Duck21

Hi ED, I happily pre-ordered the full map instantly after receiving the news. I want to fly somewhere new, I want to experience your latest terrain tech, and well, want to support ED. So thank you for all that! But you saying that you're not planning any airfields of neighbouring countries is something that puzzles me. So you do model parts of neighbouring countries, but how are we supposed to fly into and out of Afghanistan without ANY airfields across the border? Why model these areas outside of Afghanistan in the first place if really only AI can make use of them? I know we can spawn in the air, but that is just kind of "meh"... I hope that at some point you will model at least one airfield of each country modelled, that would be fantastic.

Has there been any news from either ED or HB regarding this topic? I mean simulating a sophisticated failure system of a Phantom without the ability to land and capture the longfield cable is a bit... useless? And obviously it would also be fun to use the emergency cable on all other hook-equipped aircraft. ED already developed the required animation techniques for the Supercarrier, what's stopping them to use the same code and models for airfields? I know it's not a 1:1 replica on land, but still, the tech is there.

Nah not really. Your example is for a TEMPORARY installation. That's a completely different scenario. Yes places do exist with light installations raised on paved surfaces, but they are extremely rare and different to what Ugra shows on their airports.

Hi Ugra, I'm delighted to see this airbase coming to DCS, and in general more of Jordan! However, can you please clarify how this works out on the map? So you build this airbase, does that mean you've also built the cities of Amman and Tel Aviv? Because flying westbound from this airbase you'll soon cross Amman, and later on Tel Aviv to get to the Mediterranean Sea. Surely you won't have us fly over "nothing" for that entire distance?

With arrestor wires already being functional as part of the Super Carrier module, I hope it won't take too long for ED to port them over to the base game and enable them on runways. The Phantom with its wear & tear simulation certainly needs them for when things fail...

I'm afraid I missed that poll. But here's one more vote for option 2, the more synthetic version.

If you can release your stick pitch axis in neutral without pitch changing on its own basically equals being trimmed for 1G, but obviously only if you are not flying a crazy pitch angle.

I'm sorry, but that is just not true. Every software that wants to be taken seriously needs to be stable, and customers need to be able to use that. If you only had beta software out there, you would in fact be selling unstable bugged software. That just doesn't make any sense. It's a matter of principle. It is in fact a bit of a plague that everyone seems to have the mindset like "oh just use beta, it will be fine, who cares about bugs". Why? Just so you can get new toys a little bit faster? Not everyone is highly experienced with all the modules to deal with bugs. And reading through the OpenBeta change logs, there sure are lot of them - which is fine, it's beta. But there needs to be stable too and people should be encouraged to use it. This "I want my toys NOW" mentality needs to stop.

I agree, it would be fantastic to have at least one airbase of every country that is part of the map. As far as I can see the map coverage should be sufficient to include Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan? Because that's where they have based all their F-16s.

While I do realise that developing a Typhoon takes a long time and there will be times when there's simply nothing to show and talk about, I am worried right now seeing this abrupt radio silence from TrueGrit. Forum statistics say their members haven't even visited the DCS forums in over 2 months... that's not good

Thank you, very glad to hear that!

Same here, it's really hard to understand why ED refuses to put realistic prop effects into their WW2 aircraft, even the latest releases are so far from reality, it's not funny anymore. Surely there are SOME people within ED who have sat inside real prop aircraft and therefore should know that individual propeller blades are NOT visible ever if above idle, and especially at mid- and high RPM settings. I get that for the vast majority of customers what they see right now seems to be realistic, since most of them never flew a real prop aircraft. So they can only judge from videos. And since most YouTube videos are filmed with crappy camera equipment, that's what those show, individual blades visible everywhere. But ED should know better and do something realistic. While early WW2 releases were sort of OK, things got very bad when the Spitfire was released. And it continued that way for every subsequent WW2 release. Oh well, at least with the upcoming Mosquito, we'll have a bit of a break as we won't have to target through the blades on that one!

