - the "cinematic" missions, those where you are just an observer. Take your cup of tea, sit down and watch the "movie" as it introduces you to the story. What a treat, where's my popcorn! There are great voiceovers across the whole campaign and they deserve accolades on their own, but even such a small thing as the font used for inscriptions popping up on the screen in those cinematic missions was mindfully selected to pretend the text came out of a worn-out typewriter. Get it? WW2, no computers, no printers, all the bureaucracy punched on typewritters. The briefings are written/drawn in chalk on a blackboard, you didn't expect modern stuff, did you? In each mission you get the "B" channel on your radio tuned to... probably BBC playing some cool swing songs, I listened to it every time on the way back to England. I may be wrong, but I think the song-set wasn't the same in all the missions. If I'm correct, think how much attention it takes to cater even for that! Boy, the list goes on and on, I don't want to write an epic, no one reads epics nowadays. While in fact I had seen it before, played through quite a few campaigns from Reflected, Bunyap and some other folks, it has only recently started to fully "float" up to the surface of my mind, I started realizing actually how much thought and love (yes! that's the right word) is put into these campaigns. And I'm utterly charmed... Now think about this: is it obligatory to create the aforementioned cinematic missions, chalk briefings, add music, add all these countless touches (there are more, but contrary to what you think I'm trying to be succint... to my limited capability), or if you don't, ED won't accept the campaign for sales? No, it's not obligatory, some campaigns don't have it. Do you set the price for the campaign twice higher than other (less sophisticated) campaigns if you do all this? No, campaigns cost more or less the same. In fact... I like to be honest... I've seen a tad bit rough-edged campaigns sold for more than the Reflected's ones. Why then does Reflected make them with such great attention to detail anyway? Well, for starters I suspect he simply does this for his own satisfaction and the feeling of accomplishment (which the campaigns undeniably are), of doing a great job, but at the same time he wants to give something as spectacular as he possibly can to other people, to get us involved, immersed, "soaked" in the world at war, give a taste of those gloomy times when even though you'd prefer to date that girl you met just before coming to Great Britain or fool around with your mates in your home town, you must instead stick your head out against the bullets in a furball mess. Today you live, tomorrow you may not. You never know. If all history lessons at school felt this great, we'd all be historians by trade I'm writing all this to confess that: a) I get it, b) I appreciate it a lot, and c) THANKS A 1000 for taking the time and energy to do all this for us! Part 2. I know there are new people here who haven't played any WW2 campaign yet and may be wondering if it's worth it. Shortly speaking: you bet it is, but here are some pros of a quality WW2 campaign, such as the Wolfpack: 1. You will learn to drive your warbird comprehensively! Initally, you'll want to try instant missions to quickly get the feel of your new warbird, how she can (and cannot) dogfight, what her strong/weak points seem to be, you may learn to take off and land more or less properly and that's basically it. In a campaign you'll be doing all the things that real pilots did (to the extent possible in DCS), not only dogfights, not even predominantly dogfights. You'll be taking off in a queue of other warbirds, sometimes 36 or so of them. How often did you see an airfield in DCS crammed to the limit? You'll be circling above the airfield until the whole group is airborne and formed. Yes, you, too, have a specific place in this big formation, can you find and hold it for 10-15 minutes? You'll be climbing with the whole group, keeping the formation and then you'll be cruising in formation a long way to the AO. Well, not very long as WW2 maps in DCS aren't very big, but still - quite a long trip. You think it's boring? No, it's not, go and see for yourself - formation flying keeps you constantly busy and time flies fast. Oh, and overall you DO become a better pilot by doing just this. Stick and rudder heaven. By the way, how often do you land a damaged aircraft. It's not uncommon in a campaign. I had to belly land once because I messed up my landing gear (the wheel got stuck against the wheel bay flap). Do you know how to feather the prop in the Jug, so that you can turn off the engine, cut the fuel off and decrease the risk of fire? How does it feel to land with other types of damage? I've had oil leaking, so I had to do everything it takes not to strain the engine in the hope that she takes me home in return. How often do you refer to the manual to check the best economy settings (manifold, RPM, altitude, speed), because suddenly you realized you had very little fuel left? All these may or will happen in a campaign, maybe the Wolfpack, maybe some other. And you really though you could fly the Jug, didn't you, eh? 2. You will really need to learn fuel management, something you never do when playing instant missions or any kind of short missions. You may even want to make some new control bindings for it (I have). Two drop tanks? How do you deal with them? Here's a supposedly historically accurate practice: initially