SmirkingGerbil

Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. All comes before Devastate, annihilate and liberate. Best synopsis ever. :thumbup:

Thanks for your answers, and honestly I think you are on to something with the TF-51. Put some guns on it, let new players at least experience the thrill of combat, at least from a WWII perspective, with the "free" module. I think that would go a long way towards keeping people intrigued and interested before they made the "big leap". I can relate to some of your issues. I also read the AAR post after you created this one, since it was referenced. Like others I am torn, as I wish DCS to succeed and grow, but not to sacrifice what makes DCS so unique. Maybe my fears are overblown? My experience was quite different, I actually began playing in 2011 with the Steam Version, and registered here finally in 2013. I started with the KA-50, talk about overwhelming. Of course then I wasn't using a TM Thrustmaster, just a simple joystick and a keyboard. However, I did manage to learn to fly it, and get a lot of enjoyment out of the KA-50 with that setup, and yes I had to lurk in forums to fill in the blanks. However, learning to fly the KA-50, deep diving in forum topics, digging around on the Internet and yes "Reading the Manual" are what got me to that point. I will admit, DCS is not for the faint of heart. Then I bought the A-10C, and it took two attempts about 3 years apart to get good enough to enjoy. Yes I used You Tube a lot, and of course I "Read the Manual". The A-10C is pure joy, and worth the time. I guess that is really what it comes down to, after reading your posts here and in the AAR thread, is the time commitment, and yes, it is steep. However, I guess it is what it is worth to you. To master a difficult simulation or just enjoy the aircraft without the time commitment. I don't have the answer in that regard. I have a demanding job, and I am an amateur Triathlete (racing for 20+ years), and I guess it all comes down to allocation. Triathlon, like DCS, requires enormous time, to get the most enjoyment out of it. I am not sure how DCS can keep folks hooked during that initial phase of bewilderment and sense of being overwhelmed. I only mention Triathlon, because after certain distances over the Half Iron distance, without the time and discipline involved you will probably have a really bad day. There are no "easy guides" for how to get into the sport, and without an investment in gear, training, time etc. Lots of research too, and of course, plenty of You Tube! Basically, I experienced the same sort of deep dive and time that is required from Tri, as it is in DCS in order to enjoy it to the fullest. I just stuck in there, and I am glad I did. Other than a better introduction overall, and a focus on new user "bootstrapping" I am not really sure how to ease someone into DCS.

Switch to "Arcade Mode". I am not saying DCS is easy. I read the OP's lengthy treaty on his first few times with the free aircraft in another post. I am curious since even with these he was "frustrated" since there was no familiarity with the avionics. This is DCS after all, I am curious about his initial reactions to the two free aircraft. Since he also states he has "years" of experience in other flight sims. Why was DCS such a struggle? Just curious as to how that introduction could be made better for new users. Besides, instead of asking for changes to DCS, just flip back and forth like I do. Want to jump in and fly, not worry about bindings, PFM, all the immersion that makes DCS what it is, then fly the "other" title for easy mode fly and gun. Then when you have gotten your fill of "easy mode", come back here and learn to master all the intricacies. I am still confused why folks ask for certain things to be changed in DCS (including reducing time involved), when for $40.00 you can get one module in the "other" title and fly your brains out and not be bothered with all the things that make DCS . . . well, DCS.

Jumping into the F-14 module, as your initial experience, shouldn't be the metric by how you consider making DCS more "noob" friendly. Buying several modules as you mention, is not required, as you get two free ones to start. The F-14 is arguably one of the more complex modules in the DCS stable. My questions to you (to understand why an easier path wasn't apparent), would be why didn't you try the free airplanes that come with DCS World first? From a "noob" perspective, I would like to understand your thoughts or experiences (good/negative) with the following: 1.) Did DCS make it clear that free, and simpler aircraft were available to get your feet wet? Was this information handy or no? 2.) Should DCS push the "free aircraft" as the initial first step for new users, and supplement that with better training experiences around those aircraft? 3.) Were you aware of these two free aircraft and the simpler flight model? If yes, why did you go straight to the F-14, if no, would it have mattered to you had you known? 4.) Was it that you saw the F-14, and this is what attracted you to DCS, so you took this path either knowing of the free models, or not, due to a desire to experience such an air frame?

