Talisman_VR

Further to above, I have just had a look at my copy of an Ordinance Survey RAF (WAR) map from 1944 covering the Strait of Dover and Normandy, and the magnetic variation is shown as 8 degrees and 47 minutes. I believe that the variation at the moment in 2017 for the same area is 0.1 degree. That is a significant difference between 1944 and today. P.S. I suggest that if DCS want to give us a Normandy map with a negligible variation, as per more modern times, then that would be fine, as long as we know one way or the other. Happy landings,

I think you will find that the magnetic variation was different in the 1940's WWII era than it is now in modern times. As I understand it, the variation changes over time. So the Normandy map should have different navigation in terms of magnetic variation than the more modern DCS maps. So, I suggest that the Normandy map should be subject to the magnetic variation of the time of WWII and not 2017. How this may effect modern jet flying on the DCS Normandy map I am not sure. Perhaps the Navigation map for WWII should be separate, bespoke to the 1940's and part of the WWII pack. Happy landings,

I can't make tracks and post, but perhaps someone could make a track of the elevator trim wheel movement to show Yo-Yo that many of us do not get full movement in anything like 7 seconds! (I use button on my TWCS throttle for trim and do not have any axis available for trim). Elevator trim is painfully slow, slow, slow Yo-Yo. Please check this issue. Thank you in anticipation. Happy landings,

As I understand it, he was referring to the fix in relation to the DCS version 2.1.0 update for Friday 26th May. I am asking if it will be included in the version 1.5.7 update due this Friday 7th July. His post about the fix was dated 24th May, at which time there was no news of version 1.5.7 update, only 2.1.0. There is no mention of the fix in the version 1.5.7 changelog, so I am concerned about that. Some information on this from the developers would be very welcome, as many of us are not involved in testing version 2.1.0. I hope that version 1.5.7 users will not be left out of this fix. Happy landings,

Many times I am searching the MP servers looking for human combat Mig-15 vs F86 for good old guns only fast jet action Korean war style. I just love the challenge of flying the Mig-15, especially against the Sabre :)) I will even spend an hour or so on an empty server hoping someone will see me and join in a Sabre to test our skills and aircraft capability. Such a shame that I am not able to find populated Mig vs Sabre servers :(( If only there was a Korean war package and enough historical aircraft, like with the Normandy project, to create the environment. Carrier operations with aircraft like the Hawker Sea Fury and others would be great! Thunder Chiefs, B29 bombers and more aircraft for the North Korean side, etc, etc. Now that would be truly great! I love the WII and early jet aircraft, prior to air-to-air missiles, but not having the historical environment to use them in is what I find disappointing most of the time. Happy landings,

Hi PilotMi8, Will the fix be included in the new version DCS 1.5.7 now planned for release next week? I am a big fan of your Mig-15 :) Thank you in anticipation. Happy landings,

Hi Andre, Any chance of compatibility with BoX (BoS/BoM) series in the near future in terms of software? Happy landings,

Dear Spitfire dev's, Any news regarding my original post concerning .303 rounds for the final release version of the Spitfire would be greatly appreciated. It seems that we may still have historically incorrect type of mix of .303 rounds for the Spitfire, including observer rounds :( Thank you in anticipation. Happy landings,

Yes, I used to be able to get these speeds when I flew the last 3 races of the last DCS Mustang racing series a couple of years back, but lately a quick test showed me that I can't get the same sort of speed anymore for some strange reason. However, it is important to note that the speeds stated above need manual control of radiators and extremely, repeat extremely, careful flying; the sort of flying that does not lend itself at all well to combat because to get these speeds in racing means flying on the extreme edge and the engine can blow in a heartbeat. Just lifting the nose a fraction for a second too long and a slight reduction in airspeed and resultant cooling effect can mean a lost engine very, very easily. Not only that, although these speeds can be sustained for a while, you need to take the word 'sustained' with a pinch of salt because the engine will not last indefinitely at the settings required for such speed and race winners have had engines blow just before the finish line but stayed in the air long enough to carry enough speed to win by a whisker; it is in fact a calculated risk to go for broke in the last seconds of a race to secure a win knowing that the engine will likely be lost (this is not real world realistic behaviour). I would suggest that we don't get side tracked by specialist racing settings, but concentrate on the real world speed tests for the DCS competitive combat environment and leave the racing settings and scenarios to one side. P.S. You can't out run the bullets/cannons being fired at you from behind, so as soon as you manoeuvre to avoid them you won't be at optimum speed anyway. Happy landings,

It would be good if the devs could confirm if they have sorted out bomb delay settings for the allied side ready for the Normandy map. The allies used bomb delay settings for ground attack, so it is a basic fundamental requirement for a WWII simulation. Bomb delay was not just a LW thing, LOL. Come on DCS, lets hope you can give us some news on this. Happy landings,

Sorry, but I can't make video's. No software, no camera and I am not very computer literate, LOL. Happy landings,

DCS 1.5.6.1938 Update 2017-02-10 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). Worked like a charm. My stick now works better than ever and the FF is great! (I use DCS Version 1.5) I did not have a autoexec.cfg file, so I used Note Pad and put a newly created file in in the Config folder. And, thanks again to Holton181 for informing me of the change, that I had missed on release, in this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=180624 Happy landings,

Hi ebabil, Sorry, but I only have the Saitek cyborg evo FF stick, not the ms ffb2. I must say that I very much enjoy the Saitek cyborg evo; so much that I have a large stock of 2nd hand (ebay) fully working versions ready to last me for the next 12 years or so :) Happy landings,

Holton181, Brilliant :thumbup: Worked like a charm :) Thank you very much for highlighting this issue on the forum; I had completely missed it on the update. My stick now works better than ever and the FF is great! (I use DCS Version 1.5) I used Note Pad and put in in the Config folder. Thanks again and happy landings,

