DB 605

Already down to zero. But i did re-test it and yes there is slight stiffening at over 480mph or so.

Well yeah, some of the replacement G6's and G2's were rebuilt but majority was new.

No they weren't. Some of the G2's (from first batch, 16 new/14 rebuilt) were, but one that was in finnish tests (MT-215) was brand new erla built. All G6's were new too.

In open beta? Because i just tested "normal" version and didn't noticed any elevator stiffness at 450mph/sealevel when i leveled it from dive. And i was in believe that elevator forces are only modelled to K4 so far.

What do you mean by this?

Or 16190 and 16191...but yeah, hard to say from those small pics. There is another pics there: http://www.arsenal-45.de/shop/product_info.php?info=p9_----instrumentpanel---messerschmitt-bf-109-k4----.html but unfortunately just as small. Of course you can buy whole instrument panel at 572,00 eur :)

Exactly like it was in '44-'45 :)

Another pic from repro panel, should be authentic thought.

Printscreen and at least my shots are in C:users/owner/saved games. :)

Usually there was some kind of squadron badges or different coloured bands painted to planes, however from very late war fighters these were usually missing. Sometimes you can tell it by style and/or color used on number painted to frame as different squadrons were known from certain style or color. Most of the time however i'll check what my books or internet sources say about it :) Edit, ninja'd by JST, check post #80

"Red 23" of JG 27 getting ready to take-off, spring 1945.

I warmly recommend to try them :) There is instructions with JST skins but i'll copy it here: Installation: #1 Unzip folder to DCSWorld/Bazar/Liveries/Bf-109K-4 #2 In skin folder, choose .lua file from two sub-folders for swastika or clean and copy file to main folder with other files (Default .lua file is for swastika!) #3 In DCS, select "Payload" tab in Mission Planner and select the skin from the Paint Scheme dropmenu below

Another masterpiece skin from JST - makes K4 looks very sleek. Also never get tired of details in K4 3d model...just lovely.

Tried Flight replicas 109 few years ago. Only positive point i can remember was good 3d model and nice cockpit. Other than that it felt and sound pretty horrible, i would never compare it to DCS 109 personally. :)

Another gem from JST, many thanks!

I have "Checkflight Gustav" cd and there's onboard recording from "black six" (G2) and during take-off you can clearly hear that horn sound until pilot have take flaps up, with take-off power. IIRC it's same way in one of the EADS "rote 7" onboard videos.

So, as the poll says, it's JU 88 for axis and B-25 for allied. Great! :D Devs can choose the exact models for them...Seriosly, if there was Ju 88 in game i would probably spent most of the time in it's cockpit. It's easily my favourite in Clod and it's now coming to BoM too.

I have full finnish G2 test report somewhere in the house, problem is that i have not seen it in last couple of years. I'll try to find it and check what it says about trimming. Because i have to agree with JG52 Otto, trimming as it's now in DCS 109 seems quite weird to say at least.

MW50 system was fitted most of K4's. edit. ninja'd by saburo

Well, i just don't believe fuel octane will change situation much to any direction. I'm just bit tired of that "because they have this and that, we need this" etc. Planes, or their fuels/equpment is not selected by us users but devs. I'm probably going to buy every ww2 plane they'll release and will enjoy them all no matter what fuel is available.

Laughed a bit when i read that...:D I have seen Invader "live" couple of times and it really is fast and manouverable but probably not that much... B-26 would get my vote for allied "twin" too tought, but i voted Ju 88 because it's my all time favourite bomber.

It doesen't "proove" anything. I personally don't care too much about what fuel Jug will have but do you seriously believe 150 octane would help it to fight against Me 262? :lol:

If you re-read this thread carefully you may note that majority of people is not against it - it's other way round actually. I'm personally very glad it's done like it's done, we just want to make sure it's close as possible to reality. Everyone who knows a bit aviation history knows 109 has it shortcomings, it's probably better known by it's faults than good points.

Yes, i just re-did same tests at 3000m, 400 and 450km/h IAS. Results were around 5 sec, without using rudder at all (to compare my previous test). I guess it's very close to real one, finnish test for G2 says 4-5 seconds. :thumbup: Anyway, after couple hours of flying, stick forces doesen't feel excessive at all anymore. I just needed to get used to them. Flying the K4 is now better than ever.

Okay, maybe i just need to get used to it then :) Pitch control forces are not modelled yet to fw 190 and p-51, right?