Zimmerdylan

What I meant about shooting others down with malice and worrying about it was kind of implying that I personally don't do this. And that I would be a bit worried if I started to think this way. I would probably give up playing if that were the case. That's just not healthy in any way as far as I am concerned. I cannot speak for others or their attitude about it. I'm pretty sure I don't fly with anyone who carries that attitude. But if what I said evoked some negative feelings, then it's probably best that you spend your money on something that won't make you feel the way you are feeling. So I guess I'm glad I was able to help you in some small way. As far as you thinking people are laughing at you for your opinion on it. I wouldn't worry too much about that. :thumbup:

You won't be shooting American anything. It's all a computer images created by Russian people. Plus....if you are really that freaked out about it, you can set the 190 as an american plane and make the P-51 a Russian plane. I fly the 109 all of the time against the P-51. I never look at it like I am a real German pilot shooting down a real American pilot. It's just an object in a game. Flying different planes against other planes that you are familiar with is a lot of fun. No one here that I know of is shooting anything in anger or with malice. If that were the case, then I would probably worry a little bit. It's all sport and we all are going home at the end of the day safe and happy. :doh:

There should be a sticky posted in every DCS catagory / thread saying: IA cheats, we know it cheats. It has always cheated, and will most likely continue to cheat for the foreseeable future. We apologize for this issue but in the interest of saving your frame rates, and keeping DCS from eating all of your memory, we have overly simplified every known function of all IA aircraft. We sincerely hope that you understand. LOL If I had a penny for every time some poor guy came to the forum and posted of their frustration, anger, angst, and disgust with themselves because the silly AI aircraft rips em a new one every time they go against it, I'd own my own P-51 and wouldn't need flight sims. Sometimes it seems like an hourly occurrence. Sorry CaptJack, it's just the general nature of AI AC. And it's not just in DCS. Many other flight sims suffer the same exact issues. It's a necessary evil that we all have to live with. :dunno:

There's really no hassle. You just start the map and click on the install option that automatically pops up when you start it up. Go watch TV for 15-20 minutes while they all download and install, Copy and paste your input files from the Config folder so that all of your mapping from your HOTAS, pedals or whatever else is preset up so you don't have to go through setting up every plane and you are off and flying. No set up, no issues. It's well worth the half hour or so it takes to get it set up. And half of that time is spent doing something else while the planes load. :thumbup:

Yeah....That explains a lot to me too. Now I get why the NTTR map has so few servers and 1.5 has so many. It seems counter intuitive.

Could someone explain this to me please? I'm sorry but I'm not sure that I understand. You have to buy a second copy of the map to run it on a server????

This is an interesting take on the Nevada map. I'm kind of stumped by it. That's kind of like saying that you cannot imagine WWII planes flying over modern Georgia and shooting one another down, or having modern planes on the new WWII map will be unrealistic. This (or any sim) is all pretty much about imagination. None of the situations that 99% of us fly are anywhere near reality in DCS. When I'm flying the NTTR map, the last thing in my mind is that I'm flying on a training map. And unless I'm actually flying over Las Vegas itself (Still a lot of fun to be flying over an American city) I don't really think at all about the fact that this is NTTR. It could be Iraq, Afghanistan, or Africa for all I know or care. The geography resembles any number of places all over the globe. The same goes for Georgia, and I'm sure Normandy. On NTTR, Vegas is such a small part of the map that you really don't ever have to see it if you don't want to. But you'll want to see it because it looks a lot better than anything on 1.5. I don't go back to 1.5 often because it just doesn't look all that great after flying 2.0. Night and day difference. So my mindset is that it doesn't matter what the location or theme of the map is, It's what you make of it and how you use your imagination. When I set up missions in NTTR, I'm usually thinking along the lines of the middle east. When I'm flying WWII planes and setting up missions, I pick light armor BTR80 or something like that to use as Panzer, Shermans, or Tiger substitutes as there are currently no WWII vehicles in DCS. But these issues never sway me from having a good time or using my imagination to set up scenarios. You work with what you got in this case. And truthfully.....I don't spend a ton of time staring at the object I am shooting, I am usually more focused on lining my plane up on them, or whatever to think too much about what they look like. I'm not saying that you are wrong in your thinking, but in my opinion you are slighting yourself out of a whole lot of enjoyment by closing off NTTR. Could you please elaborate on your comment about purchasing a server copy. I have never run a server and don't know if I understand what you are saying. If I am reading correctly, you are saying that you have to purchase a second copy of the map to run it on a server?