Thanks Yo-Yo - I realize I am combining modern terminology and a pure wastegate operation Turbo from that era. Trying to visualize that physical connection or electro/mechanical operation of how the wastegates were operated and the effect on the Power Plant, along with the use of the Boost lever. I did find a couple references to a electro/mechanical interface for exhaust back pressure, but no real diagram. Also found a picture showing a braided steel cable, housing some type of tubing exiting the turbo-supercharger. I imagine this would be the pressure sensing device, and at some point a coupling whether electrical or mechanical was used to control wastegate operation at varying altitudes - along with pilot operation of the Boost lever. Appreciate your time describing what you know, very helpful. ED's modeling of this airframe is remarkable considering the complexity of the mechanical supercharger coupled with the turbocharger. Apologies for my rudimentary understanding, and poor use of terminology!

One more if I may. After researching on this, I am getting mostly modern references to "Variable Geometry Turbo's", "Variable Vane Turbo's" or closer to your usages "Variable Nozzle Turbo's". So in effect, an Aneroid device measured exhaust gas back pressure at the entrance into the exhaust turbo nozzle, and adjusted Waste Gates automatically on this reading - or more accurately, Waste Gates reacted to this measurement via some mechanical linkage? In effect, creating a primitive Variable Vane turbocharger?? Again, many thanks, I find understanding all the interactions of the P-47 and engine management fascinating!

Great link sir, thank you! :thumbup: Fortunately I grew up with Grandparents that let me disassemble their lawnmowers, and my neighbor had a nasty little 67 Camaro with a 327 Small Block that he would let me tinker on. At 13 years old, I bought a Chevy 327 block from a junk yard, built a stand for it, and tore it apart and "rebuilt" it many times over. However, when the P-47 quadrant first dropped, the first thing I did was get out my old vacuum gauges, take some readings, put them on a hand held pump and think things through. The P-47 has at least 4 things (outside of altitude) that will affect MP, and it is a real thought experiment to think through various settings and what will happen to MP. This article is a great refresher, and keeps the concepts simple before layering up with all the things that can cause a P-47 to hit 70 inches or more!

Sir, By invoking the statements of the gentlemen in the video, and reinforcing what I myself have seen personally in France, French people honor American War dead, as if they were their own, this includes various cemeteries from WWI also. I am always touched by this. His statement about Parisians was humorous within the context of his experiences, and I found amusing, as it could be applied here in the States to many places, for example Texas. I personally have never been to Paris, mostly to regions outside of Troyes, and through Belgium, Luxembourg, and areas of Northern France. My daughter has been to Paris, and loved the city! My Uncle was in the first waves onto Normandy, Utah beach. He survived that, then fought at Bastogne, wounded, and continued to fight on well into Germany proper. He always remembered the folks of France fondly. I echo your sentiment in regards to how my Uncle viewed his French counterparts.

"Don't complain about the French, they take care of our dead . . . now if you want to complain about Parisians, well that is okay, because Parisians don't even like other French, only other Parisians" Love that line, have been to those areas (thought not directly in them) and the folks in the French countryside do great honor by our local folks buried there.

Fully mapped on my Thrustmaster HOTAS now. Becoming second nature with trim, and engine management to offset for torque/power etc. Becoming second nature with no keyboard interaction to squeeze out a bit more power here and there. Cruising along, hands off at 380 knots, maybe some minor rudder input has become a relaxing scenic drive faster than my A-10C will hold. When we get our WEP function, and the Cylinder Head Temps along with some other visual things get finished . . . you can bet I will show up to test her out.

Eureka! Thank you Yo-Yo! I hadn't come across anything like this, and now I have a good reference and explanation to add to my understanding. Very much appreciated.

