Zimmerdylan

Wow guys.....This is pretty amazing. 3 years ago I weighed 220 lbs. I'm only 5'7" so that's kind of big. I had 3 herniated disks in my back that hurt constantly from bailing hay as a teen, I had pre arthritic conditions in both of my hands, swollen Hemeroids, and several other aging type issues. I was pretty dumbfounded as I was eating healthy (or so I thought), I exercised regularly. and I'm only 53. I thought that I was just getting old. At some point, I just got disgusted with my physical appearance. I went to talk with a doctor to see if there were anything I could do. Again, I was eating healthy, and I ran 5 miles a day. Yet I was still gaining weight. Thankfully, I found just the person who would help me and change my life completely. Long story short, 3 years later with no simple sugars, processed foods, and NO STARCH unless it's in a natural grain, I have maintained 180 lbs easily, my back is great! Very little pain. Hemeroids are completely gone. No sign of them at all. My hands and joints are pain and swelling free, and my life is so much different. The food industry is as bad as the big tobacco guys so far as I am concerned. After doing a ton of research I have learned that most of what we eat and is advertised as "healthy" isn't healthy at all. Most of it is harmful. The way it was put to me by a doctor: "Food companies make stuff.......stuff that happens to be edible. It's not "food" by any means. They have to add sugars and chemicals to it just to make it taste like food. But it's just edible stuff." And that's the truth. I thought that eating natural was a hippy fad. If it is.......call me a hippy. I learned.

That's kind of funny, and accurate IMO. Too many guys spend too much time watching the History Channel where all American designed machines are far superior to the enemy stuff. The truth was that the 109 would have easily won WWII for the Germans had they had the leadership, and trained pilots. The P-51 was not the end all of aircraft. The 109 was a very capable fighter plane. More so than the P-51 in the opinions of those who flew them. Watch this full video, it tells it like it is. Reality comes crashing in!!!!!!!

OK....Cool, thanks a lot!

Hey guys, I cannot seem to get my flaps to completely close. I try it manually using the lever in the cockpit, I use LShift+F ,LCtrl+F, and I assigned them to my HOTAS but nothing I do seems to make em move at all. Is there something that I am missing?:joystick::joystick:

Yes....I just purchased this module a few minutes ago. I'm eagerly awaiting my first flight. I have only heard good things about this plane.

I would agree.......

What????

Wow!!!Friggin insane flick!!! have a look. Great graphics and the fighting is insane.

And as we all have learned, this is a very common phenomena here. I speculate on nothing that's to be released any more. In fact.....I just forget about it until it's actually released. It's the best way to get from one release to the next. :doh:

After sifting through a bunch of photos on the internet. I see some pix of these. I never saw anything like this while I was in though. Always shoulder stock on the choppers I flew in. But at least now I know they actually exist. Thanks for pointing it out to me guys.

OK......I have flown in many a Huey in my day. Back in the early 1980's I probably flew 2 times a week, or at the very least, once every couple of weeks. But that was over 30 years ago. But in all those years, I never remembered an M-60 that had handles and a lever. It's kind of like our Huey has a bastardized door gun that's half Browning .50 cal. and half M-60. I just wish it had the punch of the .50....... This has always been something that I noticed but never thought to ask about until just now. Is the DCS M-60 like this because it would be much more complicated to model the gunner in the shoulder posture? Just curious. :dunno:

I could go to another popular flight sim that I own and have a simplified P-47. Yet I don't. SO my answer would have to be yes. Having already purchased the simpler P-51, Spitfire, and ME109 from another sim company, I don't think I would be apt to want to own another. No matter who made it. Sorry.......just bores me to tears. :joystick:

The urban areas like downtown Las Vegas, Parump, and the other towns are generic and as was stated by Sith, many major landmarks aside, it's just generic flight sim type scenery. Although the new Vegas Strip is there, the older areas like Freemont Street (Where all the old rat pack flicks were filmed) is not there. But all in all, it's probably the best rendition of Vegas I have seen in a flight sim. I purchased a Vegas map from another sim and god I hate to even go there after flying the DCS map. I just flew into and out of Vegas (the real Vegas) last week as I do pretty regularly and I happened to notice some of the smaller populated areas that DCS seems to have managed to place in there pretty nicely. The desert areas look really good and pretty much like a desert looks from 10,000 feet and above. And as a whole (especially when set to late day) the desert makes the map IMO. All in all I really enjoy the Vegas map and since I don't spend tons of time looking for flaws in it as I know it can never be perfect, I find it quite easy to imagine that I'm flying over Vegas. And as another poster said, the closer you get, the less believable it is. But that's just flight sims in general. The only thing I kind of notice and that bugs me once in a while is the silly names they have for the casinos, and the lack of realistic show ads around town. It can really bug me once in a while. When I and others asked about this issue in the very beginning, ED just sighted copyright issues. And they also made it clear after being badgered by nitpickers over a time that this is just an imaginary rendition of Vegas and not actually Las Vegas. So I'm guessing it's kind of a touchy subject with ED. To our defense, in all of the other versions of Vegas for sims that I have, all of the names are accurate and the signage is also pretty darn close. So I fail to understand ED's reasoning. But It's really not that big of a deal any more. I enjoy it because it's a very nice, well detailed map.

