Skewgear

Which white mark do you mean? Do you have a picture, video or short track file? I was able to use the compass earlier this week as intended so I think it's probably OK, but worth a look.

Our testers for Project Overlord reckon all is back to normal based on their controlled experiments. We think it's stabilised enough to put bombers back into our missions, which we've had to remove since July.

Clearly this playback is bugged, neither Mosquito smashed its tailwheel into the runway and burst the tyre on touchdown. Reported. Beautiful thing to see.

Known bug with the AA director units (Kdo40 for Germany/Third Reich and DRT for UK/US). Should hopefully be fixed whenever the next major DCS update is published.

As belated closure, this was fixed quite a while ago. Now 85 gallons means 85 gallons! It should also have been fixed for all other DCS warbirds, as the fuel weight/density figure was previously set on a per-module basis but has since been tied to a single global figure.

The Spitfire is challenging to land without bouncing. This thread is well worth reading and applying in-game. Know your approach airspeed - 100mph in-game is about right, even though the original pilots' notes say 95mph is right for the full width wings. When you flare, know the pitch attitude you are trying to set and hold it there once reached. If you're bouncing, typically you're approaching too slowly and making large control inputs right before touchdown. Set it up a couple of miles out, gear as you pass 160mph while slowing down, flaps once you've re trimmed, re trim again, pitch to maintain 100mph and use throttle to adjust rate of descent. Start to flare as you see the runway threshold flash past in your peripheral vision, pitch up to select the landing attitude and hold it there for a three-pointer. Landing attitude is tail low, tailwheel about a foot off the runway if both mains are down.

I'm tearing my hair out here trying to figure out what, if anything, can be salvaged from the destruction of DCS 2.9.7.59263. So far I know that AI bombers spawned by the method we've used for years are no longer viable; there's a memory leak somewhere in the core game that saps performance and frame rates out of it over time like cutting a vein; and *somewhere*, one of the WW2 Asset Pack units in combination with another, in a way we've used harmoniously together for years, is directly harming server side performance. This is not a WW2 problem, this is a core game problem. I'd rather retire Project Overlord than turn it into an air spawn, air quake arena because that's the only scenario DCS can reliably support any more.

There is a full range of damage effects modelled, it's just that sitting 150yds away at dead 6 before opening fire, as the vast majority of players do, means you'll only see a few of them! Try this: get in a Spitfire, go find a player in an Fw190, and bounce him from a few thousand feet above and starting no more than a quarter of a mile behind if you're in trail. If you aim it right you'll deal visible catastrophic damage to the engine and blast the cover off the nose cannon bay. Find an Me109 and stalk him until you're exactly 250yds behind. Open fire. A solid 1.5-2 second burst at gun harmonisation range means the tail will fall off. Take a German fighter and in single player try attacking the front of a B-17 and side slashing attacks. You'll see very large chunks fall off including the entire tail fin and the nose plexiglass, if you hit it right. You can also blast engines partly off their mountings. Attack a Spitfire from dead 6 with the Me109K's 30mm cannon only. You can shoot away the tail surfaces, totally separating rudder and elevators from the aircraft. Aim for the left radiator and you'll likely puncture the oil cooler, setting off an inevitable engine seizure within 2-3 minutes. Attack a P-51 head on with an Fw190 and you’ll utterly ruin the engine and its associated fuel, oil and cooling systems, and smash the canopy while splattering it in oil. Do it from above or below and you blast holes through the wings. This is all stuff I've seen while moderating Project Overlord from the admin-only game master slot which has all views enabled. What I also see is that 95% of players will manoeuvre until they're in pure pursuit/dead 6, close well within gun harmonisation range, and then wonder why all their shots hit the target's wings. Something I think has been lost over the decades is that WW2 fighter pilots were trained to avoid attacks from dead six, certainly not in the RAF from mid-war onwards anyway. If you adopt the RAF method of deliberately lining up deflection shots from 10-30 degrees out, suddenly everything starts looking a lot more like gun camera films - and your kill ratio goes up too!

I also thought this until I started digging into it. The E wing internal layout snd external detailing was different from the C wing we have now. Creating that in DCS means a new X Ray damage model and a new 3D graphic model plus a new 3D damage model. The wing layout is different which means the guns and ammo boxes are in different places. In turn this means changes to the flight model. The original Spitfire manuals give the weight and balance changes for different armament fits. Finally, a new gyro gunsight means a new cockpit 3D model, including coding work to integrate the sight and its new controls with the new 3D model. You end up creating a whole new aeroplane with substantial amounts of work. Sure, the starting points are there for some of it, but it's substantially more work than retrofitting the real thing would have been.

We've had to disable MIST and everything reliant on MIST as it seems to have been broken thanks to the last DCS update.

A) The Mustang is a tail dragger with good brakes. You slam the brakes on full, you're going to tip it on its nose. B) Throttle fully closed is not "idle". For Merlin engines you select 1,000-1,200rpm on the ground. You're getting backfiring because you've fully closed the throttle to around half that value. The engine is not designed to be run for extended periods of time with the throttle lever fully closed.

