ZaltysZ

Do you run regedit with admin rights?

You can use external view for roughly estimation. Gs are shown at the bottom of screen. Roll to get inverted, pull and tighten gradually until something breaks, save a track, and then watch it from external view. Then do the same, but add rolling while pulling.

It was changed. Tips broke off at 6.7G before patch. Now they break at around 7G only if Gs are asymetric (pull + roll). If Gs are symetric (pull only), 8+ G can be reached.

Yeah, unfortunately even the important ones might be skipped.

HDR WARM + 8Q AA @ 1920x1200 helps me a bit.

Flaps and trim axis are not absolute, but directional. This means, if you have joystick axis mapped to flaps or trim, then: 1) moving joystick axis closer to center position would slowdown flaps or trim wheel movement 2) moving joystick axis away from center position would speed up flaps or trim movement. Why we don't have absolute axis for trim and flaps? It is really cumbersome the way it is, if you want precision or exploit muscle memory.

You flip, because you stall the aircraft. Nose down trim is not enough in most cases. Try taking of with stick slightly forward. Center it briefly for leaving the ground and then push it slightly forward to stay level until you pick more speed.

It can turn out it is Yak-52 (or whatever else ED can easily access in local airfields) recorded to show incompetency of our ears. :lol:

FW is easier to be flown in cases when flying by the book is the only way known. In others words, FW is a bit more noob friendly than BF flying (not combat) wise. FW has wider lading gear, rear wheel lock by stick, and its trim does not change much with changing speed.

They did not put them with intent of dogfighting. Once USAAF air campaign began rolling, the priority target of Luftwaffe in ETO became bombers. More punch increased the chance of kill per single pass on bomber formation.

P51D has multiple fuel tanks, but at any given time it uses only one (the selected one). In simple case (a.k.a. lazy pilot) fuel will be taken just from left tank once all other tanks has been emptied and pilot has been forced to switch to left tank. In more normal case (a.k.a. competent pilot) rear tank would be emptied first and then pilot would repeatedly switch between left and right tanks avoiding unbalancing aircraft by too much.

I got an opportunity to fight against K4s in MP yesterday. Not impressed. My wingman was supposed to be on receiving end of killer punishment, but easily got away just by doing high G downward spiral. He got 2 maneuvering kills that way. K4s either break their wings or can't keep following. In other words, if P51 is not crawling near the ground, it can easily shake off all BFs due to the current low G tolerance of theirs. So, despite other advantages of BF, it is still far from true killer of P51.

It has L shaped fuel tank, which is installed partly below the pilot and partly behind him.

I average to 4 hits (4 separate clicks of cannon trigger) against AI P51. It would probably be less for human controlled P51 before it goes down.

There are multiple posts on Russian side of forum about "wings bug" (wrong values at wrong place...) ant that it has been already fixed. Maybe we simply didn't get the fix with this version?

I always had impression (from pilot memoirs, tests and etc.) that BF109 was easy to handle at low speeds (i.e. forgiving), but was crappy gunnery platform at the same time (somewhat wobbly). Only higher speeds stiffened it enough and made easier to keep sights on target. I decided to skip open beta and wait for release version update, as it usually doesn't take too long to arrive after open beta, so I still haven't tried K4, but are you guys experiencing twitchy FM through "dancing" sight at lower speeds? If so, I think it should be expected.

I hope everyone was a good kid this year, or else there will be no K4 under DCS folder tree tomorrow. :prop:

It boosts the main brakes so that they can hold aircraft still until engines spool up before takeoff roll. For other normal braking operations only toe brakes are used.

Make sure force feedback is disabled in DCS settings.

Sure way is to concentrate the fire and cause critical damage at single point.

Maybe one zero too many?

US limits export of HPC (high performance computers) depending on how much operations they can do per second (MTOPS). Intel 486DX4@100Mhz should be at 70-80 MTOPS. MTOPS limit went from 195 to 2000 in 1993, and 486DX4 is a 1994 product, so it never has been a HPC. P.S: by the way, around 2000s, when clock speeds rose drastically and multi core / multi cpu desktop systems began to appear, some of them got classified as HPC and export limited, however these limits were increased shortly after once again.

If I remember correctly the Su27SK manual, there are toe brakes for normal braking, a lever on the left for emergency, and start brake lever on stick (it is supposed to command higher pressure for main brakes while engines are spooling up before takeoff roll).

Have you tried landing with stopped engine? If it behaves the same, then propwash isn't the culprit.

I used aggressive snap rolls in old IL2 sometimes, however mostly only in FWs against certain types of aircraft (P51, P47) and only at high speeds. The idea was to use snap roll as mean for loosing only 50-100km/h quickly without becoming a sitting duck. The sequence was: high speed hard turn, but still with enough room for pursuer to pull for lead shot, then snap roll to outside of turn and immediately counter it with a goal of 1-2 full revolutions only. This forced pursuer to overshoot, but left me at speed, which was way over my corner one. If pursuer immediately dived, he was safe, but so was I; if he pulled up or continued straight while in confusion, I could take an advantage or have some trigger time at least. Of course, such snap rolls were not used while having multiple pursuers or against something like Spits or Yaks, and relied a lot on surprise.