Very cool.....Thanks!!!

Really? I own several of those simplified Flaming Cliffs planes and I just don't enjoy them. I have flown the F-15 only a handful of times and the SU-25 I have flown only once in 7 or 8 years. They just don't do it for me. I don't even have any controls mapped to any of them because I never touch em. I also kind of feel that the WWII planes are so simple to begin with that there isn't all that much to simplify. I don't think that the flight models are any different in the Flaming Cliffs planes so if this is the case, the actual flying of the WWII planes is the only really challenging part of flying them. Since the flight model would be the same. It seems kind of silly to just simplify the easiest part of the WWII modules. And......like another poster here. I have IL-2,and Rise of flight. I find them to be boring and I only fly them when I'm more or less just joking around. I never take either seriously. And I certainly never invest any money in any of their AC. I cannot imagine that I would purchase any simplified AC from DCS either. I wouldn't matter how much I like them. I've gotten to the point where I only purchase planes or modules that I would actually be interested in flying. Just My opinion but I can't see any good reason behind it.

I'm going to use some fake words to describe this thread. I have never seen a deader horse beaten harder or more deader. Guys this is thread # one million, six hundred trillion about the under powered Mustang. We all get it. we got it at thread number one thousand three. The rest were all just carbon copy dribble. It is quite obvious that this issue isn't going to change. My god.............A dead horse is a dead horse.

Ahhh yes! The first time flying the Mustang! I remember it well, and I remember thinking exactly what the OP must be thinking right now. I cannot really add much to the advice already offered to you, but I can offer you comfort in the fact that you are not the only one to ever suffer this feeling. When I started flying the P-51, I was banned from the forums due to my attitude toward it and DCS at that point. After study, practice, and a lot of broken planes, I realized that most of the issue was that I was expecting DCS planes to fly like XPlanes. That just isn't gonna happen here. The truth is that DCS has the flight model pretty accurately done and most other sims do not. You just have to get use to the flight model and learn to understand it's rules. I have had real world pilots sit with me and watch me fly this sim. They were all pretty impressed at the accuracy of DCS. Although I have to be honest and confess that I have never had a P-51 pilot sit with me, I have had 2 A-10 pilots, a Hawk pilot, 2 Huey pilots, and 2 guys who flew with P-51 pilots and were pilots themselves. If you can't trust that much experience then who can you trust? When I first flew the P-51 in DCS I could barely keep it steady and level because I expected the flight model that I had flown in the other sims that let me pretty much do whatever I wanted within reason. When I started the DCS P-51 I could not for the life of me do much more than fly the damn thing. Now I fly air to air combat and win against AI and other players 2/3 rds of the time. Just hang out on the forums, practice, learn the plane, and give it time. You'll be an ace in no time. I do have a question for the OP though. You say that the P-51 is impossible to fly. But many people cannot even get the 109, or the Spitfire off the ground much less fly them in the beginning. I'm finding it pretty astounding that you are having a hard time with the P-51 as it's the easiest of the WWII modules to deal with, yet the harder planes aren't an issue for you. Maybe I'm crazy but I fly all 4 of them regularly and the P-51 is the easiest by far.

However.......You can still beat it. Start out fighting it with less than 50% fuel in your Mustang, put the AI skill level at it's lowest, load it up with full fuel, and start with the Dora (was easiest for me anyway). You will still lose several of the battles but will start to feel the edge you have gained. After a short time, the difference in your and the AI's performance through changing settings will start to be apparent. This will give you time during the fights to realize your turning radius, stall speeds, and general abilities as a whole. When you are fighting the AI at it's full capabilities, it gives you absolutely no chance to do anything but run like he!!. Beginners need to be challenged, not beaten to death. As you keep fighting the AI with these settings, you will start winning more than losing. And then you can start to fiddle with the degree of skill the AI has. It takes some time but it works. I started out by getting killed 9 out of 10 fights. I now regularly beat AI aircraft 3/4 of the time. I don't really dogfight much and still have advanced that far.

