Art-J

You'll probably be better off asking either in a thread dedicated to A-4... or its discord channel.

Although more precise patchnotes is always a nice thing to have, let's be honest - If majority of servers use OB anyway, mentioning known issue in 2.9 Stable changelog is kind of pointless. MP users who should now - they already know (because most of them are on OB in the first place).

Oi! Speak for yourself . I'd love to be able to remove that ugly fokker from Il-2GB Mossie where he only obstructs the view and does nothing else. Lack of crew body models is the best decision ED could make for its Mossie. If they ever implement AI navigator, fine, they can add 3D model as well as long as it remains optional. For the time being, though, I don't want any lump of dead meat to limit the view and access to switches on the right.

Following 2.9, old shortcuts which previously launched the game in singlethreaded mode now launch it in multithreaded one by default. Double check where your Reshade is installed (Bin or Bin-MT folder?) and edit / create shortcuts to the right DCS.exe accordingly.

No way to have it from ED as long as DCS is still limited to single global set of ATC voice samples for each side (red/blue). As a custom mod, however, to be enabled/disabled at will via OvGME whenever you need to switch back to stock voices for other planes? It could be done I'm sure if you find a modder willing to work on it. SFC Tako used to have custom language ATC voices in his DCS videos, but he deletd his YT channel it seems, so it's not possible to check what mods he used. You can always PM him, though.

Mate, with all due respect, I'm puzzled now by that statement and not sure you understand what detail exactly is being discussed here. The mysterious shutdown sputter has been a "thing" in Mustang, Spit and Mossie since their respective releases years ago, so it literally is impossible NOT to experience it. Unless of all warbirds in DCS, you only ever flew Mossie and only in hot-started missions, which I know can not be the case because of great tutorial missions and videos you created for that plane. Now, thinking about the Merlin engine itself, one could argue that fuel is being cut off at pressure carb level and thus there's still unspecified some of the mixture left in manifold between carb and intake valves. That still doesn't explain, however, why there's never any loud sputter after hot-stared missions, and there always is one (with 5 or 6 "bangs") after cold-started missions. Doesn't matter what shutdown procedure is followed. I mentioned it before and showed in replay tracks posted on previous page already, but once again just for you - below is another replay track which follows "to a T" the period-correct shutdown procedure you posted. All by mouse to avoid variables in form of HOTAS buttons/witches assignments. And yet, with the same and repeatable result - fast and quiet shutdown after spawning hot-started, but longer and sputtery shutdown after engines are restarted. P.S. - I guess there's one more thing we might check later - what would happen if we only used built in auto-start and auto-stop commands? Let's allow DCS code do its job without human interference and see the results. Cheers! 2.9_cutoff_test 4.trk

^ Yup, but such an upgrade is a separate item only in Steam. In ED shop the product is just listed as a "Normandy 2.0 map", with relevant discount for Normandy 1 / Channel owner showing up after logging in.

I'm not quite sure which problem original post is supposed to highlight, because the post is a bit confusing: 1) that Mossie is generally impossible to trim out for hands off level flight for more than a minute maybe? IF the reference docs ED used showed the real thing had so low static stability margins then there's nothing to "fix" here; 2) that there is no AI pilot to take over flying when we switch to nav seat, similar to one in Mi-8, -24, AH-64? Then yes, I agree and I hope he'll be implemented eventually. It's still a "planned" feature allegedly, and I hope it's not going to end up in neverending hold pattern like other "planned" thing ie. Fw-190 F8; 3) that Mossie can still be controlled to some extent from nav seat? Well, technically navigator had access to rudder and aileron trim wheels, so he could operate these two. Realistic or not, as long as point number 2 above is not addressed by ED, I'd rather still retain the ability to control the plane as navigator - at least it allows me to last-second save myself from crash after looking back too long!

Rgr that. Well, I'll keep an eye on it next time I fly the Spit, but I'm pretty sure I really never experienced anything similar. MFG crosswinds here. Do you use t.a.r.g.e.t soft with these TPRs of yours? Or Joystick Gremlin or anything of that sort? Also, do you have two separate controls folders in your Saved Games, for CW Spit and normal one? The bug with ctrl edits saved in one not transfering automatically to the other was allegedly fixed in last-but-one OB patch, but still.... I'm trying to figure out why your input-output combo reacts different to other guys flying Spit here.