On this, Rucqueville ALG didn't exist. I think Ugra intended it as a portmanteau of Martragny and Camilly-Le Fresne. The latter was shelled by artillery fairly regularly in June according to the resident Canadian wing's ORB, including on occasions where C-47 Dakotas were seen to be landing. Similarly, the RAF and RCAF units at Beny sur Mer reported being mortared by the Luftwaffe garrison of Douvres radar station, barely a mile away, until that was assaulted and cleared on 17th June. I could bang on about this stuff for ages, there's a lot to be learnt from the old unit diaries once you start reading them. Fire and explosion at captured German ammo bunkers near Longues, Canadian officers chasing each other around Caen on horseback, the shooting down of an Fw190A with just 5 rounds from a Bofors, the German aircraft carrier reported west of Granville....

All of the above, basically. By June 1944 France had no Luftwaffe presence worth speaking of west of Dreux or north of Chartres. Caen-Carpiquet was a major Alied bombing target for the obvious reason during the invasion buildup. It wasn't used at all in June, really, other than as a bloody battlefield between the Canadians and the Panzer division holding the city. On Project Overlord we include Carpiquet in the 3rd June cross Channel mission as that one's a bit more experimental/gameplay focused than the rest of our milsim missions. Orders of battle and locations are easy to verify for the RAF, moderately so for the USAAC and pretty damn hard for the Luftwaffe unless you speak German and/or have the right reference books. @Night Owl compiled a very handy list of what went where and on what dates for PO mission design use. Our Allied squadron placement is determined by the Angels Eight orders of battle in combination with the RAF squadron histories on historyofwar.org. We have a research archive of about 120 RAF Operational Record Books for verifying details such as bort codes (RAF aircraft code letters and airframe serial numbers - yes, each and every one is historically accurate to the date of the mission) and target locations. Shores and Thomas' seminal Second Tactical Air Force volumes 1 and 2 is good for verifying air combat details and losses, but not so much for the ground strike war. There are occasional errors in the below links, as the original tables were compiled from a variety of sources about 20 years ago. https://www.projectoverlord.co.uk/history/second-tactical-air-force-order-of-battle/ https://www.projectoverlord.co.uk/history/ninth-tactical-air-force-order-of-battle/

https://digitalarchive.2ndair.org.uk/digitalarchive/ImageBrowser?tx=Military training&catNum=mc_371-575-9#mc_371-575-9x001#mc_371-575-9x001

I'm not entirely sure our sandbox concept would work if the map got any bigger. It only works at the moment because (like the Luftwaffe back in the day) we mostly ignore France from north of Beauvais upwards. Almost all the British airfields are empty as well, whereas they would need populating and AAA defences added accordingly. About 60% of the map is simply unused on Project Overlord; a further 15% is only ever flown over by Axis pilots. Although all the DCS warbirds are capable of making long flights over the current map, only three playable aircraft (P-51, P-47 and Mosquito) have the range to cross the whole thing end to end and come back home again. A London-Paris-London sortie is doable in ~3 hours but realistically, how many of us have the time for that? Better that Ugra refines the area we have already instead of making it bigger, from my point of view.

The RAF used similar equipment, known as a Dalton Computor and based on the same principles as the E-6B, Dalton being the inventor of the latter. For an example see: https://www.historicflyingclothing.com/en-GB/ww2-raf-personal-equipment/raf-navigational-computer-mk-iiid-/prod_20285 Edit to add - Dalton invented the E-6B before the US' entry into WWII, having died in 1941. The E-6B is so named because that was its original US Navy stores reference code.

Repairing your aeroplane in multiplayer resets all the cumulative damage from over-stressing it by exceeding Vne and then exceeding sensible G tolerances when pulling out of overspeed dives. Read the manual, follow the limits in it. There is no grand conspiracy from ED to make your Spitfire fall apart.

The Spitfire IX pilot's notes give never-exceed speed as 450mph IAS. You've oversped it and then applied too much load factor pulling out of the dive.

I run one of them. Numbers are not down. In fact we're adding more Mossie slots because at peak times demand outstrips supply.

I organised a 6-ship raid the other night. Said to the squadron, "how about we take up a flight of Mossies tonight and smash something?" They said yes, so we did. For all that we really want to see the gear bugs fixed, I don't think people are abandoning Mosquitoes just yet.

... you know Rochester is not modelled as an actual airfield on the Channel Map, don't you... ... as far as the game engine is concerned you've just landed in a field!

The point is that in reality the landing technique is to wheel it on and lower the tailwheel. You cannot do that with the DCS Mosquito - you can't fly it realistically - because of the bugs with the too-delicate tailwheel and that bizarre tail-down swing as soon as the main wheels touch, as Lixma's video illustrates well. Note that there's no stick-back input on the elevators at all.

Your local settings will make no difference on 4YA Project Overlord, our mission file enforces random failures off. Multiplayer server settings override local client settings, otherwise you'd have external views available. Pitot heating is a warbird-wide bug. We need to collect easily reproduced track files under test conditions so ED devs can hunt for the underlying cause. As far as I know it's modelled but incorrectly - there is heating but it won't overcome cold weather conditions in the sim.

Flaming Cliffs simplifies complex aircraft systems so time-poor players can use them without having to go through a virtual type rating course, in effect. What about our warbirds is so complex that it needs a simplified version? Once you've mastered engine start and ground handling, you've got about 90% of it.

Ca somebody please be so kind as to record a video of a Mosquito landing that shows the main gear compression, and capture the track file, and upload both here together? That helps the fault finding process. If the root of the bug is that the gear is simply too stiff and unyielding, that can be reported internally.