9.JG27 DavidRed

the strange thing is...control stiffness was there in the very first release which was back then only available in the open beta for like two days...you couldnt pull out at like 700kph except using the trim wheel. then the first patch came for the open beta and it was gone....

^^yes we can give it a try

the developers will have to change the way, how slots are working i think...at least this would help mission builders tremendously.same with skins.the slot system and skin system will hopefully change in future.otherwise its going to be a real pain for mission builders very soon...the more modules we get, the harder it will be to do proper missions with the current system.

JST, very nice work!:thumbup:

i really like that post!i pretty much agree on this...for now we are flying on a map which doesnt fit at all...next we will be getting a ww2 normandy map. and although the project is labeled as europe 1944, we are not forced to simulate 1944.it could be any date in ww2 really.also it will certainly not be the last ww2 map we will be getting, and the current stable of ww2 aircraft will also not represent the final list of ww2 aircraft we will see in dcs. its like a big puzzle, getting more and more complete with every new module, feature and map we will see in future. i think that discussing whether a K4 fits into normandy 1944 is the wrong approach...as i see it, the K4 is only the first version of 109s, and normandy only the first ww2 map in dcs... furthermore, its been stated several times by the devs that they chose the K4 because of best documentation.my 2cents.

+1 to the OP's request :) a good one :thumbup:

just like golani said, if you got trouble to get the groundcrew to respond...pull the radio circuit braker...or just map the function....you can map it in the controls option, and besides that its way more convinient to just press a key once instead of entering the ATC menu every time, also this bug seems to be gone...

yes i know that problem...with certain missions ive built i had the same problem.unfortunately there doesnt seem to be a fix except restarting the server....

i have a problem with using MIST 3.5 and respawning planes....after they have respawned, they will count as "buildings" and will not longer be recognized as planes.if a client then kills one of the planes it will say "player x killed building"....any known fix for this? i use the condition "lua predicate" with: if not Group.getByName('blueaiplane1') then return true endand the action "do script" with: mist.respawnGroup ('blueaiplane1',true)

that is worth a try

yeah, from what Sithspawn was saying, we seem to get the option to change it with the loadouts in the mission editor...however, this is not ideal, as then for online missions the mission designer would have to decide whether to enable or disable the flare gun...such things which dont affect competitive online play directly, the player/pilot himself should have the option to adjust to his liking and not the server/mission designer...

to the op, yes there is....rename the trackfile with the extension .miz after that open it in the mission editor and there you can edit the mission settings and enable outside views for example.after you have done so, rename the file again to the extension .trk. then you should be able to have outside views.

i already wanted to put the bombers higher, so that they start contrailing... unfortunately, our so called "bombers" have a max seiling of i think 7000meters.so at that altitude, they are still not contrailing.its already surprising how many people on the server stay low on deck and start to complain that they cant find anything, while the real action takes place 5000meters above them...i fear that putting the bombers even higher, even less people would take their time to climb up there to escort the bombers...in my experience the luftwaffe guys care to go up there, while the majority of p51 pilots dont, of course there are exceptions...

^^^ ehh what?

i already had a big long answer, but decided, its not worth it...i just say that, as an IL2 veteran you claim to be, you should know that 1vs1 in a duel situation where both oponents are on head on course at same altitude and speed and last but not least are both aware of each other was hardly the case and is pretty much irrelevant on any puplic server. the P40, as Pman pointed out, was in service until the end of the war, is an iconic WWII warbird, so it has its place in DCS WWII, thats a fact, no need to further whine about it. K4, the devs said multible times that they have best documentation about this version.i rather have a precise simulation than a funky guesstimation. you can further whine about it, but it wont change, its here and its awesome. yes, this particular server was awesome!i very much enjoyed it.there were/are other servers with all planes flyable and they were just as much fun, just different.but this particular server you mentioned, just supports the argument, that regardless what planes are produced, its mostly up to the mission designers and how to build missions, and what to allow or not...P40, is just an example, but really any WWII plane has its place in DCS WWII.

yeah, the P51 suffers the same problem, and although i appreciate that the damage model is capable of simulating it, its very annoying, and im convinced it happens far too frequent....receive 1shot from a bandit on your six, and out of magic the bullet goes through the hole plane,the fuselage,fuel tank, through the steel plate, through the pilot, through the engine, and kills the governor.pilot alive, engine alive, governor gone. definitely needs a fix in my opinion, BUT BOTH for the 109 and the P51. EDIT: although, against human players it doesnt happen as frequent as against AI fighters.those lousy bastards definitely aim on it.

nope mate sorry to burst your bubble...if the mission editor lists the windstrengths correctly, then it was indeed 30m/s from 90° towards the runway.but glad you enjoy my vids. :) iirc, also the atc in that little vid tells about the wind to be 30m/s. EDIT: i just checked,...atc tells the wind is 31m/s.

i searched for that very field, but couldnt find it...can you show a vid, or a screenshot.would like to try and see whether i notice any difference to other fields like this one: cheers.

nice Vespa! now on to the next challenge:

mh yeah possible....you mean this one?

i agree that it was pretty boring to only have the p51 back then compared to what we have now....but boring is definitely the wrong word.i enjoyed many many hours with the p51 online back then.now as we get more and more WWII planes, i dont see any argument why the P40 would be an orphan plane. also, some people make it out that the P40 will be useless against the other fighters...may i remind some guys here of il1946.some of the most popular servers had all aircraft in their selection.there we 109E1s fighting spitsMKXIVs.there were zeros fighting ME262s. :) and many people chose inferior planes and still were very very successfull.aircombat is not only about performance of planes. the P40 will fit perfectly, and so would another 109, regardless whether be it a E or F or G version.it will just make our DCS WWII project more complete.

my hope is, that one day, we hear an announcement of a 3rd party dev team, which solely focuses on building maps.i know that ED had lots and lots of work to build EDGE and thats why we are waiting that long, but i think that even if EDGE is done, the waiting for new maps will be long.and that although already some third parties like VEAO announced to build maps as well. would be awesome to get new maps every few months.with the possibilty of EDGE to stick maps together, we could end up with at least big chunks of our planet. i know im dreaming.

as EDGE supposedly comes with the ability to stick maps together, i would love to see more and more europe maps sticked together like a big puzzle, which in the end turn out to be a big part of europe all together. although i love the fact that dcs is a sanbox simulator, i think proper theaters are whats really needed.they are doing it, so thats no complain, but i just would love to see a big part of europe, with many big cities, with many many ground units, many bombers(at least AI) and generally the feel of really being there back in 1944 over europe.

love those threads...to the OP: probably you've noticed already, that there are indeed at least 10 different ways of doing it :) so my tip is, to read this thread, and try all the suggestions here, and then come to your own conclusion.also, if you still have trouble landing the 109, then post a track or a video of one of your attempts where it shows where you typically fail...that way, people can point you into the right direction. so far all the tips ive read here i can agree with.especially with the "landing in the grass fields" and also the +2 trim. i also agree with the -2-3 trim though :) works both. also as JST pointed out, applying full brakes works good to avoid one wing tipping onto the ground.

gavagai go under your saved games folder/dcs/config there you should find the network.cfg file...with a section called integrity check.delete the one line: config/weapons and you should be good.