NeilWillis

If you're flying in game mode, you'll also need to map the keys in the F-5E game category. The sim category will not apply to game mode use.

As I said, nice that you have an opinion all of your own. Historically, there were a few minor niggles, that have long ago been rectified. The most often quoted statements - which coincided with the release of Normandy were that the Spitfire had suddenly become easier to fly. Everyone falsely assumed there had been a change to the Spitfire modelling. All of that was denied by ED, and it was just a collective realisation that they could land the Spitfire. Go practice some more, and don't confuse your in-built muscle memory for the Bf-109 with better modelling. The two just handle differently, and the Spitfire is absolutely fine in it's ground handling and low speed flying characteristics. "It must be broke cuz I can't do it" isn't really an analytical assessment.

Well, that's one opinion. The wrong one, but hey, it's a free world! The Spitfire, like all tail draggers is a lot harder to land than you think. It has a narrow undercarriage, and you have to cope with a lot of contradictory forces, that change a lot during the landing phase. With practice, it'll come, and they you can start to really show off with wheeler landings. It is just a very demanding phase of flight.

I heard a report about an ultra bright light laser system that is supposed to make scanning x-ray machines with huge resolutions possible. They're already seeing the possibilities of ultra microscopic computer chips being a possibility. Maybe the next step in computing isn't going to be down the quantum road after all, and it could make some big steps possible much sooner with current technology taking a leap forwards. Those ultra high speed chips could be a year or two away, who knows?

Cheese sandwich on the left, thermos flask on the right.

In a crosswind, it isn't travelling with a mass of air, it is crossing it as it moves relative to the aircraft's flight path. Any force applied to a body against which it is not symmetrically applied will always induce a rotational moment. Go do some basic physics instead of making accusations.

Yes, if you are part of a moving mass of air or water, you will make lee way or drift over a fixed point on the ground or ocean floor. An aircraft will have a tendency to yaw when flying into a cross wind if there is an imbalance of side forces due to the shape of the airframe. In other words, the tail fin will create more wind resistance than the fuselage, and so the nose will usually tend to turn into the wind. A crosswind will manifest itself in the HUD of an A-10C by the flight path marker and ladder being offset. Placing the flight path marker over your chosen direction of travel will offset the nose of the aircraft to make the aircraft fly on the chosen bearing. It is when you are close to the ground that you'll notice the lee way drift most clearly.

A long time ago it was said that the whole ATC package is getting overhauled. No doubt there will be better local operational variation along with that. NTC would be a very useful addition, and I am sure that given time, ED will re-visit NTTR. Unfortunately they have had to prioritize stuff like the F/A-18. I am sure given the choice between another airfield, or a whole new airframe, their priorities might be considered wise? I'd read "not yet" rather than "not at all" into the info we currently have on NTTR. Truth is though, we can never be sure. Those people at ED do like their surprises!

Charly Owl hit the nail on the head. There is a huge difference between a simulation of an era, and a study sim of an aircraft. Right now, IL-2 has the era nailed, whereas DCS has the study sim in progress. Frankly, this discussion is taking place a year or two too early for DCS World to even come close to the kind of depth provided by IL-2 - purely in the number of assets available. To expect some kind of mass migration from one genre to another is missing the point entirely, apart from which, Normandy as a theatre is in it's infancy. Once it is fully implemented, and bug free, then you'll probably see higher figures. Normandy is still pre-release only, with a large number owning the software, but waiting for it to mature before anything serious is done with it. There isn't even a campaign yet, and without decent mission writers creating suitable stuff, there is very little attraction for it. Wait an absolute minimum of 6 months and have this conversation again, and I expect you'll see hugely different results.

They'd be most welcome JST.

Voicing valid criticism is one thing. Not allowing the testing phase to end before sounding off is quite another, so no, you have proven no point at all beyond your unreasonable assumption that 3rd party devs have nothing better to do than cater to your every whim. No one objects to reasoned, and considered complaints. We're just too close to the initial release for there to be any hope of a valid whinge here. Give it a couple of months, and repost it, and maybe we'll take you seriously!