Last I knew they were not. It's pretty much the main reason that I rarely if ever fly the Mi8 any more. This has been such a problem with both the Mi8 and the Huey from the start.

Yes I understand this. But an RC aircraft is a simulation with obvious different physics, as is DCS in the way that it's physics is all coded. All I am saying is that it is very conceivable that Polychop may have accidentally programmed the same general FM as an RC plane. To me.....it's not that far fetched and would be an honest mistake as it is shown to be possible in small scale. They must have fixed it at some point as no one seems to be able to replicate it now. That was all that I was getting at.

There must be some kind of physics that could allow for a helicopter to fly inverted. I'm not saying that it is possible for a full size aircraft to fly that way, but there is a possibility obviously that this phenomena occurred in the initial Polychop FM. I don't find it to be too bazaar. In of course there is the Red Bull Helicopter: https://www.youtube.com/watchv=uYbx5H5e9Es I find it to be pretty amazing. I've actually seen it do more amazing stuff than this at the D.M.A.F.B. airshow in person.

"5) Remove this {How hard can you beat a dead horse?} thread!!!!!" That would be option 6 maybe?

If you are playing SP, it's not easy to kill a spitfire, Dora, or 109 especially. Although I cannot really say that the AI spitfire is harder for sure because I have rarely tried to dogfight the AI Spit. Maybe a few times with the 109. I should add that skill level of the AI, and fuel level can greatly improve your chances of killing them. Take a bit of their brain power and add a few pounds to them and they become a bit more sluggish. But on high skill level with compatible weight, they're a nightmare for any pilot to go up against. For reasons I do not know, the AI P-51 has always been easiest for me to kill, and then the Dora next to that. But I can easily dispatch the AI P-51 with most any WWii planes. As we all know, the FM for the AI is not a good measure of the planes actual performance so you cannot really go off of it. On line however is a different story altogether. I have had guys get on my 6 in any given plane and I just cannot get rid of them. And by the same term, I have done the same to others. I think the on line fights are largely about who has the better skills and who stays calm when they run into a bandit. I have found on several occasions that most other planes can just fly away from me if I'm in the Spitfire when I get them into my sights. But I can easily gun inexperienced fighters down in it by just out turning them and bleeding their energy if they let me. I do not fly the Spit a lot so I am not very experienced at how to really use it effectively. But I am good with the 109 and can keep on a Spitfire long enough to wear him out on line. I make far fewer mistakes in the 109 than I do in the Spitfire. Just my 2 cents........for what it is worth.

Scarecrow84 But, as the Huey shows us (IMO) a good approximation is pretty great. I have to agree on this point. I will take the Huey over the Gazelle for fun flying every time. Many of the points made here about the Gazelle's handling are true and I find them to be a little annoying at times. But I always figure that everything gets worked out in it's time with DCS modules. I know that the Gazelle will eventually be as much a pleasure to fly as the Huey. Does anyone remember the days when people were complaining daily about the terrible flight model in the Huey? And how no one thought that it would ever get straightened out because the module had been out for such and such a time period and it should be fixed by now? Now the Huey gets a lot of praise for it's flight model by most people who fly it. And even though there are still bugs with it (as in all DCS modules), It's a favorite for a lot of people. I think the Gazelle will eventually go the same course. In the meantime, it is fun to fly and play with the weapons systems.