Prepare for stupid question, but what is SSA? Happy landings,

Alex Henshaw flight testing a MkV Spitfire at Castle Bromwich Birmingham 1941: Happy landings,

Good post. Very much agree. Happy landings,

Thanks Holton181, but I can't find the autoexec.cfg file. And the config file just gives me Input, View, network.vault and options.lua files. Can you give me any more clues? Happy landings,

Good post philstyle. The .303 belting appears to be well out of date and more in line with the Battle of Britain era than Normandy. On a more general note, I asked for clarification here but have not seen a response yet: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=183520 The .303 belting appears to need some attention. I hope the WIP will look at this issue very soon. Happy landings,

I like to use MP Air Quake servers for rapid dog-fight practise to hone gunnery skills on particular aircraft and hone aircraft, engine and energy management, including SA skills in a highly dynamic and pressured environment (also good for testing/experimenting new settings and combat manoeuvre techniques, particularly after patches/updates to flight models). Competing against AI is just kidding yourself in my book; if you intend to properly test yourself and get to know the limits of your fighter aircraft, one needs human opposition, lots of it and the better the Air Quake opposition pilots are the more one learns and improves. So, for me, Air Quake is all about practise for the real deal, which for me and most of the squads I fly with is about historically based WWII scenarios with and against human players on MP. Sad to say, I have come across snobbery towards Air Quake, but I find these MP servers are useful and have their place as much as any other type of server. The frustration I find with DCS at the moment is that we are waiting, waiting and waiting and trying to keep faith that DCS can deliver a WWII environment and appropriate plane set. I also like air racing, but 2 years of no Mustang racing series is also sad, but understandable due the state of flux DCS sim versions are in at the moment. So, 190 or 109? I don't know, but I do know there is some way to go to before we get some historically based WWII action servers (and not just with AI only flight models). It appears that there may be a lot of potential, but we just have to wait and see. Happy landings,

Thank you. This news lifts the spirits somewhat. The proof will be in the pudding and I look forward to the eating. Happy landings,

This, and I am a stick and rudder seat of pants human hands on flyer who finds that managing 'systems', like in modern combat aircraft, is just not were it is at for me. I like the human judgement involved in, for example, using the human brain to estimate a deflection shot and fly my crate without system aids. Missiles are just so unsporting and flying systems too much is a cold experience for me. As for some computer generated voice telling me to "pull-up-pull-up-pull-up" or whatever, well that just sucks; might as well go fly an airliner simulator :P Don't get me wrong, I agree with different strokes for different folks and that's great. I am happy to see people happy to fly what they want to. I love all aircraft, but I only have so much time to spend on flight simulation, so I prioritise my most passionate fantasy and that is WWII war birds. The real deal for me is human vs human competitive combat in MP with organised squads and historical flying/maps and tactics. I go as far as the Korea conflict in terms of my favourite aircraft to fly. I must say I just love that Mig-15 and wish there was more of a following for Korea style MP maps/servers. But I suspect that would only happen, the way I would like to see it, if we had a joined-up Korea plane set and historical map. Happy landings,

Hi Wags, Some of us are most interested to see what the WWII historical in-cockpit navigation map will look like and how we may interface with it in terms of functionality, etc. For example: Will we be able to conveniently toggle the map on and off with one key (rather than 2 keys open and close)? Will the map be big enough for us to use effectively to navigate, but still give us use of our peripheral vision to safely keep wings level whilst referring to it? Will the map be custom sizeable for convenience in the cockpit (drag edges in and out to size with mouse to simulate folding the map to size)? Will we be able to move the map to a place in the cockpit (on the PC screen) that is most convenient to view (different cockpits have different instrument layout that we may chose not to block)? Will be able to zoom in a little on the map to simulate close examination of small details? If our position is automatically shown on the navigation map by a moving icon, will we be able to turn it off and will it be able to be enforced off by default by people hosting full real navigation servers on MP? Will there be a separate modern navigation map (current DCS style) for PC pilots of more modern aircraft that are not interested in WWII? Perhaps the WWII map comes with the WWII asset pack? Perhaps you will be able to show this to us as part of your live stream. Sorry if this has been asked and answered before and I have missed it. Thank you in anticipation. Happy landings,

Racoon, This book looks like a very good source of information for the Normandy map: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=I10OjlPjcI0C&pg=PA81&lpg=PA81&dq=2nd+taf+ground+attack+techniques&source=bl&ots=5Fs7Aq_c9B&sig=aakAadthwHzEV9MjOhlnUS4KS50&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi03PTj9pLTAhWHJMAKHfPiBrwQ6AEINjAF#v=onepage&q=2nd%20taf%20ground%20attack%20techniques&f=false Just been reading about Irish Guard tanks in Normandy firing red smoke to indicate German positions for RAF Typhoon rocket attacks in close air support. It was interesting to read that some Typhoon rocket attacks were within 100 yards of the Guards' tanks which were burning yellow recognition smoke. It appears that in instances like this, accurate Typhoon rocket attacks were very desirable because artillery fire could not be brought down on the German positions due to the close proximity of the British tanks. Anyone know if it is possible for individual British tanks in DCS to burn recognition smoke during the course of close air support attacks? It would be nice to be able to trigger recognition smoke just as friendly close air support attacks, as well as lay coloured smoke on the enemy. Anyone know it the German Tanks/forces also utilised smoke in the same way for recognition and to lay on enemy positions? Did the LW provide much close air support to ground troops in Normandy, bearing in mind that the Allies had air superiority? Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Nice movie Phil. :) Looks like the Burning Skies MP server using the left-shift/F10 icon modification to improve on standard DCS aircraft air-to-air model visibility. The visibility mod makes a big difference.