DefaultFace

More nose down trim than normal definitely helps for 2 point landings in dcs. Thats how I was originally taught to do it in the 109. You trim full nose down so you need some back pressure to hold level flight & flare, look at the horizon over the nose as you touch down & centre the stick once the wheels are on.

Its doable, Ive done it many times in the 109, Mustang and even in the Spit and 190s as well. There is some tendency to bounce but as some people have mentioned it comes from the arrangement of the wheels in relation to the cg. Whether its overmodelled or not is hard to say, but I do get the impression that at least some of this comes from the reduced "feel" & sensitivity of flying a virtual airplane on a screen or in VR as compared to being a real flying & moving airplane.

Would be cool, but I wouldnt necessarily say its a simple task to make it from the one we have. Its fairly well known that there are differences in stability characteristics between bubble top and razorback aircraft, on both the Jug and the Mustang. Considering that alot of the work for the 47 in DCS had to be done on CFD etc due to the scarcity of original data, its may not be as easy as one would assume to create a razorback on the basis of what we currently have in DCS.

Yes thats what I was trying to say.... Will be interesting to see. The Me 210 also had controllability issues in the beginning IIRC and it is closer in configuration to the Mossie. Although that was due to a few other things as well.

https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/pdf/13-09032.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Couple_(mechanics) Most of the yawing forces come from the propeller slipstream anyway. IIRC the original P-38s (not counter rotating) were quite a handful on takeoff for this reason, but it is a slightly different case as the twin boom tail means the Rudders are behind the prop discs and in the slipstream. This is less so the case for the Mossie. Anyway as others have said there is no way 2 moments acting in the same direction can cancel out. And the point through which the torque acts plays no role here.

I think peoples complaint is not that you can't lock a DL target, but rather that there is no way to tell Jester to point the radar in the area of a DL contact so that you can then proceed to track & shoot at it.

+1 once we get the F-8 to go with it too that sounds like the starting lineup for some pretty cool missions.

Worst Ive had is a blackout during cat launch but its gone by the time you hit the end. Im running the V2 Beta for the skyhawk and the latest version of the carrier.

I used the 2 together earlier today and didnt have any serious issues.

I had tried this but not without NWS... I see now that it turns freely without NWS on. Excellent tip thanks.

Am I doing something wrong or is the turn radius of the Nosewheel steering just not that great? Taxiing aroudn on deck is quite a challenge it seems.

MW50 still does add some power above FTH, just not nearly the same amount as below.

Same with all except the Pony. Has been this way since the new belts were added.

Im definitely not a FlaK expert, but Im not sure its necessarily as simple as just comparing calibers.... Fuzing plays a large role, and really big FlaK also doesnt necessarily need to hit a target to do damage, just explode in the vicinity. A quick google search shows that at least for German 3,7cm FlaK similar ammo the the airborne cannons existed (HE, Incendiary, Mineshells etc). I also couldnt find any photos of a fighter sized aircraft that took a direct hit from FlaK in a relatively central area and made it back. Was by no means an exhaustive search though.

Theres not really anything to deflect. Im sure it will be added in due time as a kneeboard option, like was done for some of the more modern aircraft with armament configurations that can't be done from the cockpit. Its just silly to paint it as some sort of gross injustice against you, like theres some sort of hidden agenda.