fly 5 minutes on the left tank, then take 10-minute-long turns from each tank. Why do it this way? Because you'll have weight imbalance from 5 minutes of left fuel burnt (righ wing heavy), through perfect balance, to 5 minutes of fuel right burnt (left wing heavy). If you don't allow for the initial 5 minutes, you'll have imbalance from 10 minutes of fuel one wing heavy to a perfect balance. The latter is worse. I like to think about it this way: it's better to walk like a duck (swinging left and right symmetrically) than to dramatically walk like that guy who had his whole leg put in a plaster cast, but forgot his crutches. Yes, it's all small details, but hey - you wanted a WW2 pilot's job? Here it is, it's not only about shooting down bandits. There's another good reason to do it this way: AI planes climb with very high power settings. If you create a large weight imbalance, you'll have to compensate with rudder/aileron trims, perhaps to a point where you won't be able to keep up with your group. Haven't checked that myself, but it seems likely if you really don't care about fuel. 3. Since the Wolfpack is for the Jug in particular, you'll learn how to babysit the Double Wasp: warm it up first, then keep an eye on the oil temp. - adjust oil cooler shutters, carb temp. - adjust intercooler shutters, cylinder heads temp. - adjust cowl flaps. You really need to take care of it depending on the current regime of flight (climb/cruise/etc.) and altitude. Get used to carefully listen to the hiss of air from the turbo - the manifold pressure may have just risen above the red line even though you haven't touched the throttle and boost lever. Don't get caught. And so on, and so forth... 4. A common psychological catch in long missions. When 40 minutes have passed since the mission start, and you finally face bandits, not only do you want to shoot down one or two, you also want to survive, not get shot down - just because you've devoted quite a lot of your time and effort to get to this point. Do you want to refly the mission only because you went reckless and got shot down? That's something you NEVER consider in single player in an instant mission (or any short mission), where you instinctively go reckless because it doesn't matter - if you loose, you tap ESC, click "Quit" and "Fly again". That's it. That's not the case in a campaign. Typically it takes quite some time to meet bandits (not always), so you do care not to get shot down in a stupid way. This makes A LOT of difference as far as immersion is concerned. Yeah, yeah, I know this post is too long already and you may think "Man, why blow the trumpet so loud, you liked the campaign, so just say it and go", but you know what? I've noticed these forums are a bit "asymmetrical". You see a lot of complaints about specific modules (aircraft), because there are old bugs, or new bugs, or missing this/that feature and your favourite plane isn't perfect yet. This is a skewed picture, but the campaigns get a skewed picture the other way round - they are seldom ranted on, if ever. No one wants to discourage creators, for various reasons, one of them being that everyone hopes the authors get better during the process of making new missions and new campaigns. Frankly though, some of them are technically flawed - "touchy" triggers etc. Some have subpar documentation, as if it was pulled out of one's throat by force. Or documentation where there are true and erroneous pieces of information in a 50:50 ratio. Or campaigns which require telepathy to figure out what the autor expects from the player. Oh, man... Anyway, I understand and accept this assymetry, but as a side effect I think it raises the need to praise the quality campaigns, as loud as you can, so others can spot the difference. By the way, I haven't said a single word about triggers in the Wolfpack. Why? Because everything just works and the only quirk or two I experienced were due to the "smart" AI doing their "smart" things (such as crashing on the runway etc.). I just happen to have learnt already that mission creators can do very little about it, it's a DCS core thing. That's why I think it's really important to elaborate on excellent campaigns (such as this one) and elaborate on the "value added", i.e. all those additions that (some) authors put in to increase the immersion, even though it's not strictly required to get the campaign to the shop. At least it's fair to mention them, acknowledge the author's extra efforts. The Wolfpack Campaign is one of those top-notch campaigns which you plunge into and don't want them to end, ever, and those that unfortunately do eventually end and leave you as sad as a kid who ate the lollipop and there's nothing left. I've dragged my chunky Jug into the hangar and it felt really bad and empty. This simply means I've had a freaking great time. Also make sure you understand that Reflected's campaigns come in two main "flavours": one is "fantasy" campaigns, where missions are basically made up (though anchored in the author's knowledge about WW2 reality), and historical campaigns which try to recreate missions actually flown back then during WW2 (based on written reports etc.). The Wolfpack is the second flavour. Which do I like more? I like more both They're just a bit different, the fantasy ones have a slight proclivity to be more funny, or surprising at times, but the historical ones feel equally great when you realize that these exact events really happened, you take part in the history. It feels very special.

