Smokin Hole

Another missing in this list is X-Plane 10. It's not stunning like Outera above but it's fast, capable of very long draw distances without bogging things down. And in the hands of 3-rd party modders, it looks better than Rise of Flight and certainly better than DCS (though maybe not Nevada). I've been flying the (free) MD-500 around the (free) modded Seattle and have been mostly blown away. The new Oliver Perry is impressive too.

Outera. WOW! Time for Sims to Leave the Stone Age This from the X-Plane 10 blog. Unfortunately it's not part of X-Plane either.

QNH is the real barometric setting. QFE is the setting that will result in 0 altitude on the ground (so its field-specific). QNE is 29.92.

As a fan of DCS this breaks my heart to hear. Enjoy the P-51! I certainly will try to. But the mere suggestion of adding it to the modern battlefield makes a mockery of all that DSC has meant. THIS is what i meant when I said that I hope the products are separate--they should be online incompatable. REMEMBER when I suggested a common laser code between the Ka50 and the WH? I got my arse handed to me by some beta testers. EVEN THAT little suggestion--to sacrifice a teeny bit of reality for playability--bespoiled the marriage to realism that was the backbone of DCS. But mixing the P-51 in is COOL, fun, creative, etc!?

Sometimes the reverse is also true. I remember this one old grumudgeon who would swing his slooow Schweitzer violently to the side of the box in attempt to steer me, his tow pilot, where he wished to go. He, one, had no concept of how on the edge of control I was in that Maule with a notch of flaps trying to drag his glider around at his desired tow speed of 55 knots. And, two, he had little appreciation that his tow pilot has the gentleness of touch to understand more subtle hints that he desires a turn. This guy just assumed (and said as much) that anyone who flies with a throttle appreciates only brute force. ...I really miss that Maule.

Well sixty-three pages in three days. If you just count the "definately yes" and the "I-hate-the-idea-but-will-grudgingly-take-another-crack-hit" as buyers, then I think ED will make some money. Smokin' Hole proven wrong once again:badmood:...

How about an anouncement like this: "...We at Eagle Dynamics have been very fortunate to have the enduring backing of The Fighter Collection (TFC). It has been and will continue to be a great relationship. But until now, the products that ED offered to aviation fans the world over have had very little to do with the great work of TFC maintaining and flying some of the great classics of WWII. This year that will change. As a small token of our recognition TFC's steadfast support, we are offering something to their fans, and hopefully to a few of ours: DCS P-51. ..." Actually I don't know if the above is completely true. But the backlash that ED is seeing on this thread is mostly due to how this product was intruduced. Showing pictures of the A-10 flying alongside the P-51 is pretty. I enjoy fly-bys like that at airshows. But from the perspective of a DCS "study-sim" fan, its also a little disturbing. ED might say, "relax, we are only showing that the Legend model will be every bit as great as the Modern model by showing the two together." Well, usually people like me are constantly clamouring to have ED products merged together. But this is one I would like to see separated. I will buy it and enjoy the two new desktop icons to sit alondside the eight I have already. I just hope you understand that this isn't just jet fans dissing props. Its DCS fans who have bought into the military study-sim concept sold to us by ED. P-51, as currently described, doesn't fit into that standard.

Someone mentioned above the essence of my concern but I lost the post so I will restate it: When you buy Rise of Flight or Cliffs of Dover you are getting some assurance of a combat environment in which to fly these COMBAT planes. I haven't seen any such assurances with Mustang. Had ED announced the Ka50 as a module with no combat world to fly it in, only the truly helicopter-curious would have bought it. The same is true of WH. There is a huge catalogue of threats and allies that were included with that sim to provide the player with a logical world in which to fly his A-10. There is no promise of any of this with Mustang. Once you learn to start the thing, manage the engine and appreciate the torque, you are left with what? H2H with other P-51s? It will be fun but...jeeze, I don't know. Its the oddest simulator announcement in my 30 year addiction to virtual flying.