@NealiusOK, but to play devil's advocate, I'd say modern planes might not be the good example. They are heavily automated after all and the only thing pilot needs to do in them is pushing the relevant buttons in correct sequence. One cannot make it either less immersive/realistic (without going full FC3) or more immersive/realistic, as there's nothing "analog" left for player to do. OK, Sabre and MiG-15 can have their engines flooded if we move levers too fast, but other than that, it's always just click click click in correct order. So In my opinion the logic is already the same for DCS warbirds and modern aircraft currently - just a string of scripted events which make the engine go hot or cold in repeatable manner (aformentioned Mossie shenanigans notwithstanding!). Certainly makes programming auto-start and auto-stop sequences easier for devs and I was quite surprised reading some time ago how many DCS players use these shortcuts even in fully-clickable modules. Simply put, nerds like us who would like to fiddle with primers, magnetos and mixture levers according to variable weather conditions really seem to be minority in DCS. And since the whole WWII shebang has always been a bit of a side-quest for ED in grand scheme of things, I don't think we will ever see more fidelity implemented in engine modelling (even though I'd absolutely love to face more challenge while starting piston-powered machines).

I remember Yo-Yo's post in one of the wishlist threads (for less regular startup and shutdown sequences) where he said coding all idiosyncrasies of fuel, ignition and exhaust during these transitional phases would be a waste of time in combat sim where most of folks just want to take off and blow s..t up. I kind of understand that, because no matter how cool the nerdy-feature is, once the novelty wears off majority won't care about it anymore. So, simplified sequences are here to stay and I can deal with it, even though I use DCS primarily for non-combat flying. There are, however, some noticeable issues even with these simplified procedures. To sum it up, there seem to be two scripted shutdown sequences in all Merlin-powered DCS planes, one quick and "clean" without excessive backfire (maybe just a few muted pops) and one longer, "dirty" with excessive and loud backfire. In Spit and Mustang you'll get one or the other depending on engine RPM when mixture cutoff is activated and on moving the throttle lever forward or keeping it aft. In Mossie, though, looks like you get clean sequence in all hot-started mission no matter what, and dirty sequence in all cold started missions, no matter what. That doesn't make much sense.

Pretty much. Once purchased it just activates the high resolution terrain and buildings, which are already installed and hidden there on your drive. I don't remember if you even have to click anything in module manager. I had a similar warning (although I can't recall it if specifically said "2.0") and just pressed through. The correct discount was registered at checkout and the transaction was completed. Mind you, all that applies to standalone version, which you use I believe? Steam guys had more problems making the upgrade work, but I don't know how they solved it eventually.

32" 1440p 60Hz monitor here. You will enjoy DCS very much on that size for sure and decision of not going for 27" was the right one. I wouldn't worry much about performance either. If I can maintain 60fps with mostly high'ish settings all around on my old i7 9700k and RTX3070 in singleplayer, I guess you should have enough performance margin for multiplayer with that more capable CPU and 4070Ti.

You must first have electrical power and turn the ARN on (any position except OFF will do). Only then both band selector switch and tuning crank will start working.

Well, It kind of does matter who makes the missions because that's exactly who you should ask to do the job... not the map guys, as has been pointed above. Feel free to come back to this thread after a few months, but I can already predict things certainly won't have improved if you post here, and here only. So, it's you who are half-OT here. You don't go to dentist to ask for groceries do you? "Half-OT", because, granted, I can see how RAZBAM map guys could read this thread and poke their airplane guys to include a couple of Harrier missions, after all it's all within one company. For other semi-plausible aircraft missions for this region, however, you should make some noise in Aerges and IFE wishlist sections of the forum.