Superb podcast episode with Gero! Truly shows what an amazing person he is.

Tel Aviv to my knowledge is too far south and thus outside of the map's coverage.

Please re-think the Cyprus case, RAF Akrotiri would make so much sense! The airbase would need to be high detail, but other things of Cyprus wouldn't need to be super detailed, since we'd really only depart and come back. So no need for a highly detailed city of Larnaca if that's not feasible. But RAF Akrotiri is a must :)

I agree, prop animation with latest WWII releases desperately need to be changed. Even without VR the prop animation effect on the P-47 and Spitfire are completely unrealistic. Above idle RPM, individual blades are no longer visible in reality. What ED has modelled on those is what you'd see in videos, not with human eyes. And the thing is, early WWII releases like the P51 and Messerschmitt have a much much more realistic prop animation. This shows that it CAN be done in a realistic manner. I'm deeply disappointed that ED refuses to change this on the Spitfire and keeping it unrealistic. And it's sad to see that the same unrealistic prop animation effect is also present on the P-47. I'd love to buy this module, but simply can't if ED refuses to give it the realistic prop animation effects they had years ago. So just do make it clear, the issue is not just present in VR, it is equally distracting and unrealistic on monitors too.

I see that the issue reported originally is being merged with an issue concerning VR only. I don't fly VR in DCS at the moment so I can't comment on that. However I would still love for ED to change the prop animation to something more realistic like it is done on the P-51 for example. I'm writing this after having seen preview videos of the P-47 which has the same issue unfortunately. So whoever is in charge of prop animation applies a different style these days compared to early WWII releases, but that new style I'm afraid is not realistic. Again, in reality, prop blades fade into a DISC when above idle. What we see right now in the Spit or the P-47 is similar to a low-quality video recording with individual blades visible at high RPM. This is NOT realistic at all! I really hope that ED can fix this, for the Spit and the upcoming P-47. They used to animate it so well back in the day of the P-51!

This is getting silly really, no stable version update in over 5 months. Some of us really don't want to fly Open Beta. Now if people say just switch over, so many good things, only little bad... no, some people simply don't want the bad, and rightfully so. I hope we can see a new update soon.

It does look fine on screenshots. However compared in-flight in cockpit view with the sim running, the difference is instantly visible. With the Spitfire the animation is perceived as a distraction, which is not the case in other modules like the P51. And it certainly isn't on a real aircraft. I simply wish that the ANIMATION would be done the same way as other modules, which are all realistic, only the Spitfire is not. Again, as stated also by others in this thread: At RPMs other than idle it's simply impossible for the naked eye to make out the prop's individual blade rotation on the real aircraft. What we have in the Spit is therefore not realistic. However it's perfect on other modules such as the Mustang, Messerschmitts, and Focke Wulfs...

Hi Eagle Dynamics, I was wondering if this issue is ever going to be fixed? I had hoped that after beta ended for the Spitfire, we'd see this corrected. But the propeller blade animation is still quite unrealistic. The individual blades should not be visible that well when at normal inflight RPMs, what we see in the current version of the module is more like what you see on videos. All other WWII modules are much more realistic in that regard. Can't you use the same prop disc animation for the Spitfire? Flying the Spitfire hurts my eyes. I very much hope that this is going to be made more realistic soon!

+1 for cockpit textures with less wear & tear! It doesn't need to be clean and perfect as if fresh out of the factory, but something that is better than the present "museum / junk yard" look.

I've got the same issue, heavy flickering of grass in cockpit view only.

I too hope this will be fixed during beta, it looks horrible! Right now what I see is more like a cheap internet video rather than what I would see in a real prop aircraft...

Same here, that voice volume is way too low, can't understand the guy with anything else then idle thrust. Yes one COULD try and lower certain audio settings, but that really doesn't fix the problem, does it ;)

+1