Talisman_VR

Production Mk IX Spitfires started to emerge from Supermarine plants in June 1942. No 64 Squadron was the first to recieve the new variant in June 1942; it was followed by No 611 Squadron in July 1942 and Nos 401 and 402 (Canadian) Squadrons in August 1942 and No 133 (US Eagle) Squadron in September 1942. Production of the Mark IX built up rapidly. The Mk IX Spitfire entered service in 1942, but the version we have, Merlin 66 engine and .303 machine gun, is the LF version that entered service in Spring 1943, not 44. The Biggin Hill Wing was one of the first to re-equip with the Mark IX LF The Spitfire that would be nearest on the technological time line and release to operational service to the FW 190-D and 109-K versions we currently have in DCS is the Spitfire Mk XIV. The first production Spitfire XIVs appeared in October 1943. The first squadron to recieve the Mark XIV was No 610 based at Exeter, which re-equipped in January and Febuary 1944. During March 1944 Nos 91 and 322 (Dutch Squdrons also began to re-quip with the Mk XIV. All three squadrons of Spitfire XIVs were fully operatonal. Source for above information: The Spitfire Story, Revised Second Edition by Alfred Price, ISBN 1-85409-305-3 (Foreward to the book is by Jeffrey Quill and the Preface by Dr Gordon Mitchell. Below is a combat roport of action between Mk XIV Spitfires and FW 190 dated 7 March 1944: Combat Reports 610 Squadron's Intelligence Officer recorded on 7 March, 1944 what may be the Spitfire XIV's first aerial combat: Black section, (P/O Hussey and F/Sgt. Harding) were patrolling on an east west line about 20 miles south east of Start Point 500 feet above sea level, under the control of Kingswear C.H.L. Station. At approx 17.30 hours the Section was told to investigate unidentified aircraft 15 miles ahead, on a vector 120 degrees. After two minutes this vector was changed to 150 degress (At this time Black one was using only plus 12 lbs boost with his jet tank still on, and the A.S.I. was clocking about 350 miles per hour.) The section was now outside G.C.I. cover, but after about a minute 3 F.W. 190's appeared from 9 o'clock approx 200 feet below, flying in a fairly close vic on a rough vector of 240 degrees; visibility was bad owing to haze, and the section had hardly seen the E/A before they had passed underneath to 3 o'clock. Black Section immediately pulled round to the right, and it seemed that the E/A saw them at the same moment, for as our section turned on their tails, black smoke was seen pouring from their engines as they pushed everything forward and dived to sea level. The F.W. 190 on the left of the section turned south, and the other two turned away and disappeared into the haze and glare of the sun. Our section gave chase to the single F.W. 190 which at this time, was about 800 yards ahead, right on the deck. We closed without difficulty but when 400 yards away, Black 1 noticed a F.W. 190 making a quarter attack on him from between 4 and 5 o'clock, so gave the order to "break right". As he pulled up he saw the E/A fireing at him with insufficient deflection, and it appeared that the turning circle of the Spitfire XIV was better than that of the F.W. 190. Black 1, at 1,000 feet, was now in the haze and lost sight of the F.W. 190 and his No. 2. Black 2, who was on the left of Black 1, saw the F.W. 190 break off his attack on Black 1, and dive south west to sea level, so he rolled down to the left and got on to the tail of the F.W. 190 at a distance of about 800 yards (The F.W. 190 that our section had been chasing originally, had disappeared by this time) At first Black 2, did not close on the F.W. 190 as fast as he would have liked (probably due to the excitement, he forgot to jettison his tank with Black 1 at the commencement of the first chase. The addition of the jet tank would probably take off 30 miles per hour.) Another F.W. 190 now appeared ahead at about 11 o'clock, and joined formation on the left of the aircraft that Black 2 was chasing. Black 2 now found that he was closing in quite fast, around 400 I.A.S. and opened fire on the left hand F.W. 190 from dead astern at 300 yards he saw strikes on both wing roots and panels flew off the port mainplane as he closed to about 100 yards. Not until the strikes were observed did the other E/A take any action. Even then he did nothing for some time, then pulled straight up and round to the left, and tried to get on the tail of Black 2. Black 2 took a final squirt at his target whose only evasive action was pitching slightly up and down, before he broke into the other E/A which was trying to get on his tail (although clocking 360 m.p.h. the turning circle of the Spitfire seemed superior to that of the F.W. 190) The F.W. 190 fired at Black 2 but allowed insufficient deflection then broke off his attack and disappeared into the mist. The E/A was not seen again. 60 Spitfire Mk XIV airpower was over mainland Europe by at least May 1944, With Number 322 (Dutch) Squadron over Antwerp and Volkel, Spitfire Mk IX and XIV aircraft took part in the D-Day Normandy invasion from the 6th June 1944 onwards. The Spitfire XIV is a perfectly valid aircraft for the DCS WWII map, given the date it entered squadron operational service, as well as the numbers over the battle space launched by 2nd TAF (five squadrons of Spitfire XIV) and also from the South of England. The RAF was able to use older less able aircraft like the Spit IX and Typhoon because the Allies had air superiority. Superiority that is not modelled in DCS or any combat flight sim because we would not want that. Therefore, it makes sense for sim developers to pay close attention to the technological time line for the aircraft involved. I suggest that if the Allies had been more desperate and did not have total air superiority, they would have prioritised more Tempest V and Spitfire XIV aircraft, but historically they did not need to. DCS is not totally historical WWII, but it does its best to give us a sense of air combat with some of the aircraft that were involved. The technological time line of the aircraft we have at the moment is somewhat disjointed, but that should improve as time goes on I hope. Happy landings, Talisman