Ian, unless the Spit CW vs non-CW controller fix implemented two weeks ago is causing some unforseen shenanigans with your pedals, I'd say there's a chance you just got "un-used to" flying the Spit after such a long break. Same thing happens to me whenever I get back to Dora after few months of not flying it. Have to re-learn to take off and land the damn thing. The fact is, up till recent cockpit retexture and aforementioned fix, the poor old Spit haven't seen any changes in years, with exception of new cooling model in last December and new prop animation in April 2021. I've been flying it on a quite regular basis and haven't noticed anything different in rudder behaviour to be honest. I gather you double checked if you ain't got any rudder assists turned on in special options?

I suspect there also might be other iffy things going on in DCS Mossie engine simulation in cold-start vs hot-start scenarios. For example, when the plane was released and I only used one Warthog throttle, I had to assign that single grey slider to both engine RPMs combined, while using physical throttles as separate virtual throttles as well. Because of that, I quickly noticed back then that in all hot-started missions both engines were always perfectly in-sync, but in cold started ones, they were always a little bit out-of-sync, even when oil and coolant temps evened out between both, at various power settings. They shouldn't be, because virtual RPM levers were assigned to the same physical slider. But they were. Never made a difference if I started port or starboard engine first at the beginning of a mission. Wanted to make a bug report about it, but shortly after, I just purchased another throttle quadrant to have more axes available. And so nowadays I don't pay attention to this strange issue anymore and just adjust RPMs accordingly to synchronize them. I wonder if it's still present in 2.9, though.

I also don't fly MiG often, so just out of curiosity I did two test flights again: a) Gunnery tutorial mission, which makes you follow the shallow turning Sabre at a meager 1.5-1.7 G; b) BigNewy's gunnery test mission from F-86 gunsight investigation thread, only with Sabre replaced by MiG. In this one you follow tighter turning Su-27 at 2.5-2.8 G. In the former test, gunsight in gyro mode worked very well actually, at least in moderate ranges of up to 400 m. The only problematic thing was figuring out if I should "catch" the target with outer of inner diameter of reticle "diamonds ring", that's why I enabled full unit labels for better distance measurement. Tip - turns out it should be neither inner not outer, but somewhere inbetween. In the latter test, the gyro mode was crap really and couldn't properly compute lead, even when still within reticle movement limits. I had to pull much more lead myself to hit the target eventually. I can post tracks if anyone's interested. Looks like the gyro mode is OK only for really smooth and low G maneuvers and close distances. Otherwise, gunnery in this plane is certainly more challenging than in other ones with more flat-firing guns. The 37 mm is bad, especially. Feels like lobbing watermelons rather than shooting air-to-air weapon .

^ And one can test its operation by turning it on and off using lever on the right side of throttle quadrant. P.S. - @Alphazulu, feel free to "waste your time" on RTFM of the plane you intend to fly in or against. Hint - with booster disabled, the -15's roll rate, already rather unimpressive to begin with (compared to F-86), becomes pretty abysmal. Moreover, full stick roll input is possible only up to about 350'ish kph, anything faster limits the range. Closer to VNE you almost can't move it at all.

Nah, repeated the procedure above and with hot mags they do stop after a few sputters eventually, so it's just extra few seconds. The old Fw-190 A8 bug when the engine used to sputter between 30 and 60 seconds - now THAT was "endless". Current Mossie cannot compare . So i don't think that "by the book" procedure needs altering, unless someone's in hurry. What's more puzzling and worrying, however, is difference between hot-start and cold-start missions: a) hot-started ones always yield fast and sputter-free engine shutdown (even with hot mags and after spark plug clearing at 2000 rpm); b) cold started ones always yield sputtery shutdown, no matter if engine runs at higher rpm or idles. Attached tracks show the difference, even though conditions and engine temps were comparable in both cases (engines restarted shortly after shutdown) and thus, from principles of piston engine operation point of view, there should be no difference in how they stop. Cut-off is cut-off. Or is it? I wonder if simulation code responsible for priming during cold starts doesn't "carry through" the mission for some silly reason, all the way to subsequent engine shutdown procedure? Priming by the player is, in theory, the only difference between cold-started and hot-started missions. 2.9_cutoff_test 2 idle.trk 2.9_cutoff_test 1 high rpm.trk

Do they really never stop for you, or just take w while to do so? Ever since getting the module when it was released I've always used correct order (cutouts first, mags last) and the engines always stop eventually after the same scripted (probably) number of pops and bangs. At least it seems to be the same. I admit I probably use different RPMs when pulling the cutouts, though. Is there something fishy going on exactly at 1200 rpm? Will have to test later.

