Hueyman

Wow , Awesome ! Am I wrong, but the Combatace model I found is from 2012 and is certainly not this one, SFM, and no Canards, any link to this amazing version ? Thanks

I could kill for a B-17F/G, honestly

Actually guys, all you say is pretty valid and well defended, so it's just a matter of opinion. We all invest in this sim, what it require to run smoothly, as well as flight controls hardware etc , for our own reasons, and we don't have to agree with other's wishes ( that's probably why devs don't give a heck about our wishes as it diverges so much, but do that they are interested in and what has potential ). Still I can tell you, this kind of plane ( or the Chipmunk, or the T-6 Texan, or any military initial trainer ) would be loads of fun if delivered with appropriate campaign, with the true feel ( and pressure ) of having an IP sitting next to you, great voice overs and true dynamic missions, where all your actions are analyzed and greatly affect the mark of each of your training flights. That's how it's done in real life, so it may be very interesting for aviation enthusiast to " live what it's like to be " in front of a screen. I know what MSFS is ( while I only fly X-Plane when I close DCS or IL-2 ), but clearly the level of accuracy devs are reaching those last years in DCS has nothing to do with casual public sims. I had hard times trying to understand the nonsense and lack of any relation between DCS modules, but finally, I understood that everything that flies and that is modeled as real as it gets naturally found its place in this platform. If you speak about realism, I don't know a single conflict or theater nowadays ( or even before ) where only military A/C are lifting off the planet... a great percentage of the traffic is commercial planes, GA, private A/C, commuter turboprop etc... Not trying to turn this digital COMBAT simulation into a DIGITAL SIMULATION at all ! No ! Just saying aircrafts different than the F-15, A-10, Sukhoïs and Rafales still have their place here and would certainly be much more interesting than we may expect them to be. Have safe flights !

No problem guys, as long as it's constructive and justified then it's good for the sim I think. Just said it was part of a real world pilot career and I thought DCS users were hardcore simmers and so eager to practice as close to real as possible. No army will let you handle a F-15 from day one obviously. But once again I understand your points, and depending on what we're looking for in this sim, this kind of " GA " planes can be annoying yes... Still I hope to see it one day, or another, as well as big brothers like the C-130, Tu-95 and such big turboprops

Hi everyone, Just a question : I would love this little effect being implemented : Afterburner flow deviation according to surface. Not a crucial thing at all but always a shame when you do short take off ( high AoA ) to see the afterburner flames going straight into the ground like if there was nothing. What do you think ? Also, I heard about new missile smoke effect and contrails in DCS2, any news on the contrails ? The missile smoke I saw on last videos were just jawdropping...