Great work, as always. Thanks JST.

Just do clearing turns. It's what real world pilots would do too.

Go to the controls options section. Select gazelle from the drop down menu if it isn't already selected. Go to Axis commands. Ensure there is only a single entry for each of the bound inputs - the default will create an entry for each axis in each of the connected controllers, and this always needs to be re-set for each new module installed.

Remind me again, how long has 2.1.x been in the public domain? Is it months or years? Oh no, of course, it is just a few weeks. So no, the comments are simply unreasonable, and the fan boy label is frankly childish and immature. Traits that go along with impatience and exaggerated comments, so much to be expected I feel. Clearly work needs to be done, but in the meantime, there is 1.5 - the release version of DCS World, in which the MiG-21Bis performs well, even if it is feature incomplete according to some of you. It seems people demand instant gratification as soon as an Alpha version of DCS World hits the public domain. That I am afraid will only ever lead to frustration and name calling. Get real guys. A month is no time at all to expect results. Give them a break.

It is the most objective review I have ever seen of a sim module. It appears unbiased, and comes from a guy with far more experience of real world helicopters than the majority of us. Excellent work.

If you expect too much you will be disappointed. You entered into an agreement with RAZBAM that for a given sum of money, they'd sell you an incomplete module - a Beta release. There was no written undertaking by RAZBAM that they'd concentrate purely on the Mirage to the exclusion of all other modules. Unless you can show me anything to the contrary - which you obviously can't. As a consumer, you have no right whatsoever to try and dictate terms to the vendors. You cannot earmark money for a specific project, you cannot demand progress at any particular pace, and you cannot dictate their business policy, or which module they can or can't prioritize or defer. You have no right to complain when you have exactly what they promised you'd get - a Beta release. If you tell other potential customers not to buy because you are less than satisfied then you are being completely unreasonable. There are some minor snags with the Mirage that simply do not detract from what is an excellent module, and one that is still a work in progress. If you buy now you'll get a great package that will get better still. Stop being unreasonable guys, and please keep things in perspective. RAZBAM are a highly reputable organisation who have a lot of products on the market in other sims. Don't let your impatience cloud your judgement. And beware of crossing the line when it comes to spoiling the reputation of a high quality product.

If you're having real issues, why participate in the Beta testing phase at all?

There are English cockpit mods out there. It'll have to do until the official one reaches the top of the priority list (and I hope it is pretty low on that list right now!)

The size of patches currently being pushed out are due mostly to the new graphics and other items associated with the Normandy map. It will settle down soon I suspect, but in the meantime, it is inevitable I am afraid.

Plenty of people. The real question should be whether developers are interested in it too.

When ED give us something to talk about regarding 2.5, then the discussion will gain some momentum, and relevance. Right now, we're in the midst of Normandy being fixed and the rolling out of a stable and complete 2.1. All we know right now is 2.5 is coming, but we don't know when, and it is on hold until Normandy is complete. The state of the F/A-18C is a separate issue, and we can hopefully expect to see it this year, but even that is by no means certain. Exhibiting a demo is a different animal to releasing it as an almost complete module..

The issue hasn't been marketing strategy or anything else. It has been due to the fact that the base game is still under development, and will continue to be for some time to come yet. Once 2.5 has been thoroughly debugged, you will see a sea change in development of both terrain and aircraft. DCS World will probably continue to evolve for many years to come, but huge changes like the introduction of an entirely new graphics engine will cause issues all the way down the line for developers. I suspect a lot of map work has been shelved simply because the base code is still very volatile. Once it has settled down, things will move faster I expect.

If wearing out drives is a problem for you, I'd suggest you place any important data elsewhere, and wear out that sucker doing what it is supposed to do. What else were SSDs invented for if it wasn't DCS World! By the time you wear it out, the replacement will be as cheap as chips.

Excellent work. I wish we could afford custom skins of that standard!