Skewgear

The 109K-4 is a substantially better aircraft in every respect except turn performance. If it has MW50 you cannot outrun it at any altitude. If it doesn't, you have the band from 18.5k-21,000ft, and even then your speed advantage is minimal. Keep your energy up, learn to manoeuvre smoothly and without jerking the stick so you don't bleed unnecessary energy, keep the ball centred. Avoid following 109s in extended dives, a Spitfire above a bandit has many more options than at the same altitude or below.

Maybe someone could email Avspecs and ask how the throttle cables and quadrant are set up on the real thing? From memory, the Merlin 60 series doesn't have any non-linearisation features for throttle response (i.e. cable movement and action at the carburettor is directly proportional to quadrant input). I'll have a look through the Merlin 24 manual in a bit.

DCS collects and records all that. On 4YA Project Overlord we just choose not to display it. Other server operators probably differ.

Wrong. The Project Overlord stats are automatically updated from the custom-built 4YA stats system every hour. As the ingame message displayed to you every time you connect to the server says, if you type $stats into the DCS in-game chat you can track your score in real time. We have disabled the in-game stats display on Project Overlord for two reasons: 1. It was frequently wrong. DCS' internal events system is buggy. Kills are not registered correctly, or sometimes at all. The same goes for bailouts and crashes. Our stats system tries to address that by interpolating outcomes from linked events. So, if you disconnect within 15 mins of taking a hit and without having landed, we record a death against you and a kill for the player who fired the last shot that hit you, because in those circumstances you have likely disconnected in mid air to try and evade a death stat. 2. The in-game stats display encouraged mobbing of successful players. We didn't want that on our milsim server. The in-game stats display is enabled on our WW2 PVE training server, which also has a dedicated PVP area. Please ask me if you have any further questions about how player statistics work on the 4YA WW2 servers.

I'd expect their aircraft is much lighter than a wartime one. But the DCS Mossie is also on the bottom of the observed variation in speeds from Mosquito FB.VI test flights. I have thought for a while, though, that our Mossie is under powered. Single engine flight is borderline dangerous even at cruising speeds, whereas one modern Mossie operator cheerfully makes cockpit videos showing one engine shut down and feathered in flight.

I've no idea. I don't fly jets.

The original limits were set to prolong engine time before overhaul (TBO) rather than avoiding catastrophic failure. You won't kill it in DCS as our aircraft are all factory fresh for their 2 hours in existence.

There's plenty enough data available on all those types from the various national archives, if you know where to look. The key thing is finding and paying developers to build and maintain those addons... ED has made it clear, without stating it explicitly, that there will be no further WW2 development by them. The Mosquito remains in early access 4 years after release. There has been no concrete information about the promised Pacific theatre. Whatever they’ve announced since the release of the Mosquito appears to be marketing hype instead of products. With no third party ever having delivered a WW2 add-on aircraft - even the unofficial Lancaster mod appears to be nothing more than a private plaything that will never be released but gives its creators social status via screenshots and videos - the idea of anyone delivering new DCS WW2 content is fantasy at this point. Accept what we have. Enjoy it, it's great despite some flaws. But the game is finished.

The problem highlighted in this thread wasn't fixed. There was a flickering effect in VR that was fixed. Give it another 4-5 months and this might actually be fixed. Seeing as we told ED during beta testing that the canopy update was bugged, and they ignored the testing reports to release it anyway, I wouldn't expect this bug to be fixed soon or potentially at all.

This is a video of Kermit Weeks sitting in his P-51C's cockpit while a noisy pre-oiling pump runs. That's a relatively common mod to Merlin-engined warbirds that are flown infrequently but is neither compulsory nor a factory fitting. It does not address anything you've claimed about how the Merlin V-1650 works. Show the sources for these claims of yours, please:

Where on earth do you get all this nonsense? Nearly every single thing you have posted above, except for oil pressures, is wrong. Show your sources, please.

Obviously the OP was trolling (very well, judging by all the bites) and this entire thread is years old... but as it's been resurrected, it's worth noting that every single piece of advice in the above post is wrong and most will kill your Spitfire's engine. Don't leave the supercharger in auto. Select MS after your pre-take-off power checks (you do carry those out, don't you...). When you've climbed to the point where full throttle no longer gives you +8lbs boost, throttle back to +6 and select FS. The boost will jump to +10lbs or so. If you leave the switch in FS from takeoff you jump in an instant from ~7lbs to maximum boost, +18lbs. This stresses the engine and contributes to 'mystery' failures later during the flight. 2850rpm is climb/combat RPM, not max continuous. 2650rpm is the setting in the pilot's notes for max continuous. For landing select 3000rpm, not 2500. You want max power available from the propeller for a go-around which is why you select fully fine pitch. It also helps decelerate the aeroplane with the throttle very low or closed. You can fly with any sensible combination of boost and RPM at any speed. 200mph has no significance. +4lbs/1850rpm is a sensible boost limit to observe at the lowest RPM. When increasing power to combat settings, select RPM first, then boost. Doing it the other way around as suggested above overboosts the engine and causes it to fail. Disable auto rudder. It makes things worse. (in fairness 100mph over the threshold is right)

You've ignored the bold text in my previous post because it doesn't say what you want it to say. I'm being nice to you because these forums are full of angry weirdos shouting at each other while missing the point and I think it's important to not do that, but you haven't understood that the SFM produces the same flight envelope as the various later incarnations of the flight model, per the very same link you posted. These later models are designed for greater fidelity from the player/client point of view when it comes to things such as accelerated stalls, snap rolls and other things on the edge of the flight envelope that you'll only ever notice from being in the cockpit at the controls. The SFM was the player flight model for many years and produces the same flight parameters (lift, drag, stall speed, max AOA etc) as the later flight models. In effect you're fighting against the same thing, whether it judders in ground effect or not.

@NineLine could this ammo belt layout be included in the Fw190A? While they're tweaking the canopy per other posts

After reading the first and second sentences as indicated, I read the third, fourth, and then the fifth from the same page: DCS AI fly a lightly slimmed-down version of the SFM. They don't have the full modelling of certain reactions to turbulence or the full ground physics modelling. Incidentally, short-period oscillations refers to very short-duration motions (a second or so) resulting from gusts, microbursts etc. Not really relevant for AI, as should be obvious. https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/august/pilot/technique-aircraft-control