Luzifer

I think one of the rocket or bombing tutorials explicitly mentioned that radar is not needed. So I don't think this is accidental. Could still be unrealistic though.

Just how does the sight calculate an impact solution for bombing? It has gyros and accelerometers for sure, but it should need to know the distance to ground to properly calculate the impact point as far as I know. I know the tutorials say you can enable the radar in fixed beam mode, but that is optional and it works just fine – or at least almost as good – without. So how does it work without radar?

No, that is the oxygen for engine starting. The pilot's oxygen supply is indicated in the forward part of the left panel, the indicator with the flow pulsers.

This contradicts what? BLC is only active with flaps fully extended. If you go faster than 380 km/h, the flaps would be pushed up by aerodynamic forces which causes the BLC to turn off. To prevent that and the associated altitude loss, you must restrict speed on go around to 360 km/h.

The unintuitive part may be that maneuvering in the air doesn't have the same restrictions as landing. You can do very high AoA in the air without problems, but when landing you need sufficient lift to reduce vertical speed to a safe rate without so much AoA that the tail hits the ground first. And you need to see where you're going. (Alternative solution: very high landing gear and a mechanism to move the nose out of the way for better visibility * – like the Concorde.)

So you don't understand why a tail dragger bounces when it is put down on the main wheels? You actually think it is the shock absorbers catapulting it back in the air?

That's been my experience, too. I was steering during taxiing without using the brakes unless I need to do a really tight turn. And I noticed that at lower engine RPM steering doesn't work as well or at all.

That would be aerodynamic lift generated by the fuselage, I guess.

I had something similar descending from a high altitude, the airspeed indicator dropped until it was around 150 kts before it recovered as I leveled off. I was much faster. Effect like pitot icing but pitot heat was on. I think I was on idle during descent, but I think the windmilling kept the engine generator running. I've looked into some real world manuals, but I don't remember if pitot heat runs off the generator or battery DC. Maybe it was before I found out that I had to put the starter switch on "battery" after startup so maybe the pitot heat was realistically unpowered.

DCS, like pretty much all games, uses a rectilinear projection since any other would require heavy processing. The distortion you see is the same you would get if you snapped a photo with a real camera from the same position with a rectilinear (i.e. not fish eye) ultra wide angle lens.

Don't ask me for a link (this subforum has been active like hell these last days), but I've seen it said that the wings breaking under overload isn't implemented yet. They are still researching good data to model it properly.

I came in a bunch of hours after the release and I already saturated my 18 Mb/s line (until I started some other downloads in parallel). So yes, it appears to have improved a lot.

This is a FW 190. No playing with prop pitch or mixture there.

The GPS on those planes is much better than what you know from everyday live. It's not just better receivers, it's that the full precision GPS data is encrypted and civilian GPS receivers use only the degraded public GPS data. That's what the GPS erase button somewhere in the cockpit is for, to erase the keys before crashing to prevent them from falling into enemy hands.

UH-1 isn't beta anymore and the MiG-21 won't have a public beta.

They are movable and flush with the fuselage when retracted.

Wait... Are we still talking about a MiG-21 video?

IAS is measured as the pressure of air blowing into a tube facing forward. In order to get the same IAS at high altitudes in the thinner air, you actually have to fly flaster. So you have a higher TAS for the same IAS in thinner air. You still use IAS for everything since that determines how the plane handles (i,e, if it stalls at x knots IAS, it stalls at x knots IAS no matter the altitude). You can compute the TAS from the IAS by factoring in the static air pressure. Some planes have instruments for TAS, since maximum speed may depend on TAS (if there's no instrument, at least there will be a table somewhere in the cockpit that tells you how much max speed IAS reduces with altitude). To compute ground speed without GPS you would need to know TAS and wind at your altitude.

Um... The APU is a turbine, it uses the same fuel as the engines. Plus it should charge the batteries when its generator is online. Starting the APU will use the batteries since it is cranked by an electric motor.

I remember one review of Wing Commander mentioning its high hardware requirements. It noted that a 386 was really recommended and you wouldn't have much fun on an XT. :D

It can't possibly be as bad as the first days after the UH-1H release. :D

Doesn't at least the Eurofighter have the capability of launching at a target behind it? Anyway, it's probably more efficient to launch the missile forward and let it turn around using aerodynamic lift instead of doing all that with the rocket engine alone.

Radeon HD6950

That doesn't do anything in this case. Backface culling culls polygons you would see from the back side. It would only cull the water plane when you see it from the back, i.e. you are under the water.

It doesn't need LockOn anymore.