""@Zimmerdylan/BigNewey I disagree in that it is not all subjective. At the point in which I referenced the actual Gazelle flight manual (which I believe nobody has done to date, could be wrong), it became only partially subjective since I pretty much quoted verbatim, certain undisputed facts of the portions of the AP/SAS/FD in how it relates to aircraft handling. In a way partially validates some questionable parts of the FM. "" The point that is being made here (or attempted anyway) is that two completely different people, both claiming to be real world pilots, one of them claiming to be a Gazelle pilot with many hours of flight time have come to two completely different conclusions about the FM of this module. That is not speculation on anyone's part. It's all there in black and white. It is a known part of this debate. It is one of the only known facts. Two guys who are pilots have two completely different takes on this module. This fact has been proven again and again all through the DCS forums. Many people claiming to be pilots have given two completely different accounts of their experience with the DCS flight model. I have personally had Huey and A10 pilots sit here with me and fly DCS and have gotten completely different responses as to the realism of the FM, detail, sound, and appearance. And these are people that I know are pilots. And again, this is a fact that I have seen with my own eyes and ears. Thus......accuracy of the FM is to a large degree, subjective. To say that it is not, is just ignoring what's right there in front of you. Everything else being discussed here can and usually is debated. But the fact that people who have flown these aircraft in real life have always had different opinions as to their accuracy as depicted by DCS is one of the only consistent facts about this whole argument. That's all that I am trying to get across here. By all accounts this makes it....subjective. I'm not arguing whether anyone is right or wrong. TripRodriguez: " I will add that I do find the Gazelle fun to fly after taking some time to start getting used to it. That is not to say it doesn't need to be fixed if it is as incorrect as people are saying." This is one of the best ways to deal with the Gazelle and IMO, the best response in the thread...........

Was just answering your question...........

sub·jec·tive səbˈjektiv/Submit adjective 1. based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. "his views are highly subjective" synonyms: personal, individual, emotional, instinctive, intuitive "a subjective analysis" 2. GRAMMAR relating to or denoting a case of nouns and pronouns used for the subject of a sentence. nounGRAMMAR 1. the subjective case.

I am not advocating one opinion or another here. I'm just driving BIGNEWEY's point home that this thread is probably 99% opinion. There was another fella saying that he was the chopper pilot to end all chopper pilots who flew RL Gazelles in a thread he posted: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=180633&page=5 and in his thread (albeit kind of condescending) he stated that the flight model of the Gazelle was 100% accurate. Is he correct? Is the OP in this thread correct? I don't know. I'll probably never know. But I do know that from everything I have read, BIGNEWEY is certainly correct. It's all subjective. (by subjective I mean opinion, and based on what the person judging it paying attention to.)

Sometimes explaining how I do something isn't very easy even though I can do it quite well. I had similar problems when I first started with the F-5. I had to use the chute every time. Braking seemed like it was a real problem. Nut just like all of the modules in DCS, once you get the jest of it, it becomes second nature. I touch down around 150, but this depends on my load but I never hit the runway slower than that and not very much faster. If you flare right at the end of the runway and you are doing 175 or so, you'll slow to 150 pretty quickly and the plane just sets itself down pretty handily. From there it all about applying wheel breaks steadily, applying more or less on one or the other depending on the sway of the aircraft. I never give it full brakes. Maybe 3/4 or so. If I remember correctly, I have about +10% curve set on my wheel brakes to make it easier to slow down without them grabbing too much. I know that everyone is different and a lot of guys have their way of doing it, but this is what works well for me. Hope I helped just a little bit. :smilewink:

Roll and pitch are +15 curve for me. Rudder is set to around +20 curve because I hate the way the plane jostles around when I need the rudder while lining up on a target, or even just maneuvering the plane. Throttle is also set to +10 because I don't like the instant jerk when I bring it up or down while flying, and especially landing. I set curves for all of the other WWII planes but they're all a bit different so it changes from plane to plane for me. A lot of guys say that they don't use curves at all but I find that hard to believe. Especially in the choppers. I may be a terrible DCS pilot in some people's eyes but I use curves on every module to one degree or another.

LOL....You took the thought right out of my head.

I believe that there is something mentioned about the overheating and damage model of the guns also. I know that it's not in the forum thread that I offered up, but I have read it and I'm kind of certain that it was mentioned by ED. Update: I have to stand corrected on this. I have read through several threads where changes to the P-51 have been discussed and other than the thread I posted for you, any and all talk of change to any noticeable degree presents itself as pure speculation on behalf of the community at large. I do not find any place where ED confirms such changes to be fact. So I'm guessing that we'll have to wait and see if ED puts something out on it down the road. Sorry about that!

Flares were used to mark locations and basic info on what was at that location to near by allied aircraft. I imagine each color was assigned whatever fit the mission or scenario. In DCS, people use them to find each other.

As of several updates ago, the embark feature no longer works in the Huey or the Mi8. As of now, there has been no information on when or if it will ever get fixed.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=165068

Yeah.....but this issue did not exist until an update or two ago. I never had this problem before.