SmirkingGerbil

Been "flying" the A-10 for 6 years. Got it on sale back then. Hell they could charge $100.00 for it, and I would find a way to buy it, seeing as how I have gotten multiple returns in enjoyment and knowledge from that initial $29.00 investment. Discount would be nice, but a "newer" A-10C, with previous issues addressed, new skins, modeling etc. ??? Shut up and take my money!!

It shows two aircraft selected, and your backer level as 2 aircraft. Since those licenses are issued already, you will have to wait for the 262 to come out, and pay DCS module price. 262 is still in early development.

Wow, thanks! I had no idea it was still possible. I had a "hunch" it might be feasible, but at the same time, I just assumed it would be too catastrophic. I haven't seen the "one blade" artifact since the last OB update. Performance seems unaffected by bent props, but I am a desk driver pilot, so no idea what that type of damage should "feel" like. Thanks on the bomb drop, I have been working on the technique described by WWII protocol. Once you get the hang of it . . . why would you need fuzing! :megalol: Did manage to grab vid later, protocol bomb drop for those not wanting to dig up the track file, happens right at start

New track, and vid of visual damage @BIGNEWY Here is the track file, miz file, and a vid. Unfortunately, I had a great run with this track and miz, but wasn't recording, so I am including a vid from an earlier example that shows how the plane responds and flies even with prop blades bent back 90 deg with large holes in them. Will attach vid after it renders at YouTube visualdamage.trk P47CaucasusStraf.miz

Can generate a video and track file of the "visual damage" this weekend and will upload. I haven't really noticed the prop as being very noticeable as far as regular flight with no damage. The only time I really get a sense of that is when the sun is directly behind me, at early morning angles and you can get some pretty intense flashing and glare . . . but I have no real world experience in if that is accurate or not.

WOW!!! Nice work!

:thumbup: Second this, also the addition of more period ships for Russia, Germany, UK and US. For instance, right now a "Insurgent Boat" from the Caucasus map is one of your options for Third Reich, looks very out of place. Have some nice raid and bombing missions that I am creating but you can only place the U Boat, the Schnell torpedo boat, and one US destroyer and LST type, Russia and UK bring nothing to the table, especially for smaller faster boats or are just copies of the US LST. Boats like the Koenigsburg and Karlsruhe, along with a Kirov would be welcome!

DCS A-10C folks: "First Time?" :megalol:

Wait WAT? We just got our own forum section!!!

Another fella had the same experience you did - I wonder if it would be the same for us fixed wing peasants? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=249291&page=4

Not a fluid dynamics guy, not an FM guy. Not going to try and be one. Just thrilled you let us peak under the hood, much appreciated.

I used to think the A-10C needed a lot of trim based on power, ordinance loaded etc. Then I got the P-47D As others mention, trim to power and loadout - constantly.

Reported a few times now: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=277802

That was what I did, googled those weapons systems, learned how my RWR presented them, made simple missions to experiment with different weapons, delivery, approach etc. Learned how to use my RWR to orient, and get a rough idea of distance, in order to flag them in my TGP. Some of the most satisfying, and eureka!! moments in my A-10C! Took some time and effort, and the reward was well worth it.

Ahh yes, the auto jettison prop feature. Flown many missions sans prop. Does quite well.

Yes. What is going on here isn't unique. I was active in another forum for a few years, similar gripes, similar diatribes. Similar amount of time and effort spent. Always the same people, or group of people. Very emphatic, very dogmatic, after awhile, they were just ignored. It was the "Boy who cried wolf syndrome". Pretty soon, we would see who posted, and just walk away. Sad actually. That is what it comes to though.

Apologies, I missed that context, you are absolutely correct - just another highlight of the contradictions by OP throughout. Which is why I say "You lost me . . . " to Vert. Hard to keep track of it all. Again, apologies for missing that bit of context.

Yet earlier in this thread, after I indicated the time I took to become familiar with the P-47, your response to me was how easily and quickly you took to the 109, as if my effort was out of proportion as a "DCS veteran". But you can't even be bothered to check options and video settings, or post a question on the forums, about removing the pilots body - so in effect you claim the pilots body is a "bug" of some sort? You lost me, and I think most long ago.

Yikes! Don't use the paddle with holes drilled in it, those hurt! Yes, tail wheel smack was recommended by someone somewhere, so after last update, I tried that first and it works. I am duly embarrassed and going forward I will focus on a 3 pointer! Not sure why I was having so much trouble before, but now, I can put her down using the speeds, flap settings, engine controls as recommended. My vid is three weeks old and has all kinds of bad habits in it, so you will have to overlook that.

This bit me for awhile also. For me, Track IR used F7 to load profiles. Once I changed Track IR to use keys like my playback buttons (Pause, Play, fast forward, etc.) All good. You might have F7 mapped somewhere that is active while DCS is running.

Great summary. Been dinking around since 2011, all these years, I still get hours and hours of enjoyment out of DCS while other titles fade, and end up in the dust bin. I understand what the OP is asking for, as you mention, anyone that has been here any length of time understands ED is working its way to many of these things. They have addressed these very issues openly, and often. Having flown and played many many titles (FPS, role playing, strategy etc.) DCS is the only one to still be installed and still have legs after all this time to keep my attention. I guess I am too emotional in response to these threads - but having personally been part of the initial Kickstarter dust-up and ED wading in and saving it while taking a financial hit, has endeared this company to me. I hope the OP gets what he thinks we need, hate to lose folks from the DCS family with such a cloud of negativity. It really is a wonderful community and product.

Bold, my emphasis, but there you have it. "Ideally you wouldn't even need the manual". The entire gist of this thread. I suggest that OP ask for a sticky, submit to the community for developers and content creators to create this GUI/Video driven interactive environment. Work with ED team, and content creators to develop this environment. I look forward to the first few efforts, curious as to which topic they will cover first?

Agreed, same approach, based on tutorials and advice for tail draggers, as dozens of times before. Came in for a couple of landings, made sure to smack my tailwheel down first because I have trouble with a three point, and she dropped the front wheels down with just a smidge of a bounce, and settled in nice and steady at a 80 to 90 mph drop to tarmac. That same sequence before would induce a hop a good 15 feet (?) in the air, causing me to break something when I came back down every single time. Maybe I am just a bad pilot, hopefully the FM wasn't dumbed down for dummies like me, but I sure did crack a big smile when I didn't smear down the runway leaving a trail of parts!

Having a blast, this vid is from 3 weeks ago, the difference in landing now is night and day, plus some form of cylinder head temp modeling has been added, though I don't think you can damage the engine with overheating. IF this isn't enough to get you to download after waiting 6 years, I don't know what is:

You raise some good points, honestly better than the OP IMHO. DCS (as admitted by some of the most ardent defenders) has some holes in it for entry level seeking folks. However, I am "flabbergasted" by how folks who point out these shortcoming seem to always focus on how difficult it is to get that initial starting point information. Started "flying" in 2011, the KA-50. Talk about a tough module to take on for your first aircraft. The difference between 2011 DCS and 2020 DCS content wise is night and day. Yet, from 2011 - 2012 I was able to find all the information not in the manual (yes, I referenced the manual) I needed, it wasn't that difficult to fill in the gaps. 2020 DCS has so much content available now, through dozens upon dozens of content creators as compared to 2011/12 it is mind boggling. I am flabbergasted that new users keep insisting it is difficult to find this information. There is some kind of disconnect here. Honestly, I am at a loss as to why there is such a chasm between those who navigate and pick up on DCS and manage to amalgamate the information, and those who have difficulty - or maybe they don't have difficulty, but they don't like HOW they have to amalgamate and synthesize it?