Thanks for the invite folks, but I and those I fly with use TeamSpeak and not simple radio. I do not intend to ever download and use simple radio, but it looks like simple radio is compulsory. So I will sadly give this event a miss, even though I love flying the Mig-15. Good luck and have fun. Happy landings, Talisman

Could not agree more! Why DCS puts valuable time and effort into this is beyond me. I have to spend time deleting all their default assignments to put in my own. Happy landings, Talisman

Thanks Bob. Talisman

This is what we need.

Hi Folks, Just a quick question. Is it still worth turning off hyperthreading in the bios these days, or is that no longer necessary for better performance? I am hoping to progress to VR soon and am not sure if turning of hyperthreading will help. Thank you in anticipation. My system specs: 5Processor: Intel Core i7-8700K Coffee Lake CPU, 6 Cores, 3.7 - 4.7GHz, overclocked Case: Fractal Design Define R6 Case - Black Graphics Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11GB Graphics Card CPU Cooler: Corsair Hydro H100x CPU Cooler Motherboard: Asus STRIX Z370-F GAMING Memory: 32GB DDR4 3000MHz Memory (2 x 16GB Sticks) OS Drive: 1TB Samsung 970 EVO M.2 PCIe Solid State Drive Secondary Hard Drive: Seagate 2TB FireCuda SSHD Hybrid Drive Optical Drive: 24x DVD-RW Drive Power Supply: Corsair RM850x 80 PLUS Gold 850W PSU Sound Card: Onboard High Definition Audio Operating System: Windows 10 Home 64-bit Monitor Samsung 2433BW 24" TFT, 5ms response time, Res: 1920x1200 MS FF2 Joystick Thrustmaster VG TWCS Throttle Saitek Pro Flight Throttle Quadrant MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals TIR4(V.5 software) & Track Clip Pro eDimensional AudioFX2 FF Vibration Headset Gametrix KW-908 Jetseat (with SSA software) Happy landings,

Thanks Phil and Dietrich. Your reputation and admirable commitment has persuaded me to download the beta version and give DCS WWII another go. I have managed to convince one other member of our squad to join me, so I hope to be punching holes in the virtual sky on your SoW Historical server soon :) Many thanks for all your work and providing the server. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Hi Phil, Will this server be on the release version or beta? Happy landings, Talisman

Bos_Man, You need to see this: DCS 1.5.6.1938 Update 2017-02-10 DCS World S-25OF rocket. The motor flame effect increased to S-25L level. Sweden was added to blue coalition by default. Propeller drawing procedure in controllable aircraft was reworked to handle rare negative prop phase values in a way it won't change prop blur mode. Trigger zone can be set to 5 meters radius now, instead 100 meters minimum earlier. Corrected 3D shape of MiG-29S wingtips. Force Feedback can be enabled for Saitek Cyborg Evo Force joystick (need to add ‘input.blacklist_ffb = false’ line into \Saved Games\DCS\autoexec.cfg file). MP. Corrupted F10 map after Changing mission function restored. MP. Client crash after connect to server when RB-04 is in flight fixed. It is also covered in this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=180624&highlight=Saitek+Cyborg+EVO+stick As you will see I had a problem too and got it sorted. Although, I now use the MSFF2. Good luck and happy landings, Talisman Faded UI when set antialiasing 8xQ fixed.

Considering the other aircraft we have and are getting, including the Me262, the Hawker Tempest V would be fantastic! It was the best Hawker aircraft of the war and a tribute to the pinnacle of their achievement. Ultimately it was a later version of the Typhoon and the most dangerous aircraft to counter the Me262. Happy landings,

Hi Alpenwolf, Sorry I did not see your thread before I started this one. This situation is causing me to go elsewhere at the moment for my PC flying. Same for most other MP squad PC pilots I speak to and fly with, most of which don't post on the forums; they just vote with their virtual wings by being and going elsewhere. It is a shame I think. Happy landings, Talisman

Thanks for your reply Smokey. Interesting about PUBG. I am not familiar as I am only interested in flight simulations, but I presume the community player base is rather larger than DCS and can more easily support multiple communities with large numbers. I do think the community split for DCS is a thing though. I suggest it is a case of cause and effect. Sometimes unintended consequences can occur, or perhaps consequences that are considered as of no consequence by some. I know the effect this is having on me as a customer though, because I am experiencing it first hand. I shall leave it at that for now. Happy landings,