Mate, if you want people to watch a bug-reporting-track, especially developers who have dozens of tracks to investigate daily, you better make it a short, airstart mission already near a target. Watching you sitting on a runway and tinkering with radios and radio-compass is not what guys want and need to sit through. Luckily, your track doesn't de-sync with time acceleration, so it's easier to fast-forward to gunnery parts. Back to the topic, please keep in mind that: a) Both cannon types on MiG have noticeably lower muzzle velocity compared to guns you are used to in aforementioned 3 warbirds up to that point. Between about 670 and 690 m/s which is quite low (albeit If you ever buy 109-K4 module, then you will see what a REALLY low muzzle velocity cannon is . Good luck trying to hit anything with MK-108 beyond point-blank ranges). As such, they require more lead while aiming. Low rate of fire of 37 mm gun makes things even more challenging. b) ASP gyro gunsight on MiG is supposed to work only when both you and target turn SMOOTHLY at low G, or preferrably - target flies straight. You're not supposed to use it closer than 180 m either. That AI C-47 pitching up and down like crazy wasn't the best platform to test (although it would be annoying target in any fighter I think). In either case, who knows, it's possible that recent changes to F-86 gunsight had some negative, inadvertent side-effect on MiG as well. Or maybe gyro sight issues are just "normal" in old Belsimtek-developed modules - I've read that the one in F-5 isn't great either, but I don't own that module to confirm. The only way to check it properly is to do the same what was requested by devs during F-86 gunsight investigation - set up a mission with loitering target, constant G, constant speed (like in MiG-15 gunsight tutorial). Turn wake turbulence off and icons on for precise distance measurement. See if gunsight in gyro mode can calculate correct lead at, say 200 and 300 m. If it doesn't - save a track and create a thread in bugs section.

Oh, don't get me wrong, kudos to them - I lack the skill and tools to do even that, but indeed these fast conversions were the only things available for DCS for a long time. Fingers crossed that's about to change relatively soon!

^ Same here (or worse, being brough up on the eastern side of Iron Curtain ). SEA-camo and green-grey land based Phantoms were the most ubiquitous NATO versions shown in all documentaries, books, magazines. Then followed by German ones visiting the first post-cold-war airshows on "our" side after the Curtain fell (although OK, that doesn't count because in the '90s the USN versions just didn't serve anymore, right?). Being a kid I didn't even know at first this plane was initially designed to be flown out of a boat. Watching cheesy old American movies like "Hamburger Hill" or "Red Flag" only cemented perception (skewed I admit today) that land Phantoms were the only ones that flew and fought anywhere. Damn, even the crappy CGI ones in "Forrest Gump" are USAF birds If I remember correctly. I'm also yet to see a naval one "in flesh". Gotta travel to some museum in US I guess? To sum it up, I also concur this was probably the reason why HB went with E first (apart from having easier access to ex-German airframes). More initial customers who recognize and remember the plane that way, even freaky customers from ex-Warsaw Pact countries. I, for example, pre-ordered this one, because it does bring some nostalgic memories, but will never buy the naval one, as it just something too "foreign" and means nothing to me. For Americans and Brits, however, naval variant is a must I'm sure and, despite some doom-and-gloom posts here and there, I think it WILL come eventually. After all, that's what this HB's modular development framework is being created for - to make next versions faster and easier. Both variants will probably stay in eternal Early Access like the Tomcat, but they'll be here allright, in sufficiently playable state.

Can confrim Garokdu's observation. Screenshot and short replay track attached below. The bug seems to pop up only with rain droplets option ON and with canopy closed. Open the canopy and mirror is OK again. Latest OB, MT and 2D user here. 2.9_Spit_droplet_mirror.trk