Doughguy

Ok, so here´s some pictures of real life examples. most wartime and some restorations. as you can see, reflections were there. and very drastic. also, the perspex wasnt fully clear but had some opacity to it which can be clearly seen. Hower, and that is what ED def got wrong is that the surface isnt "polished" enough and appear very rough and sandblasted. means, roughtmats are wrong. reflections on canopies were present but very crisp and only the very bright spots were mostly noticable and obscuring. if we compare that to current pictures, it should and would be the same. pics from with the cockpit, especially during flight are scare. i know that there are a few, but i cant recall if they showed reflections. Also, with the sandblasted "reflections" bein mostly present permanently (!) around the canopy edges, i suspect some normal issues caused by smoothing groups.

Flickering only it seems..

The reflections on the anton canopy are simply overdone. Lookin backwards its like theyre sandblasted, because they arent transparent enough. theres tons of wartime footage. Yes, they had reflections, but they werent so bad. If the perspex wouldve been so bad, that would be a life threatening flaw...

would be easy to create. similar to bort numbers

@Hobel i can only reproduce this in the air, not on the ground unfortunatelly since i cannot produce a noseover doing screens with active pause.

The + would be 11,5m which would make the crosshair even bigger. The marks arent evenly placed if you look at the spaces between the first long crossed out mark, for "generic" one engine planes. But thats not the main issue. The recent fix of the target distance scale was only cosmetical. The 400 meter mark was once 100 meters, which was quite "correct", distance wise. The old mark between the 100m and 600m was ~300 meters iirc After the "fix" that mark would be 500m as it sits between 400m and 600m... Telling by the labels, the distance is actually ~200m framed at a wingspan of ~11meters, not 500m as indicated by scale. Distances above 600m seem correct. Anything from 600 below is off per the new target distance scale.

600m 500m 400m 200m And that one was fixed...

Target wingspan set to 11 meters for a spit, distance 500m according to new "fixed" distance indicator. Spit is 500 meters away. Crosshair is wrong/ too big. IIrc the current 500 meters setting was 300 on the old scale, which will be more fitting.

I cant seem to open you track file for some reason. Usually mw50 is in OFF position per default. The Swith appears to be in the middle. ON is to the front. The rear tank light flashing is usually because you pull negative g / do a nose over once your press "play" and start in the air.

Please post tracks. So far i didnt have had engine failures in the same way it was before. Usually mine broke even cruising at 2500 and then increasing throttle. Combat overheat can happen if you fly below 300kph at full power for too long.

no big deviation until roughly 1ooo meters then it starts to run away looks right on other planes the needle for the 100meters seems right throughout +/- the qnh deviation. the disc for the km is off. at 1000 per info bar the 100m needle points right down, which is correct. the disc has already passed the 1k mark. at 1300 meters the altimeter reads 2300 meters. 100m needs is correct. disc off. at 2000 it reads 3000. at 2500 it reads 3500. at 300 it reads 4000. the higher you go the weirder the readings. at 5000 per info bar, the 100m reads correct but disc reads nearly 7 k. also reported via discord https://discord.com/channels/542985647502393346/1301815770799542272/1303081286688047169 wrong altimeter.trk

Yea same with the dora while shes getting her altimeter fixed

Correct. The altimeter is wonked. At 2k youre at 2,5 indicated. At 3 shes at 4. And at 6 shes 8k indicated.... Compare infobar and altimeter. It increases by a different factor. Anton and k4 dont seem to be affected. Ive already reported this but couldnt make a track with comparison of different units.

There is a page that would take your monitor size and distance from eyes into account to calculate the correct fov. I had the link somewhere....

It was there. Primer.

Ran tests with said flak. Had 8 flak batteries as per preset placed on the map and 36 c47s. before the latest patch it turned into a slide show. Its back to normal again regarding the flak. They also actively engage again and also at night. Unfortunately theres more to fix....

@BIGNEWY ran latest patch, started with high 100+ fps and over the course of ~2hrs it dropped to 50 40 fps. rather low player count 6 7 players some ai. not much https://1drv.ms/u/c/153140320d8bd7a3/EeNV99xwNNZPgep8ycUiGOsBGuqeMwwXnKM-0el_218fbg?e=aBqJ5T trackfile DxDiag.txt dcs.log

Correct. If you have the 4*250kg bombs, and jettison the "quad" rack (the main ec504 rack cant be jettisoned), you can fire any of the rockets. Not possible if you have the single 500kg bomb attached. Works on the anton tho. Cant say if correct or bug, id say the latter tho. Cant see why it shouldnt be wired the same as in the anton. So far ive only seen only this or that configurations. Either Bombs, (clusters mainly) or the small r4m rockets.

I just said it works properly on maps that have ils. Try it yourself.

Yes you can make units emit a radio signal that can be picked up by the fug. However only the distance needle moves not azimuth hence useless. It works on maps that have ILS systems installed. Same for the systems on the p51.

Its the same unit. @NineLine The flak units in generally do not really engane incoming fighters, but only after theyve passed. Also, theyre very sensitve to time ... they wont fire before 4 or 5 am.. where they did before.. was pretty fun for night missions and searchlights.. This can be reproduced on the fly really...

yes. i can get decent rumble. I dont have any other devices to compare. You can adjust sliders for the stuff. Eventually the 1187 driver changed stuff. 1171 had decent effects but also some bugs when it would rumble when nothing actually happend. Apparently the lua throws some errors so.. My settings below. You can also test each of the motors by clicking the white dots on the left side of that screen. Old version had some discrepancies between MP and SP behaviour. Eg SP there was no effect for gunfire. Stalls worked or lowering gear gave good effect tho.

Yup. Newest version works again aswell, tho it feels 1171 was bit better? now i kinda get a steady buzz throughout unless i pull slight neg g and not all telemetry is transported it feels.

i still have a previous version if you should need it. he pad itself works with testing, but not with dcs. as said, the 1.1.8.6 version doesnt work with dcs for whatever reason. prior versions work fine.

if its and LOD issue because of some unoptimized LOD models, the LOD slider should help right? And optimizing models on your part.