Congratulations to a braveheart! The Hawg version "Charlie" is (very) complex, but I heard this great piece of advice once: accept the learning curve, but don't forget to enjoy the ride along that curve. Eat one "chunk of the elephant" at a time and you'll tame it. Well, technically it's a pig, not an elephant. Whatever. Just take your time, simply because there's no other choice - it must take some time. On the sweet side, she's so incredibly competent at the single job she does, especially the "II" with HMCS, and so enjoyable for the driver when you finally learn by heart how to use the Mammoth-HOTASTM plus all the myriad of cool stuff she has onboard... and under the wings. (EDIT: Forgot the nose - the BRRRT!) Those engineers should get some Medals of Honor from the president, or whatever appropriate you get in the States Have fun!

Thank you, @BIGNEWY. Track included (17 seconds long). Stock instant mission. ah64_wpn_ase_unase_tsd.trk

Thanks, Kharrn! Hmm... I don't know. If I understand correctly the passages you quoted, they're about when and how "ASE data" can automatically pop up on an MPD, on their own. Let's say you have WPN page on the left MPD and FUEL on the right one. Now the Apache detects a threat, so it may automatically display a good page to tell you about it - the moving map with threat overlay or maybe the "bare" ASE page itself, whatever. That would make a lot of sense! However, when I'm doing this WPN->ASE->unASE sequence, I'm doing it on the left MPD, while I keep TSD displayed on the right one so I end up having two TSD pages on both MPDs and have to press WPN again on the left one. Like I said - no big deal, but it seems to violate the rule of entering and exiting subpages, that's why I started suspecting there may be something wrong with the way it currently works.

(Scratching his head...) I don't know if it's a bug, Boeing's ideology, or myself being too dumb (as usual) to dig it. Press "WPN", enjoy the WPN page, then box "ASE" and do your changes on the ASE page as you wish. Now "unbox" ASE and... you don't return to WPN page, TSD gets displayed instead. Shouldn't "unboxing" ASE cause MPD to return to the page you were previously viewing? In this case - to the WPN page? No big deal, but since we're talking "Bugs and Problems" here...

It may be the case that pitot heat is currently broken across all warbirds, look here: Speculations now: I haven't had a dead speedo in a warbird for a long time, so either I've been just lucky, or maybe (just maybe) they "blocked" pitot icing as a temporary workaround for the pitot tube heating issue? No idea. I'd love more talks about systems, or better yet more systems actually simulated as this is what makes the birds feel "alive", to me at least. Flight model is most important, sure, but then come the systems, which add so much depth to the airplane, and so much immersion to the pretend-pilot like myself Thanks to Reflected I've just learnt that in the Spitfire oil dilution actually works. I had never bothered to try it before because I was somehow convinced it was just a "fake", the switches or buttons are there in cockpits, but it's no use flicking/pressing them. I'm glad I was wrong, but don't know if dilution works in the Jug (for the same reason).

It is! I was thinking about something quick and dirty, because... sometimes I have the impression that only quick and dirty "non-core features" stand a chance to crawl into DCS. Maybe I'm being unfair, no rant intended, really Sure, a human-friendly editor sounds awesome.

Hi, folks! A bit off-topic, but it's just struck me it could be pretty easy to have "automatic tabs" in the kneeboards, so that when you put in a bunch of your own pages (your own checklists, the girlfriend's photo or whatever), they will be automatically "tabbed" according to your own liking. And it wouldn't mess up the kneeboards we currently have! (I know I'm wasting time, it's not gonna happen, but still...) Here's the "patent" (you may come up with a few similar ones serving the same purpose): 1. File names in a kneeboard folder have typical structure FILENAME.EXT 2. DCS sorts all the pages by their file names, just as it does now. 3. For each page whose file name's last character (in the FILENAME part) is the underscore, DCS automatically puts in the kneeboard a coloured tab linking to this page. Example: No need to manually add tabs from scratch at the beginning of each mission! If you want you may still add new tabs when sitting in the cockpit, but you may also have automatic tabs created for you at the mission start, say: airfiled charts, aircraft checklists, mission briefing pages (named with an underscore by the mission's author). How about that? It would also be nice to have a standarized system whereby you are allowed to put your own things into the "kneeboard" folder in <Saved Games>/DCS/..., for a particular module or a map, whereas DCS updates would only touch kneeboard folders in <DCS install dir>/Mods/etc. DCS would then add up the kneeboard contents from all these folders. I think it kind of works now for some modules or maps, or it used to work, can't remember clearly, but I would be cool if they made it a standard feature in DCS. As for the philosophical dispute... personally I make my checklists "actively" (pen and paper), for the reasons SharpeXB pointed out above, but mostly because I just like it this way. Sometimes I download checklists or guides (e.g. Viggen) from "User Files". I think it's a valid and sober claim that kneeboard checklists be a standard part of a module, but I'm also afraid they'll be treated lightly by the forever-on-the-rush developers, so... I don't know. Maybe it's better to have control over what's there? I'm on the fence. Anyway, YMMV, it's just a personal opinion.