So, if the open beta is constantly run alongside the standard release version then the community is diluted as the choice is constantly one or the other or both and/or constant chop and change, depending on what is best at the time. Was it always like this? Is this a long term strategy or a short term expedient. Do any other games have this sort of business model? Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Hi folks, Just a couple of questions to try and gauge the lay of the land. Question 1. How much longer can we expect to have the open beta version of this flight simulation perpetually running alongside the standard release version? Or is this part of a permanent business model? Question 2. With the beta version being used as the continually open lead version of this simulation, is it causing a dilution of the community, particularly in relation to the on-line multiplayer base. I ask these questions because I don't want to be a beta tester or hold 2 versions of the simulation on my PC, but then find that my options are rather limited on multiplayer, particularly with regard to WWII flying, as the popular servers all appear to be running the beta version :(( As a result, despite recently purchasing a new expensive PC to run DCS, it looks like I shall be putting DCS to one side, yet again, in favour of other titles that lead with a stable release version that includes everybody. I stand to be corrected if I have got hold of the wrong end of the stick. Thank you for your consideration. Happy landings, Talisman

Voted yes as it makes more sense anyway, as the opposition provided at the moment is way ahead on the technological development time line. What would be much better is to have the Griffon engine Spitfire of the time represented by the Spitfire Mk XIV, or a Tempest V. Plenty of them about at the time and much more in line with the technological development time line represented by the opposition aircraft. Historically, air superiority allowed the continued use of older aircraft like the Spit IX and Typhoon during the war. However, we would not want air superiority modelled, LOL. Happy landings,

Very much support the OP from the original thread. My squad has given up with DCS MP and moved on to another combat flight sim.

Seems to me that the very fact we are having this poll speaks volumes! It is all very crazy that to get satisfaction and quality we have a situation of always needing the beta version of a product. Mad, mad, mad. If this is the business model then I wonder how long things can keep going this way. I am sticking with the standard release model because that is were I would expect customers to get the best quality of experience overall. But since that is not the case in my experience, I have given up on DCS for the time being and treat it as if it is in a coma. I check in and update to the standard release version every now and then to see if there is any hope for the future and then leave it alone in the hope that one day it will wake up and I can start having a good relationship with it. I certainly don't purchase any new aircraft models, no matter how hyped up the PR is. Sorry to be so down, but it is how DCS makes me feel. It is so disappointing. In short, I use other flight sim products these days and just update DCS in line with the release version. I am on the fence as to whether to delete it off my PC, but keep it on for now in the hope it will recover and perform something glorious. Happy landings, Talisman

Can't stand Discord, it is awful and I don't trust it! I have my own reasons over and above below. It is so childish. Talks in silly riddles and communicates with me like a child. It's like it's grooming kids. I find the thing sinister and untrustworthy. https://steamcommunity.com/groups/FORSERVERS/discussions/0/143387886727258213/ Happy landings, Talisman

Many thanks to Mr Grey, NineLine and all those that contributed to this thread. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

What is the highest boost and rpm settings he has ever flown a Spitfire and what type? P.S. What was it like to fly at high settings and fast speed in terms of feedback from the engine and airframe and maneuvering. Thanks and happy landings, Talisman

In April 1944 the squadron converted to the Supermarine Spitfire, but this was short lived, and in June it received the fast new Hawker Tempest, an aircraft that finally lived up to the Typhoon's early promise as a fighter. In the same month the V-1 offensive began, and for the next four months the squadron was involved in the campaign against the flying bombs. In September No.56 Squadron was finally free to move to the Low Countries to take a direct part in the last stage of the ground war. From then until the end of the war the squadron used its Tempests on armed reconnaissance sweeps, which gave its pilots the freedom to range around behind German lines attacking any suitable targets that they located. After the war the squadron remained on the continent, where on 31 March 1946 it was renumbered as No.16 Squadron. http://www.historyofwar.org/air/units/RAF/56_wwII.html Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

1. Hawker Tempest Mk V. 2. Spitfire Mk XIV. 3. Mosquito. Happy landings, Talisman

I use a splitter (double socket) for the line out green connection (speakers/headset) on my PC when using 'Sound Mode'. This way I can plug both my headset and my JetSeat into the same line out socket green. This allows me to easily combine the use of my headset and JetSeat in 'Sound Mode' when playing BoX and CloD. When using DCS, I pull out the JetSeat sound jack from the green line out splitter, because I don't use the JetSeat in 'Sound Mode' for DCS; I use JetSeat in USB mode with SSA for DCS. Happy landings, Talisman

Sounds like you might be using the JetSeat in 'Sound Mode' rather than 'USB Mode'. Check your JetSeat control panel to see if you are in 'Sound Mode'. If you are, try changing from sound mode to 'USB Mode' and then run SimShaker for Aviators (SSA). I use 'Sound Mode' for BoX and CloD, because they are not compatible with SSA, but for DCS I change the JetSeat to 'USB Mode' and use SSA. With SSA I then get the aircraft bespoke feedback features that SSA provides :) With 'Sound Mode' when flying BoX or CloD I get the vibrations when people speak on TS, but I don't find it much of a bother once we start flying. It would be great if BoX and CloD were to become compatible with software like SSA, but that is not the case at the moment. Hope this helps. Good luck. Happy landings, Talisman