Hello, As the tendency lately went for military trainers ( Hawk and C101 ), I was wondering myself why wouldn't we want this kind of aircraft : Single piston engined, low wing cantilever, agile and sleek airplane In real world, before even thinking about low performance jets like the Hawk, Aviocar, Alphajet or whatever, trainees are selected then trained in this kind of airplane. It could be high performances A/C, like the PC-21, TB-30 Epsilon, T-6 Texan II, but I named a true trainer : The Mudry Cap 10, a French designed and built little airplane, used to make the in-flight selection of Navy pilot, and give them basic skills in VFR flying, standards procedures, dead reckoning practice, aerobatics, formation flying etc etc It's also a very popular aerobatic airplane to built the bases in this category It may sound silly but I'm sure it would be a great commercial success, for different reasons : - I see online so many people struggling to even taxi ( not talking about take off/landing ) on WWII beasts that the very powerful Warbirds we currently have are, that learning to handle a 180 cv friendly and straight forward little taildragger like the Cap 10 could be rewarding and very useful to deeply understand the flight principles. It brings much more pleasure to handle that supersonic fly-by-wire assisted fast movers. - With this kind of trainers you learn to fly " watching outside ", with windshields marks materializing the different pitch attitudes for various airspeeds etc, that is the best way to correctly learn to pilot an airplane. For example on the Cap 10, everything was made to use " pre-sets parameters " that correspond a flight regime i.e : 20" MAP and 2 fingers between the horizon and the engine cowling will give you a level flight at 200 Km/h, 23" MAP and 3 fingers will give you 230 Km/h etc ... That helps flying by " feeling " the machine, trusting pre displayed parameters and understanding what's really happening ( good thing, as this wouldn't have allowed some catastrophic accidents like the Rio Paris, where people blindly trusts electronics and ignore what's aerodynamically happening ) - Dead reckoning is one of the busiest task you can do in mid-air, with only your chronograph, your map, and the ground landmarks around you. Constantly re-reckoning everything, and adjusting your navigation regularly according to what you want to see on your map and what you actually see outside - Also, formation flying is a science and work of art that require a lot of practice, but also a pyramidal work that must start from the basics with slow ( still 230 Km/h ) and maneuverable aircrafts, with healthy and straight forward reactions, and good cockpit visibility, the Cap 10 is perfect for that, from basic close formation, up to maneuvering ( close form in aerobatic maneuvers such the loop ) - Learning how to circulate and fly in military airspace, taking into account radio messages, military traffic etc would be on the program. - Finally, it would be a relatively fast project to manage, with 1 or 2 persons, to bring it up to DCS standards, and could also bring a great fun factor and good sightseeing platform to explore the two new incoming maps. Let the poll begin ! Cheers, Hueyman

I think I read this a couple of times lately... what could you tell me more about this, any links ? Very interested, many little things to fix/improve in this already 2 years old module...

That would be so awesome ... I also still fly occasionally this sim, and just keep hoping an up to date counterpart will see the sun one day. Hopefully, this will be with DCS : B-17 one day ...

Hello guys, Sorry if off topic but just wanted to be sure, which airplane are meant to come first ? The Thunderbolt or the Spit ? Didn't really understand in the last newsletter. Thanks, happy flying !

Wow, a true Soviet Mil Pilot Honestly dude, I'm impressed... two things I would like in my life is : Be a Huey pilot Be a Mil heli pilot Your Red Crossed aircrafts have so much appeal, both fighters and helis, they truly deserve much respect. Happy flying comrade

Yeah I second that, very good and informative post Fri13 ! Thanks for searching the values !

Yeah but even ammo boxes or light vehicles ( Jeeps etc ) would be nice ! Wow Ciribob, that definitely worths a try, thanks !

Hi, I have no real interest in ground units, but , I can understand some may have. But I was wondering why couldn't we merge both online, with the ability to sling several ground and light armored units with the Huey and Mi-8 ? This could make the outcome of an online battle much more dynamic, combining heli pilots skills and gunners/ tank commander abilities, That would be Just awesome !

Well said ! Give them a finger they want your whole arm. Each one his job, yours is to create accurate Warbirds, maybe some 3rd parties would focus on AI units one day, both air, land and sea ( sub-sea with the Caïman ? )

Lol :lol:, I'll get ya Actually, it's not because the Mil helis has an automatic startup procedure, that means they aren't accurate. Western ( US ) helis at that time like the Bell 204,205,206 ... were " manually " ( not hand cranking hehe ) started as you well know with the Huey, but all Russian rotorwing I'm aware off used an automated start sequence, after the APU was running smoothly of course. All you had to do is APU On, select your engine, press the start button to launch the process, open fuel levers and monitors temps rising ... They nailed it down pretty well actually

Outstanding, thanks for giving this mighty bird some love, it truly deserve it !

