DD_Fenrir

This has been identified as on discord as a bug, or more accurately as a very early in development feature that accidently found it's way into the release candidate and is related to mission wind settings: Having tested, I can confirm - a mission I was experiencing this shaking in that had an 8 knot wind at sea level, this effect disappeared upon editing the mission to drop all wind speed at all altitudes to 0 knots.

This has been identified as on discord as a bug, or more accurately as a very early in development feature that accidently found it's way into the release candidate and is related to mission wind settings: Having tested, I can confirm - a mission I was experiencing this shaking in that had an 8 knot wind at sea level, this effect disappeared upon editing the mission to drop all wind speed at all altitudes to 0 knots.

Indeed. Bear in mind this is an iterative implementation; from the Discord the various fusing options are programmed in the coding but they ran out of time to finalise the GUI changes necessary to allow us to access them. They’ll come in due course.

What seems to be the case at this point: 500lb SAP - Confirmed instantaneous. 500lb MC Mk II - Confirmed instantaneous. 500lb MC Short Tail - Confirmed instantaneous. 500lb GP Mk.IV - Confirmed instantaneous. 500lb GP Mk.V - ED documentation says 30 min delay fuse. 500lb GP Short Tail - Confirmed instantaneous.

Thanks, amazingme, can you clarify whether in SP or MP?

MS Sidewinder FFB2 user here getting random stick shake that fades in and out with no apparent correlation to damage (there was none) airspeed (happens randomly in climbs, dives or level flight), AoA (whether climbing, level or diving) or power settings (happened at full military, max continuous and fuel economy cruise settings). Also affects the P-51D. Latest Open Beta.

MS Sidewinder FFB2 user here getting random stick shake that fades in and out with no apparent correlation to damage (there was none) airspeed (happens randomly in climbs, dives or level flight), AoA (whether climbing, level or diving) or power settings (happened at full military, max continuous and fuel economy cruise settings). Also affects the Spitfire. Latest Open Beta.

As described, I have noticed this a lot lately, any enemy aircraft that you damage significantly enough to cause it to ditch in the sea is not represented as a destroyed aircraft in your scores/debrief. This is a much more common occurrence for WW2 aircraft in comparison to the modern jets.

I don't disagree with the general sentiment; pushing the chronological purview of the Asset Pack both forward and back has some merit, but only if it supports aircraft types and maps we have in game. The key is this: If you are prepared to fight recreations of historical battles (1) on maps that do not represent the historical area and (2) with aircraft that aren't historically relevant then why do you care about (3) units that aren't historically accurate? Why is using a panzer IV instead of a III against a 75mm Sherman in lieu of an M3 Lee to recreate an El Alamein scenario using the Persian Gulf map such a problem? The arguments are inconsistent. Half the time from the cockpit of a fighter-bomber you won't tell the difference of armour types (and don't really care anyway) and given the challenge of hitting such small targets, it doesn't really matter. What you are after are troops, trucks, trains, artillery - all of which we have now - ships (a little sparse on the Axis side, but both need fleshing out) and radars (Allies suffer in the latter example). My key point is that by fleshing out the Normandy/Channel with chronologically relevant units we often bring that desired usefulness for wider scope anyway; for example a USN Destroyer could be useful for both Normandy and the WW2 Marianas. An Austin K2 ambulance would benefit the Normandy scenarios and a future foray to the Western Desert, should that ever happen. Should DCS make a move later or earlier in the war then yes, 100%, let's have AI Ju-87Bs and He-111s to fight in our Spitfire Mk I over a modified Channel map when DCS: Battle of Britain appears; let's have the Yaks, Laggs T-34s and Panzer IIIs when DCS: Kursk is announced. Until then let's ensure that the Asset Pack remains relevant to providing depth to what we have.

Which is why the F 190B and C variants were trialled; the 801 engined Würgern were never much cop at higher altitudes, but this was ok in 1941/42 when neither were it's contemporaries. However as two stage superchargers or turbos started seeing far more prevalence amongst their foes into 1943 and beyond it became more of an issue. With the B and C efforts to increase high altitude performance a flop, and Tank struggling to get authorisation to utilise an already oversubscribed resource of Daimler Benz engines to power the future 190 and Ta 152 variants, he is obliged to use the Jumo, ostensibly a 'bomber engine' to give him the required high altitude oomph for the D series. But this takes time.... Meanwhile the Jagdwaffe must soldier on with the A series. They lighten it a bit with the A-6, which is good and helps a bit, but are finding the MG17s are just not up to much especially as the opponents are more and more becoming heavy-bombers. So in the A-7 they fit the MG131 instead. However, having just lightened the aircraft, they've made it heavier again... (don't even get me started on the Sturmbocks...) Jadgwaffe: "Nevermind, we won't be fighting Allied fighter aircraft over the Vaterland! We'll be able to make our head on attacks on the lead bomber formations then sweep round to slowly overtake the viermots without worry from any fighter escort...." P-51B: " Hold my beer..." P-47 with droptanks: "Hold on sonny Jim, I was here first..."

