Talisman_VR

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

If you are running a version other than 1.5 release version, then it looks like you might have found a bug worth reporting. I don't have time to check the P51D at the moment. Sorry if I missed it, but what version of DCS are you using? P.S. I agree with you that it is important that the rads close as they should. Happy landings, Talisman

Did you read in my post when I said "P.S. I am still on 1.5 release version, so have no experience of later versions/patches."? Thing is, the rads on my Spit are working fine and dandy. I have just watched them open and close 4 times over with no problem, just as they should. I have just tested them using the Instant Action, Free Flight mission for the Spit in the 1.5 release version. If you have a different version then that might be the key to the issue you have raised. What version of DCS are you using? P.S. I only mentioned throttling back in a previous post because that is what I sometimes do in combat if there is a break in action, to get the rads closed again as soon as possible. Happy landings, Talisman

Thanks for the news. Any chance your company is thinking about producing a force feedback joystick any time in the future? That would get a lot of attention I am sure. We live in hope. Happy landings, Talisman

Lower throttle = lower boost = lower temps = rad closure at lower temps, under 115 deg. Do what ever you need to do during your flight, the auto rad will open and close to keep your engine temps within limits. Take care that you do not fly too slow, nose too high for too long, in a climb, or the engine will overheat even with rad open. Happy landings, Talisman

Check the pilot notes, but I believe the rad was designed to auto open at 115 deg. In my experience, I find that a few seconds at boost +8 lbs and engine will cool enough for auto operation to close the rad (unless nose too high and speed too low for cooling effect). Trick is to not fly over 115 deg unless you really need to (perhaps in combat for example); a little under 3,000 rpm may help at times, try 2850 rpm. Pilot notes for most Spits indicate that climb settings are good for combat. Once you have accelerated to speed, climb rpm setting with +18 lbs boost can help with max speed at sea level (yaw and pitch trim, together with minimum movement of stick and control surfaces is essential). P.S. I am still on 1.5 release version, so have no experience of later versions/patches. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Hi, No problems, I use MSFF2 with JetSeat and SSA and it is great! :thumbup: Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

That is a great restoration project, I have been following it :) If they ever get that Tempest V flying, before I am in my box, I would like to fly to the good old USA to see it. P.S. Some information can be gleaned from the Sea Fury, since the Tempest was the basis for that aircraft. If I remember correctly, at one time one of the 3rd party developers was planning the Sea Fury for DCS, which would be nice (historical) for a Korea scenario. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Thanks f4I0, I will try and remember not to say product in the future, but what you do is really very, very good! :thumbup: Thank you for all your good works. Happy landings,

Hi f4l0, Thanks for all your work. I now have full aircraft specific list showing, as well as generic types :) I have had a chance to more seriously test things out with the following results: No flap movement effect with Mig-15, Spitfire and P51D. No cockpit open/close effect with Mig-15, Spitfire and P51D. No gear turbulence effect with the Spitfire. No WEP effect with Spitfire and P51D. Almost no effects with the Hawk apart from ground bumps/take-off rumble (perhaps because the Hawk is still WIP). On a more positive note, I would just like to say how much your product brings the Mig-15 alive. I love all the effects, including the cannon loading effect, the air brakes and all the other features; pure joy :) The JetSeat and SSA software worth it for the Mig-15 alone. I say to any Mig-15 lovers out there that you are missing out if you don't have the JetSeat and SSA software. Happy landings,

Thanks f4I0, I really enjoy the Jetseat and SimShaker for Aviators software. :thumbup: I will try again tonight, but it is strange that I have no aircraft specific list anymore and only have generic aircraft setting for rotary, piston and jet. Happy landings,