Don't get me wrong, there is nothing " dirty " or so in reading you, that wasn't just the initial goal of the thread. Anyway, yes there is FB but there is also more specialized place like here. But after all, just nitpicking here and it's no big deal at all, as long as everyone benefits from that, that's OK

That's not the subject here mate. Simple : The thread title is : " Mirage 2000 Screenshots " So, as a common DCS Forums user, I click the thread link to see and admire Mirage 2000 screenshots. Then I have to cope with 90 pages and 890+ posts, only to read people whining, complaining it takes too long, expressing their preference of the Rafale and so on ... all that to see only a couple of screenshots, ( sorry, probably five times that as it looks like people feels happy to QUOTE the same post containing picts over and over and over, like if we didn't know what subject we're talking about ). This is just called flooding or posting for purpose other than ( well, I dunno actually :mobile:). Nothing wrong with free talking such subjects, but why not creating a " Mirage fighter enthusiasts " thread ? So you could allow people interested in RAZBAL incoming module to check the thread regularly and see the evolution and related news, and not the entire life of each member ;) But it's only my opinion, if it's OK for the majority to spend 40 mins digging pages to look at 4-5 screenshots, then I'm OK with that

Seriously guys, I try to check this thread twice a week to see what it was created for " MIRAGE 2000 SCREENSHOT ", and all I find is dozens of pages filled by junk and variously speculation/request posts Please mods, that wouldn't hurt anyone to remove all of them and make it a locked thread where only RAZBAM could post picts... Let 'em create a separate blabla thread elsewhere

No no, that's not harsh that's your point of view and I must also agree with it ... Of course we don't know what's happening behind the scene, but something sure is that it's not the hardest part in their titan work. They initially did the Huey rotorhead animation wrong ( they corrected it later ) but at least there was some movements of parts. Here there is nothing... Once again, beta or not, it's like if you had a plane with locked controls ( visually ). When you're flying in first person view it doesn't decrease the immersion ( except if you look at control surfaces ) but it's just one of the feature every module ( even other sim's addons ) have, a standard.

Yes Focha I realized that ;-) But one of the nice goodies we have in Flight Simulations is, we can fly while looking from every angle how things are actually working and moving, and that is IMHO one of the main features of simming something you even fly IRL...

Yes that's one thing guy you're both true about ... But the actual problem is that the current Mi-8 has nothing done regarding flight controls animations, with or without hydraulic press... Tail rotor blades are rock solid, even no flapping hinge anims Main rotor blades droop and coning is absolutely well done, as well as flapping hinge movements ( try to roll the ship upside down, the blades fall by their own gravity against high flapping stops ) But nothing regarding swashplate movement ( cyclic or collective ) and the according push rods and AoA change on blade. This really has to be done, It's like if we had an A-10 or any DCS plane with their rudder or ailerons stuck to neutral... while our input has effect in flight. From a definition, they shouldn't be called DCS modules as it's far from " very realistic ". The good side is that it's a matter of a day to animate that for the devs, they just need to be aware we WANT it ;-)