Yes, largely, especially in relation to the many types that you would be far more likely to encounter given the timescales most consistent with the current maps defined eras. The Bf 110 from 1941 in the west was relegated to Nightfighting (which DCS currently doesn't have the infrastructure to support in much if any depth) and the He 111 was encountered infrequently, it having taken very much a third line status and being primarily used as a transport and trainer. These do not represent frontline types commonly encountered. They are essentially one-offs. Crikey, in the years 1941-43 even the Siebel Si 204 and Junkers W 34 feature more heavily in the combat reports of the day fighter arms of the Allies than the Bf 110 or He 111. Agreed but we don't have a WW2 Caucasus map or any other WW2 aircraft relevant to the Kuban campaign (Yak-1, Yak-7, LaGG-3, P-39, Bf 10F-4/G-2) available, so again, a white elephant. Me 262s did indeed fly one or two sorties as bombers at the very end of the Normandy campaign. But again compared to the 700 odd B-26s that were available for operations over the battlefield, which do you think is more credible to represent a typically encountered type? As for Russia, I assume you mean Eastern Front, as by the time the 262 entered service the front in the East was a couple of hundred miles west of the Russian border.... For that you'd need a WW2 Berlin/Prussia map to be of much relevance. Which we don't have.

All largely irrelevant to the WW2 maps we have. The following would be far more useful. Ships: Axis Destroyer Axis Minesweeper Axis Tanker Axis Cargo Vessel Allied Destroyer Allied Minesweeper Allied Liberty Ship Allied T2 Tanker Ship Allied Fighter Direction Tender Ground units: Nebelwerfer Luftwaffe Unarmed Ground Crew Axis Fuel Bowser Axis Airfield Fire Fighting Truck USAAF Unarmed Ground Crew RAF Unarmed Ground Crew Allied Ambulance Allied Radar array AMES 25 Allied Fuel Bowser Allied Airfield Fire Fighting Truck Allied Ambulance Air Units Hawker Typhoon Mk.Ib Bf 109G-6/14 B-26C Marauder B-25C Mitchell P-38J Lightning P-51B Mustang P-47D-22 Thunderbolt (Razorback) Ju 52 Do 217 If you had to include Eastern Front (not a bad idea, incidentally - the poor old Ishzak does seem a little lonely) then the following would be a good idea: T-34 Model 1943 Bf 109E-7 Panzer III Ausf. J GAZ-MM 25 mm automatic air defence gun M1940 (72-K)

I am looking at a way to mimic it's function in missions to a limited degree using trigger zones. Will let you know if it's any good....

Stuka's relevance to WW2 the Western Front ends in 1940. Should DCS go Battle of Britain, then sure let's have a Ju-87B. Should DCS go Eastern Front then sure, Ju-87B/D/G would be useful. Otherwise it's irrelevant to DCS for combat operations. The timescales currently represented render it a white elephant.

Many of the F-14 vs A-7 HUD discrepancy questions answered here:

There are issues with some of these requests, as understandable as they maybe; Bristol Beaufighter Bf 110 Ju-88 Mitsubishi G4M P-61 Black Widow These all suffer from an important, almost critical omission: no flyable examples. Wind tunnel or CFD data can get you so far, but unless you have the equivalent of Erich Brunotte for each type (unlikely) you need to have modern pilots with recent experience of the handling characteristics to understand the flavour of the FM.

I find it incredulous that people can justify WW2 Asset Pack elements as not being worth paying money for as they are not "interactive". If something is to be an object for you to expend ordnance on as a target, you are interacting with that object. END OF DISCUSSION. Someone has toiled to research drawings photographs and specifications. Someone has then toiled to coalesce this information and attempt to render it faithfully as a 3D model with animations and perhaps optional cosmetic variations. Also a destroyed/damaged model, as this a combat sim and it's likely to get destroyed at some point by someone. Someone has then had to UV map, texture, and provide specular maps for a healthy model. Then repeat for damaged and destroyed models. Someone has then had to apply certain AI logic, if required, to the completed 3D model. Apply warehousing parameters if applicable. Weapon parameters, if applicable. Then it has to be introduced to the game code, made to be recognised in the engine. Then it has to be bug tested, making sure it meets parameters of performance and quality. The current WW2 Asset Pack stands at 50+ units. For the price of 3 beers. Seriously, you guys need to get out more.

