Art-J

Nothing's off, the gunsight in Sabre was just mounted pretty low. Default eyepoint position is a compromise and allows seeing the reticle near the top of reflector glass, but whether you stick to it or adjust it as PV explained above, you will still need to lean down more or less to aim.

Might be a language thing but it's obvious for me Maestro has been referring to content uploaded to their internal version. As always, we won't get access to it until one of the next OB updates comes.

Reported, to be fixed in one of future patches:

They're accessible from Instant Action menu, not the Missions menu. Also, Harbour one requires ownership of Normandy 2 map

Different maps in DCS don't (and shouldn't) affect flight models apart from results of different density altitudes (via airbase elevations and ambient temps and pressures set in mission editor). These wouldn't cause different critical AoA, though. In either case, If Nineline's vid from your track shows what you were asking about, then it indeed is buffeting caused by stall and, to answer your first question, no, it cannot be turned off in flight sim mode.

Please check Imacken's reply to You in "sister" thread in Spitfire bugs section, with steps to reproduce the issue.

That's a can of worms topic and opinions vary, although we've got some folks here who migrated from Il-2GB series, or play both (best solution in my opinion), and they seem to be having a good time with warbird side of DCS in spite of its obvious shortcomings and limitations. Both platforms have their strengths and weaknesses anyway, because they were designed with different goals in mind. If you're tight on budget and don't mind having some of your PC games outside of Steam, why not consider a standalone DCS install? There are two practical pros of doing that. First-time customers in ED shop get a 50% discount on their first transaction, whether for a single module or bulk (50% almost never happens othwewise). There's also a free trial program that lets you try out most of the planes and maps for free for two weeks apiece. That sure is a safe way of figuring out if DCS works for you before shelling out cash. Free two weeks trail beats Steam's two (?) hours refund option anytime.

What do you mean "when taking turns"? Maybe it's just pre-stall buffet? Difficult to say without a replay track. By the way, an airplane wing can stall at any speed ("normal" or not) but at a specific angle of attack. I recall you used to fly with game flight mode enabled and buffeting is not present in that one. In flight sim mode it's there, however and can't be turned off. On the flip side, it's good to have it actually because without sensory feedback it's the only thing that warns us we're at the edge of wing stall.

Well, let's just say it does some things well and some things... possibly not so well. Infamous adverse compressibility effects in a dive are, for example, an elephant in the room, because in practical terms they're non-existent in DCS Thunderbolt. Emphasis on "in practical terms", because even though a very mild Mach tuck and mild elevator stiffness are indeed simulated, easy and effective pitch control is still maintained at every power, dive speed and high altitude combo you can test in mission editor. So, contrary to flight manual notes, you can just forget about compressibility and about assigning controls to dive recover flaps, as you will never need to use them anyway. About the engine RPM, please note that even the 2880 limit for 30 seconds posted in your manual is not possible in DCS, let alone higher one from other revisions. Testing in v 2.9 shows the redline of 2750 is when damage simulation starts every time, with time-to-failure depending on how long and how far we are above that number. For example: staying between 2750 and 2800 kills master bearing in about 45 seconds. Staying between 2800 and 2850 kills the bearing in about 18 seconds. Measured with stopwatch and data from post-mission briefings. Going to 2900+ range will kill the bearing below 12 seconds. That's with power-on, power off would be even faster for the forces reasons explained in your manual. Let's get back on topic, though. The current engine RPM limits are here to stay for now, as was officially confirmed in the other thread on the subject, with suggestion for revision at a later date forwarded to the devs by Nineline. Propeller pitch limits, however, might indeed help figuring out what the most plausible simulated engine behaviour in a dive we should expect. Kablamoman presented some valuable prop reference data here.

I guess they're just fixed map scenery objects, rather than "civilian traffic" objects. Similar to boats and ships in harbours on Caucasus and Marianas maps for example. Does scenery removal zone feature in mission editor affect such items? I don't know, might be worth trying.

They're "locked" with glass they're painted on, however . That's the point. Lau's post might be a bit confusing, but his screen shows what the problem is. The video posted by Jackill here shows it better in motion. The housing rotates, but the glass (with its lines) stays in place.

Heads up for folks who don't browse user files section much. While we're waiting for ED to fix three broken instruments in new Spit cockpit, @rossmum created interim texture fixes for boost gauge and kollsman window on altimeter. Both are available in a single package here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3333907/ Don't know if they're IC-compatible, but for SP guys they work just fine. Highly recommended.