The main ships of the ETO were -F, the -G came a bit later ( too late ? ) on the war. Yeah that would require a lot of work, but no more than a F-18,F-14 or MiG-21, for sure. Flight dynamics were straight forward, not a full fly by wire logic would need to be developed like the Su-27 supersonic and subsonic headache PFM experimentation to come to that point. Only stick to historical values of control surfaces dimensions, travel course and fine tune to real world datas such turn rates, behaviors on each axis, accuracy of fuel and balance sheets, different perfs curves according to Manifold Press. RPM, SFC, Alt. Density & Press. etc... Basic development work on any aircraft, no more, no less. The engine management side would be nice to handle... Carefully monitoring MP, RPM, oil & cyl. temps, intercoolers and cowl flaps position, waste gates, superchargers etc... Only smart mechanical achievements It's always the same "problematic" here, if it would sell, it will probably be done. Obviously, it's not a bunch of " yes, I want it cause I think it would be good " that may ignite things in the good way... Without a significant number of potential buyers, devs wont even take a look or think about the idea. Put a poll with 1500 members positive out of 2000-2200 total and they might spend a little time studying the feasibility and commercial success of such module. That kind of poll : http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116871 We were told several times that DCS modules were chosen according to Army contracts... true or false ? I dunno but that seems strange USAF require a P-51D or BF109 hardcore sim... Anyway, now that 3rd parties are well into the gears, it's not foolish to keep hope that someone will finally catch up and start a B-17 Flying Fortress DCS module. For those who have skills, motivation, and time, it could be a very interesting and rich experience, traveling 'round Europe to gather as much infos as possible then going to USA, recording engine sounds, talk with 90+ YO mechanics, pilots and crew members to really understand what it was like to fly these Viermots. With a little team of 2-4 guys, it could take a rough two years and reach an incredible high standard level, same as the Mustang, Messerschmidt and Focke Wulf... incoming P-47 and Spit, I'm confident, are going to be a blast as well ! Now we need Heavies, the skies wasn't always filled with single engined warplanes. I can't even imagine what it would be to have a DCS level B-17 in DCS, online gameplay would be awesome, 17s taking off from the edge of the map and the little friends ( Mustangs and P-47, and Spitfires, like it was in reality ) taking off at mid-travel and joining them at 35 000 ft. Then Luftwaffe airfields scattered on the path to the target... that would be awesome. With the incoming NTTR map, the logical solo campaign could also feature bomber crew training, crew management, dummy aerial targets firing from all turrets, bombing practice on static targets on the desert, formation flying practice etc etc... Then, at 20% of the campaign, when the crew is skilled enough " in theory " a simple change of Map from NTTR to Normandy would mean the bomber squadron being sent overseas, and the real deal begins ! With historically true mission, including random mechanical failures leading to aborts, like it also was common back in the times. So much potential :thumbup: From a technical PoV, I don't see any valid reason to say it's impossible or not reasonably feasible. One of the thing we really start to miss in DCS is the multi-crew management system. But soon or later it will have to be implemented or DCS will meet a bottleneck here. Long time community requested modules such Apache, Cobra, Mi-24 Hind, as well as current Huey really need this. Some years ago, I remember posting such a Utopian and dreamers post about the Huey, when no trace of Belsimtek's masterpiece was present at that time : " As my username can let it guess, I'm a fully, deeply, 9000% Huey LOVER That means , civilian or military, -B or -H variants, I'm fond of that chopper.. It's rotorhead, blades, cockpit, overall shape, sounds.. and history are just so... Loving. I would give a lot to be able to fly one in the wonderful DCS Word. This thread is now a year old, Now that P-51 is out, we can launch the polemic again, they release a plane, that should fight in a world full of SAM, Air Ground, Air-Air things.. with what ? six guns ? LOL So I think the weapons side of things is becoming less and less a decisive argument. A Bell UH-1 Huey, in the appropriate foggy, grey, wet map of Vietnam jungles, would just be so SO exciting, with a detailed world that latest DCS offers to us.. Imagin : Start a mission ON YOUR FEET ( so you control the human ) in a forward base, by night, in the middle of a dense jungle. You go to the next barracks and your chiefs give you night's order mission : a team of 7 SOG Soldiers are lost in the deep jungle, near Cambodian border, you have to pick them out ASAP, as patrols on Cambodge is absolutely ( officialy at least ) prohibited, then take them to Da Nang airport cause they're about to finish their Tour Of Duty and should prepare to get back home.. during the flight, all can happen, stay tuned on the radio, the war is still advancing, and all can happen.. ( meaning here you would eventually be called to land on a kind of FARP, ground guys loading rocket pods on your airframe sides ) and we tell you you have fight against a VC attack near Khe Sanh, as soon as 7 guys are delivered. All mission editor, trigger etc offer many possibilities. I'm sorry guys but that sound really exciting plot, you'll need to work like a real pilot, plan your navigation " by the book " on map before, calculating wind drift, fill your navlog, estimate differents headings according to airways ( at least, routes that are known to be " sure " ).. then climb into your venerable UH-1 H, start checklist ( a full check would take 7-10 min ) calculating fuel you should take to fullfil the mission without being too heavy, while taking into account the possibility of a route change. Then finally start turbine, and slowly hear that so known sound of those mighty blades.. That's true us, simmer pilots used to fully automatic or powerful stuf like A-10, Su-25.. even if not latest technology, it's still relatively easy to handle them, the principal fun is by operating weapon.. here it would be have a real workload of navigation and flight management. For example, best submarine sims, Silent Hunter series ,also focus a lot on crew managing, navigation, weather change etc... not only firing a bunch of torpedoes to sink everythink. Some of you may thinks it's rubbish, compared to " LOAD OF DEATH " the A-10 can offer.. but personally, destroying things over and over in the Black Shark kinda boring me a la longue. As you said, Digital COMBAT Simulation means things related to war, not only killing. A battle without logistic support is lost even before starting. The Huey could pickup an artillery piece and bring it on the top of a Hill.. Let's just imagin a second, back in the mid 60's.. " A couple of years later we had the marvelous Bell UH-1H Huey by BST, so, while it's obvious they didn't make it thanks to this particular post, I'm sure it's not useless to make CONSTRUCTIVE requests again and again, showing our deep interest in such aircraft to be developed and released. DCS is growing faster and faster each year and 2014-2017 period is and wil be breathetaking, even only from what we had until now ( and the best is yet to come ^^ ) Have a nice weekend dude, and please feel free to express your thoughts about such projects, positive or negative, as long as you have arguments it's nice :smartass: Hueyman