Wow. You’re a prize douche bag aren’t you?

Incorrect. There is pictorial evidence of AN/APS-13 equipment fitted to P-51Ds of the 357th FG of the 8th Air Force based in Leiston, Suffolk, UK in the spring of 1945. My sources indicate trials were held by the 8th Air Force during the late Autumn of 1944, with the 4th, 355th and 361st Fighter Groups being officially equipped beginning March 1945.

There’s a multitude of factors at play. 1. Unequal elevator travel. 27 degrees up and 23 degrees down. 2. Unequal elevator trim tab travel. 3. elevator position at cruise speed and power settings is considerably displaced down. 4. ‘trim neutral’ is an ambiguous term; can mean the point the tab chord is aligned with the elevator; can mean pre-defined speed and power setting. In an aeroplane as heavily modified from its first variant as the Spitfire IX it’s unsurprising that these figures may not match.

Manual is wrong.

4th generation is not defined by FBW; it’s a higher level distinction based upon the overarching design concepts driven by operational requirements - 3rd gen reflect the primacy of interception, and hence speed and climb, over any other characteristics; these aircraft were designed for shooting down nuclear bombers as the day of the dogfight was deemed to have passed. Vietnam and the various conflicts in the Middle East showed this to be a lie and thus 4th generation aircraft exhibit design choices that attempt to marry high speed AND excellent manoeuvrability in order to be competitive in all possible regimes of air combat.

1. What airfield? Bear in mind many of the landing grounds in the Channel or Normandy map are fighter fields and have only 2,000 yard runways; a FB.VI Mossie can get off fully fuelled and with a 2000lb bomb load but 10 degrees of flap is required and you will not have a lot of runway to spare; in real life the fighter-bomber Mossie units tended to be based at larger fields with longer concrete/asphalt runways. 2. Are you taking off into wind? I CANNOT EMPHASISE HOW IMPORTANT THIS IS. I see so many people in DCS in multiplayer get in and fly WW2 era aircraft and pay absolutely no attention to wind direction or strength. Then they have the temerity to wonder why their landings/take-offs/taxiing got suddenly harder. If you are taking off with a crosswind, tailwind or - god forbid - a three-quartering tail-wind then either the mission designer effed-up or you need to pay more attention. A crosswind might be unavoidable, but most of the DCS airfields (on the WW2 maps at least) provide an option to choose a runway that places the crosswind component a little less aggressively. THERE IS NO EXCUSE TO TAKEOFF WITH A TAILWIND. DON'T DO IT, ESPECIALLY IN A MOSSIE. 3. How straight is he keeping it on his take-off run? You might be keeping her off the grass on the takeoff run, but if you're snaking left and right and using full deflection rudder inputs that's limiting your ability to accelerate. She needs to be kept as straight as possible. 4. Get the tail up! Have 2 division nose down trim, and make sure to get the tail off the ground (gently!) as soon as she'll allow; she'll pick up speed faster. With the 10 degree flap setting and the tail up she'll lift herself off as soon as she's ready to fly; try to force her off the ground and you'll end up in the.... 5. The AoA drag trap If you get flying too soon and with the benefit of ground effect you'll find yourself trapped in a nose high, high power mushing state; you're airborne but unable to make altitude or accelerate because the the angle of attack you require to maintain flight after you leave the threshold of ground effect is generating so much drag you can't get any more airspeed. Put you're flaps away and you'll sink into the ground. Lift the nose higher and you'll stall. This is happening because you forced the aircraft to fly before she is ready and whilst still in ground effect. You have to allow her to lift herself off. Keep your climb angle VERY shallow and get the gear way as fast as possible, being aware that as the gear goes away the pitch trim changes massively and wants to lift the nose markedly - KEEP IT SHALLOW. Once she's got to 190IAS then get the flaps away. As a footnote I do suspect that some of the DCS airfields have too many trees/obstructions too close on runway line; in real life there were quite stringent parameters regarding the height and distance from the approaches to a runway that obstacles were allowed; if there were any (including houses!) they were cleared. I think DCS might not reflect some of these obstacle clearance rules.

Please consider the addition of either of the two following airfields to this map to provide a prototypical home for USAAF P-51 units: RAF Lashenden: Airfield History - Lashenden Air Warfare Museum English Heritage RAF Photography RAF_CPE_UK_1923_RS_4229 | American Air Museum in Britain Headcorn Aerodrome in Kent - EGKH History RAF Staplehurst RAF Staplehurst - Wikipedia Staplehurst | American Air Museum in Britain