Could I humbly request an explanation on when the supercharger kicks into second stage and what dictates that (or a known link would work!!?). Another humble request as I also cannot find an online reference (one I can understand) on what sensors (vacuum?) is the P-47 using and from what device/location to drive the waste gates so that the turbo spools up depending on altitude and other engine parameters? I did listen to Greg's excellent tutorials but having trouble putting it all in one easy to reference place. I will also settle for links and admonishments for not searching harder! :lol::lol:

Interesting, a few things here that make me question sim conditions. First off your Horizon Indicator is still caged, even though you are in a steep climb, according to your climb indicator. So we can't really tell what angle of attack you were at from a horizon perspective. As noted, your battery is off, so you must have switched it off after Generator came online? Also, your engine temp is zero along with your oil pressure exceeding nominal values so all kinds of wonky things here. Can't see your propeller speed handle, so as noted your pitch settings could be causing this if diving, but it shows you are in a climb??? So I am going to classify this as "errata and anomalous behavior for WIP":)

Sticky so I can find this!

What throttle and propeller, boost, settings are you using? Remember the prop pitch, combined with boost at certain altitudes is going to dictate how much bite that giant Curtis paddle is going to take out of the air.

Which past? 2.44 GHZ is slower, but has better penetration through structures, and generally a stronger signal. 5 GHZ is very weak by comparison, very lossy, but does have greater bandwidth. Routinely build out 500K+ square foot warehouses, and pretty much put any kind of roaming clients on 2.44 Ghz, as 5 Ghz is worthless for anything except mobile phones (for games, FB etc). As far as server traffic, VoIP (handsets), etc. Always, always CAT 6 cable minimum. Wireless won't even cut it. For all of our dual load balanced backbone connections from South America, through North America into Western Europe, and central Russia . . . copper or fiber all the way. Wireless for encrypted Internet connections is a no go due to packet loss, doesn't even exist on our MPLS backbone due to the QinQ speeds we obtain on L2 switched backbones. Wireless is icing on a cake, but when it absolutely has to work, every time, copper or fiber is your only choice. But that is just my humble opinion of building carrier grade networks for the last 20 years FWIW.

Not to mention what happened to the mighty Hood, when one Ship Gun round penetrated through a weak superstructure area and hit the magazine. Plenty of other instances of bombs or artillery (ship) rounds dropping in through upper decks and creating havoc. I have been going after the Molinya with my A-10C in a mission I setup, and if I get a good deck hit with a GBU-12, she usually sinks first hit every time, or becomes severely damaged as to become dead in the water or extremely slow with some systems knocked out.

So stupid question, if you "j link" your maps to different folders, then run a command line update (I never do gui), does the "j link" keep track of that or will you have to download the entire map to the actual directory then move it again?

Bwaaaa ha ha ha ha ha . . . agreed!

Been flying since 2011. My join date here is when I started flying non-Steam version. I started with the KA-50, and have added many many modules since, WWII assets, all the maps, and a kickstarter to boot with the WWII birds. I have seen nothing but consistent progress for 9 years.

So I got to the part (after listening to 4 minutes about his office) where he mentioned he reviewed, noted the issues. Same things that have been noted in the release notes. Then he states "3 days later they released it . . . " and he goes on. Not once as far as I listened did he mention BETA. I stopped listening. He was just going to have his session to complain, that's all the diatribe was. Maybe he mentioned it later, but 7 mins in, you get nothing about BETA. Flying my P-47, and having a blast. Keeping track of known issues in the Bug list, factoring all that in, and still enjoying my BETA P-47 I also installed and am playing the Channel map that same day. I run both Stable and OB, both are working fine, logging in is working fine. Account profile is fine. I am making missions with Triggers for my P-47 working fine. WWII assets are tracking and using roads fine. Maybe he jacked something up rearranging his office???

:thumbup:

You mean, that does work. I have flown several times with no prop, no cowling, and maintained speed, and smooth flight! :megalol::megalol::megalol: Listed in the bug section.

Thanks for the input ShadowFrost. I fly the Anton regularly, the P-51 and the Spit every now and again. The damage with the P-47 (to me) is quite the outlier, but you are right with how it will be handled. Just a bit of an adjustment to lose your entire cowling, and prop, then wait to figure out if you REALLY lost your cowling and your prop, or if it is still there and functioning, but magically transparent. :lol::lol:

Great to hear you messaged Nineline - you commented on my bug report as well, so we should have visibility.