Horrido is a blast! THANK YOU, Reflected! Normally I play only one campaign mission per week, but yesterday I went nuts and flew Horrido missions from 6 or 7 to 11 in a row, all day long until it got late and I had to go to sleep. I didn't plan it, I just couldn't stop flying I love the general ambience of your campaigns - the harsh, crude, chaotic reality of war on one hand, but also the countless little additions you throw in. I'm really surprised myself how much difference it makes. All the stuff, barrels, vehicles, what-nots scattered across the airfield, so that the place feels alive and I, in turn, feel I'm only a tiny cog in a big war machine. Those soldiers wandering around, a busy truck rushing somewhere, other planes taxiing, taking off, other groups in the air doing their own job, the voiceovers, the music, the news broadcasts over the radio, the way the briefings were delivered (thought the guy speaking was reaaally loud), the map displayed during the briefings or... a vintage phone - what a nice touch! Champagne and shrimps were great. I was so angry with the Ponies (no major spoilers here), took down 2, let them burn in hell! It's bad to get drunk at war, now I know. I still can't think clearly about what was going on in the campaign, it felt like a roller-coaster ride, the head spinning, the eyes rolling, the hair a total mess, and you just desperately trying to stay alive along the way. Gott im Himmel, as I believe contemporary Germans would say it. I had to take a shower afterwards The other interesting thing about the Anton in particular is that if you were allowed to pick the plane you want to fly in WW2, this specific version of Anton wouldn't be your first choice. Nor a second choice, perhaps. You'd beg for something more competent in a dogfight (within the DCS realm: K-4, the Spit etc.), not Anton. But thanks to this campaign I learnt to love the bird, it's become like a good pal in teen years. The kind of pal who doesn't get best grades at school, who may not come from the best family in the neighbourhood, but you like to hang around with and do most stupid things together. The Luftwaffe workhorse, indeed. I'm getting poetic, enough of that. The point is... it may be easier to keep your head cool if you're flying "the king of the skies" type of a plane, but in our Anton you are scared. If you see Mustangs or Jugs, you are scared, they're doable one at a time if you're careful, but still dangerous and if you're absent-minded enough to fly into the wrong cube of air, i.e. a bad piece of a 3D furball structure, it will probably be your last mistake in life, especially in the Anton. If you see the Spits, you're not as much scared as... sh*tted all over and calling out Ma to take you home. Maybe that's why the campaign felt even more engrossing? I don't know, but whatever the reason, or - more likely - multiple reasons, it was really a blast. I can't wait till ED let you release the campaign for the Mossie (it's about the skin template, IIRC). Fingers crossed. Fortunately "Beware! Beware!" is on its way, so we'll take the Spitty for another ride soon. Thanks for all your great work!

+1, but also this: Yeah... that's PITA. I have no idea why these windows aren't "full screen" - not only OPTIONS window, but also mission briefing window etc. Artist's visions (pretty clouds) are good where they belong, but I dare to claim these windows should be designed for maximum practicality, not artistic impressions. If I want clouds, I can stick my head out the window, no problem

+1, but not only for the carrier - ground ops too! Simple pushback was a thing back in FS9 (maybe FS2000, but I'm not sure): one keybind to toggle pushback start/stop and two keybinds to steer left/right. That should be easy correction: relatively easy to do for ED, but most likely modules would have to get somehow updated to allow for such "external control" (for example, there may be a need for a module to disclose to DCS XY coordinates in the 3D model where the gear struts are, maybe also a way to control the nose wheel angle etc.). Contrary to that, "automatic" pushback will be difficult to do and very bug-prone. Think of all airfields, all maps, all shapes and sizes of various aircraft and all the junk that may be tossed around the place (vehicles, barrels, GPUs, crates of bananas or whatever they toss around). Yeah, it would be awesome to see animated crews, tow trucks and so on, but I prefer to keep my feet on the ground