These are some great screens. Is that flight computer on foldable table just a static texture, or have you managed to code in some form of interaction with it?

I'm pretty sure new reflections tech is not a global DCS thing and has to be implemented individually in each module. So there's not a "bug" here per se, more like a wishlist item 'cause the Albatross just never got'em in the first place. I certainly wish it did though! But first, I hope they'll fix 2.9-broken gunsight soon. I might need it fully operational when I finally try the long-overdue Kursant campaign.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but I'll just remind that all WIP screens posted within last 2 years had "26", "28" or "29" painted on that thing, so I wouldn't read too much into it. The "news soon" comment, however, is very welcomed.

^ Keep in mind sigs are disabled by default, though, so he probably can't see it (neither do I, but I just prefer less messy look of the forum, so I've got'em disabled too).

The problem of "profit projection being worth it" applies to 3rd parties as well, however. Even more so than to ED, because each 3rd party has just much less resources and smaller number of modules to make up for potential losses on less popular ones.

Does anyone have an original German flight manual for this A/C and knows the language well enough to figure out what it recommends? I haven't been lucky in finding it. In my experience DCS manuals contradicting themselves a bit (or being confusing) are not unheard of, so It would be interesting to take a peek at a primary source material.

Granted, they didn't say they fixed it, but vaguely "improved / W.I.P", so I guess it still is a hit and miss depending on individual player's hardware, controllers, aircraft and mission. I have rather good results so far, even with wind and turbulence turned on (which I frankly expected to desync the track immediately), but I admit I've tried only short warbird missions with small number of units in them.

MiG-19 seems to be the least developed and polished RAZBAM module, with still a few bugs, avionics system errors and simplifications. Not maintained much either, with most resources directed to more profitable products in their portfolio like F-15E. F-86 is programmed better, but it is a 9 years old module, barely supported too (once a patch breaks something, it stays broken literally for years) and shows its age a little. Pick your poison . I've free-trialed the former but got underwhelmed already at the beginning by devs' shoddy approach to controls assignments (single functions being named differently in manual vs on tooltips vs in control options page - good luck figuring out what the function you're trying to bind is actually called in controls table, or if it's HOTAS-bindable at all, or only mouse-clickable). Take a look at the plane's forum section (bugs especially) to see what people's opinion about this plane is. After trial ended I decided not to buy it just yet. I'd like to get it some day but not in such a rough state. Will see If RAZBAM decides to go back to it and refresh it. I do own the latter airplane. Despite its age It's still quite fun to fly just for the sake of flying, but both fighters suffer from the same major issue - lack of period correct maps and small number of period-correct enemy assets. Although that's more of an SP problem. MP guys seem to use them on specific servers quite a bit.

^ Yes, the grip should rotate like on P-51D, P-47D, F-86, MiG-15, MiG-21... They all share the same manual ranging method.

Ditto, unfortunately.

Nah. Shortest time from official announcement to release - maybe, but make no mistake, the actual development was already going on before Jan 2022. Maybe Mike will say one day when they started this project. So not a meaningful record really and this time would be even shorter, 'cause I recall HB guys planned to reveal the project later. Nagging community didn't let them, though .

Welcome to the forum... though I'd say it's kind of a WTF question in itself to be honest. The right question should actually be opposite - why Dora? It doesn't fit any maps released till now or in current development. Granted, I know it was made by ED as a performance-comparable opponent for the Mustang back in 2014 when no other WWII content existed in DCS at all. Still, as of today, neither it nor 109-K4 make any historic sense over Channel and Normandy maps. And this is why Anton was chosen by ED as the very first German plane that does fit both maps very well. Even though countless arguments were made about engine and armament configuration chosen for it, at least it's the German plane that actually flew and fought hard over these areas. And since it was THE most produced version of Fw-190, it's quite obvious why we've got it in DCS at last. As for other German planes - yes, more period-correct version of Me-109 would be nice. Would it bring more money than K-4? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe we'll get it someday. Right now, however, ED is heading for Pacific with its upcoming Hellcat, so that's that. By the way, that's a wrong forum section for your question anyway. It should go in general A-8 section.

Hang on there buddy. Make a little pact with Devil or sth to at least have enough time to learn to takeoff, drop dumb bombs and land the upcoming phabulous Phantom. You deserve it dammit!