I hope that is true but I am fairly certain that it is not. The people who are simply curious about the handling of a classic fighter have FSX and X-Plane. Add-ons for these sims are sufficient for most people. I don't doubt that ED can make a very beautiful and well-representative P-51 model. But it's been done. And whatever improvements ED brings to the FM over the existing add-ons will be subtle to the point that only a few will care. The IL2 and RoF crowd are interested in combat and history. Unless there are surprises hidden under this announcement I see immediate potential for none of either. Therefore I see little potential for this to be an entry drug to bring more fans to the modern study sims we all fly. PS: I WILL buy it. It's a great way to support TFS and their enduring support of ED. (English terrain around Duxford would be nice.)

But what are we going to do with the thing? And its really not THAT hard to fly. No, I haven't flown one but I have flown with a few people who have and they describe the P-51 as an honest, stable plane with fairly predictable landing qualities--just be careful of the brakes. Depending on the price, I'll probably buy the thing because I am simply a flight sim sucker. But I swear if see mustangs flying AFAC online, ED can take the high fidelity study-sim selling point and pour it down the sink.

Well I'll be a monkey arse! I swear I have never seen that mixer before. I am new to Windows 7 and didn't even know that there was app-specific settings. Anyway, that did it! Thanks!

Yes I have done a search and yes I have covered what I could from the FC2 sound discussion mentioned in a thread on this page. My problem is that I have zero sound in the BS cockpit. This problem began about 2 weeks ago and well after weeks without issues since 1.1.1.1. GUI sound (clicks and music) are fine. The 3D sounds are not weak. They are non-existant. No sounds: engine, rotor, cockpit clicks, rounds striking the heli--no sounds are heard. All sliders are at 100%. No modifications to any config files have ever been made. A10 1.1.1.1 works fine. This is the sound file and the zeros seem suspect to me. Actually everything in LUA-script seems suspect to me. Which is why I don't wish to fiddle with it without some confirmation that it is incorrect. P.S., I did "fiddle" with it by changing the 0 values to 5. No change.

...

Yskonin, Your 737 has a vent system too. In the form of a small tank OB of the mains. In addition to that there are vent ports if the vent tanks are overfilled. Positive pressure is provided by NACA vents, not bleed air.

They really DO love us!* Congrats, ED! *well, you

What's interesting is how this community tends to ignore the NATO terminology in favor of the Russian. Thus, "shilka", "Strela", "Tunguska", "Buk", etc. I think that's a good thing.

But before you even think of joining a squad try several on comms. Fly with them and make sure that you're a good fit. Some squads are serious and regimented, others relaxed. Don't even mention a desire to join a first. Just fly, learn and have fun.

I just hit the "HIGH" button in graphics options as the OP requested. 2500 x 1440.

a)20 b)20 c)20 d)20 no kidding.

Hello all, I've noticed that get considerably better performance with WH 1.1.1.1 compared to BS2. I run mostly high settings, HDR, 512 TGP/Skhval, all at 2560 x 1440. Settings are identical for both games, right down to shrub draw distance. If I run the same mission, Battle 2, the performance is similar with a slight edge to the WH every time. But its in multiplayer with lots of active units that I notice the biggest difference. I can jump from the A-10 to the 'Shark and take a noticeable hit when at the same altitide. I know performance changes minute by minute but this basic impression has held true for every swith from the helicopter to the hog and back. Other players online don't complain so I wonder what I might be doing wrong. I have never opened any config files for either game. Everything is stock. Thanks in advance for any help.

Well let's state exactly what happened. Minutes after 1.023 was released players flying online noticed flying trees, floating hangars and flashing towns. A cynic might say that a "really good software team" would have allowed such a buggy release in the first place. I am no cynic and I really do think 777 have been putting out an ever improving and impressive product. But if the implication is that ED might have something positive to learn from this then I believe the implication to be wrong. They, ED and 777, are both fortunate in their teams.

"No Video"

Please ED, for the love of all that's convenient and reasonable, merge these products onto a single opening GUI and single multiplayer browser. If we are expected to step out of our WH to and into a F15C to fill a CAP deficiency on our team, then shutting down one game to start another is an awkward series of hoop-jumping for such an otherwise sophisticated product.

Um, is my memory failing me or am I wrong in my recollection of a thread where you stated there really isn't a notch for a helicopter because it has rotors spinning furiously regardless of the velocity of the fuselage?

There is no way to hide AND FIGHT. If I understand GG correctly the radar is going to be improved. I just don't see how CAS types can survive in an environment where their side does not enjoy complete air superiority. But there is only one way to find out. And we will.