I would also love a Corsair, been thinking of it for a while now but never saw anything related to in these forums ... Any versions would be so great, but I personaly would love late F4Us like the F4U-5 and -7 that our French Navy used in Indochine and Algerian wars, with the huge four bladed Hamilton Standard prop ! http://perlbal.hi-pi.com/blog-images/142902/gd/131714217884/F4U-7-Corsair.jpg

I'm a B-17 lover, since the early days of my life ! I even recently acquired an original polished propeller blade from the 17's 3,6 m Hamilton Standard Hydromatic propeller, and it's standing in my tiny student pilot room ... All that to say I'm really in love with the Forts, and am currently reading the great book " Three engines, half a wing and a prayer " by Brian D. O'Neil, and each chapter makes me want to have a DCS : B-17F Flying Fortress come out one day... this just could be breathtaking and so innovative from a gameplay point of view. The piloting task is really interesting and would add another dimension to this amazing combat simulator, monitoring aircraft mechanical systems such engines, superchargers, intercoolers etc, and managing the 9 other guys in the ship, with the ability to play each station... Then come the navigator's job which could be a whole simulation on it's own, using the bubble observatory to confirm routes and locations with stars, tools, compass, Inertial Drift Indicator, maps ... The bombardier task and Norden bombsight operation, if simulated accurately, could also be a great challenge ! Pack all that with the DCS level and environment of future WWII theater and you obtain something new and rich that provides hours and hours of exhausting and challenging missions, taking off early in the morning from foggy british airfields and flying 5 or 6 hours, making your way through flak and german fighters, then coming back on only two engines, one feathered and one ripped off, and half the rudder out... That is also air combat, there isn't only fast movers with 6 GBUs and AIMs nor WWII fighters that wrote the history... B-17 did a lot here in Europe. Plus it's, from my point of view, the most awesome looking and nicely proportioned plane in the world, the kind, like the DC-3, that it's shapes and configuration makes you find it beautiful from the first sights. At the Fighter Collection in Duxford, UK, they have one in the Imperial War Museum, and the Sally B which is airworthy. We have the Pink Lady and Yankees got 12 or 13 Forts in flying conditions today, so I'm sure the documentations and material is available... Yes, WE NEED THIS !! Above : The good old IL-2 19646/Pacific Fighters sim, which is one of the only way ( with the very old B-17II : The Mighty 8th ) to fly bombing mission in this bird.