Yeah.....I can feel the acidy bile forming in the back of my throat every time it gets mentioned.........

Welcome to the party....You are a little late..........Ok, you are a lot late. This issue has been around for quite some time now and has been asked about in several threads. As far as answers.......No one knows. E.D. has yet to say anything about it.

All I can say is that if the P-38 were ever released as a module, I would most likely fly it exclusively. It was hands down my favorite WWII era plane. I don't care how it stacked against the axis planes. The P-47 wasn't anything to write home about in that department either. And yes I am aware that more axis planes were taken out by P-47's than any other allied plane in the war but there were obvious reasons for this. And the P-40 is sure to take a terrible licking from the axis planes when it's released. The p-38's abilities arent what made it so appealing to me. The P-38 was just a cool plane all around. I'll bet that it would be an insane ground pounder in DCS. I am nearing the end of my tinier with DCS because the demand on my machine has pretty much caught up and overtaken it's abilities. As it is, I have to fly with everything almost a minimum settings and I still don't get great frame rates. I don't plan on updating my rig until it dies or gets too outdated. My computer is designed for my work more than for gaming, and since gaming costs me money and work makes me money, it makes no sense to invest until I need to. That's not any time in the near future. But if the P-38 were released as a module through a dependable Dev, I would seriously consider upgrading my system. Alas.....that does not seem to be in the cards any time soon. I should add that the Vaught F4U would probably also prompt me to consider upgrading, and would most likely be an exclusive plane for me. I have cut myself off from purchasing any new DCS stuff due to the technology barrier. I see nothing coming out that would make me want to change that status. It's nothing personal, it's just a practical decision.

Some nice improvements with this update. Mustang got it's Sight screen re-shaded and it's very nice. The German tanks got their DM redone and now they can be taken out much easier. Hawk got it's fixes.....Great! Still some serious issues with it's navigation equipment but at least you can fly at altitude without getting disoriented now. I'm wondering if the P-51 will ever get it's prop back. Any info on why it's the only WWII plane lacking in this detail? I have to admit, I notice that it's not there and it is a little distracting. All in all, from what I was able to mess with today, the update was A-okay! So you see guys......Before you go thinking that any given update isn't up to standard, you have to first play the update because there is always much more to them than get's listed most of the time. And that makes sense given that there are probably literally hundreds of little coding things that get addressed on any given update. Thanks guys! We're getting there.

I'm always on the fence about the Hawk. I want so badly to like this AC but it's been plagued with so many issues. It's really a shame because VEAO has got a lot of trust earning to do as far as I am concerned. I'm not apt to shell out any more money for their modules until I start hearing more positive feedback on their releases. I usually don't pay much attention to stuff like that but in the Hawk's case.....It was pretty much 90% true. On the plus side, it is fun and easy to fly. I just cannot take it very seriously at this point in time. They fixed a few very important issues for 1.5 but those patches have yet to make their way to 2.1. But for now....I would have to side with the above.

Oh.....LOL. Aerobatics Online

Guys: Your servers have never really been very high on the performance end of things but the people who frequent them were always good fliers who get along very well, and the atmosphere is very positive. But since you started running the Normandy server, the actual server performance of both Normandy, and Nevada are just terrible. I spend more time trying to get into the server without major problems, and getting any plane up in the air than I do flying. And once I get airborne, I'm scared to death to do anything other than climb to a safe altitude and just stay there in fear of the 15-30 second lag spikes that plague EVERYONE who flies there. This isn't my rig, or my internet. It's a problem that hinders most everyone who comes to your servers now a days. It's terrible. The problem occurs whenever anyone spawns into a new plane. The server just goes into lag mode for up to 30 secs. I do not know what the issue is, or why it happens. What I do know is that many of the regulars that I use to see there frequently (myself included) can't or won't fly there any more. I'm making this thread in hopes that you will hear my plea and either offer an explanation, or tell me that a fix is in the works. Or possibly both. The spikes are only part of the issues but they are a major factor in my abandoning AO at this point. Today, the server itself reset all of my control options to default. I would get into a plane and all of my settings for any plane I was in were all set to default. But only in the AO server. Other servers were fine, as was single player. As I said earlier, I spend more time trying to get into the server with no major issues than I do flying it. So please.......could you guys look into these issues. Thanks: Tuco