klem

A really good demo fenrir. Virtually identical here. My personal tweaks are double-DDs at one o.clock and fully trimming out with flaps down (2 - 3 grads up) in case that helps anyone. Rolling right out on landing without brakes is really important. It's even possible to taxi on rudder alone if the speed is kept down and stay right on top of it.

But most of us are and many will for years to come.

I don't want it gamey. I want it historical.

Thank you Wags. Plenty of scope for campaigns :) Are 'Grass Airfields' fixed yet?

And were grateful for that, given the original scope. Wags, is your AVATAR the full scope of the map?

Looks like around Boulogne.

Ah, got it. I was afraid to run the exe before. It looks good!

Did you mean 'without ALGs' or 'with ALGs' ("we have a lot of work to do") Without would save dev time and we can add them when needed as grass fields. Also it would look a bit strange if we wanted to run pre-Overlord missions over France if they were all there.

I think you're missing my point. I am talking about the temporary fields in Normandy.

OK I have downloaded Why485's demo assuming it will allow me to switch the settings but I don't know how to use it. Is this run as a Mod under JSGME? Or if I run it does it permanently change my DCS files (integrity??). Incidentally, regardless of the FOV theory my triple screen only looks right on 80FOV (I am using 3Screen). Anything else and I'm too far forward or back in the cockpit. I'm content with that and looking forward to trying out the demo.

Thanks for the photo Basco1. An interesting point is that the aircraft is clearly much used, weathered and in need of a paint job. Not critical of course and yet the canopy is maintained in pristine condition. Incidentally the Squadron letters MT were used on Spitfires by 122 Sqdn from 1941, re-equipping with the MkIX in October 1942 operating over France until January 1944. After that they flew Mustangs including in Normandy so this photo is from before Overlord, not that it matters.

Nick, I was really talking about the airfields on the Normandy part of the map. There were very many temporary grass (dust!) fields and it seems a waste of the devs valuable time hard coding them all into the map when we could do that with 'Grass Airfield' in ME depending on the stage of Overlord being modelled. BTW thanks, I forgot to check in the mirror. Trust you to look!

My apologies, the Off periods are quite short and I missed the on/off label changes. Looks very good after all.

I emailed him. Eventually got a reply saying: "We periodically increase activations and will be doing so again soon. :)"

I did watch for that, perhaps I missed it, I'll look again. But that is what I meant by the gap, the models suddenly disappeared. I'll watch it again later (I'm on my tablet atm, another $£&*@ sleepless night!)

Calm down girls! I hope this isn't 'fake news' :) I haven't checked on any of the fields shown but if some are the temporary fields established after the landings and abandoned shortly afterwards, perhaps they should be no more than markers on the map and mission builders have to add them as grass airfields as their Overlord campaigns develop. Might save some dev time. I'm sure it wouldn't be long before somone creates 'mission templates' for stages of the campaign with the appropriate grass field in place.

Hi chihirobelmo I don't know if the 'area of interest' projector I mentioned used 'Serfoss' magnification. It was certainly about reducing the load on the graphics system and provide hi-res detail only in the area being looked at. Regarding 'seeing the target too soon', that is a separate consideration from 'magnifying to see the aircraft attitude/detail in more RL form' and you probably know there are arguments for making the dots easier or harder to see at various distances regardless of shape/aspect. In DCS there are the two issues of dots and models. Why485's demo shows your model theory very nicely but there is that point where the magnified distant model suddenly disappears altogether instead of phasing out to a faint dot. There's a 'gap'. Fix that problem and we're well on our way. I couldn't open that link because I'm not a member but no problem. I use triple 27" monitors, my eyes are about 70cm from the centre monitor and the RL FOV to the monitor edges is about 70 degrees. The three monitors reach out to the edge of my peripheral vision and with the a/c FOV set to 70-80 degrees (in SnapViews.lua) the cockpit view is very close to RL size. The only reason they differ between a/c is for fine tuning of some instrument positions. Even so, I find it hard to see distant dots and the models are OK within about half a mile (estimate) but shrink too quickly so even triple monitor setups could do with some magnification versus distance. I have had second thoughts about an 'area of interest' magnification key because it would have to be where I am looking, i.e. using TrackIR co-ordinates, and I expect that would be too difficult to implement.

An interesting piece. If anyone isn't aware, Serfoss proposes this magnification method for professional military flight simulators and proposes magnification factors. Back in the late 80's I was involved in a military simulator programme that used a high definition "area of interest" projector to give high definition rendering in the area of the pilot's head-tracked view (think TrackIR but done differently), over about 15 degrees FOV, the rest of the background being low res. Writing in 2003 Serfoss was still saying that technique wasn't really practical and says why. However it gives me an idea. Against 'increasing the target size' is the argument that the aircraft will be seen 'too soon'. Well, supposing there was a key that would magnify the centre 10 degree FOV of the monitor by the factors chihirobelmo proposes. So, first you must be aware that there is a target, then look at (centre) your target and press the key for more (magnified) detail without losing overall SA as we do with a full screen zoom-in. I suspect this idea may briefly affect frame rates (a bit like the mirror does) but it might be worth considering.

I just exit the request. I bought it but I'm never likely to use it while this nonsense carries on. Down to 7 activations now and no reply to or even acknowledgement of my email to LNS.

That could be tricky to implement and may in fact mean two maps :shocking:

And therein lies a clue. Adolph Galland said of taking off and landing the Spitfire that it was ridiculously easy compared to his beloved 109.

Hold about half right stick (aileron) as speed picks up. Be ready to adjust as necessary to keep wings level while dancing on the rudder until gentle climbout is achieved. For off line practice rub your tummy while patting on your head :)

There is a fundamental flaw in creating canopy textures 'as seen' or 'as photograped' because the viewer's focus is on the canopy itself. In RL you do not focus on the canopy, you look through it with eyes focused on a distant object/aircraft. Therefore the dirt and scratches are out of focus, far less noticeable and this should be taken into account when modelling the canopy as we have only one 2D viewing option. Also, we can propose the 'current real' circumstances and decide that the ground crew are doing the job they were always praised for and polishing the canopies with their Clairol to a high finish. Also we can decide that the ground support organisation ensures replacement canopies are available. Would they really have sent the majority of young men up in the majority of cases with canopies that would impair one of the most critical aspects of air fighting - visibility? We currently have only one canopy option. Surely that should reflect the most likely situation rather than a 'what if' or 'wouldn't it be interesting if' scenario? IMHO clean polished canopies would be the norm for most combat aircraft in which young men are sent to risk their lives. The DCS norm should be clean canopies with an option of dirty, poorly maintained canopies for the more sadistic mission builders.

Glad you found a solution crowebar. You may like to know that the 'bank indicator' needle is actually called the 'rate of turn' indicator and does just that, it gives an indication of the rate the a/c is turning in the air. But it is useful as you describe. Personally I prefer to watch the nose against the sky/clouds for directional input so that my head is 'out of the office' but you are correct about the +/- 2 deflection (on landing I'm kicking much harder at times). I've also found that about 20% right rudder trim is enough - the word "rudder" on the trim wheel is at about 1 o'clock from the top position. But whatever floats your boat......

I used the fix and it worked for a day. Perhaps something to do with problems I am having installing more memory but why the hell should LS care or even have the right to concern themselves with my P.C. configuration? I have emailed them, last week, no reply so far. I might just junk the MiG-21.