Talisman_VR

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 The .303 belting appears to be well out of date and more in line with the Battle of Britain era than Normandy.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.

Testing.

All WIP and I am sure viewing via youtube is not doing it justice, but to me the aircraft air-to-air models appear fuzzy and kind of out of focus. :( The ground visuals and effects seem to be coming along very nicely though. :) As a side note, I could not help wondering about jets operating from these rough airfield strips suffering from ingesting a lot of foreign object damage (FOD) into the engines. Particularly when taxiing and taking off in close proximity and when the wind is up. FOD can be particularly hazardous in these sort of conditions. Hope the air-to-air aircraft model visibility quality WIP comes to fruition soon. :thumbup: Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Just found this and wanted to share with Spitfire fans who may not have seen it before either. The opening sequence holds me spellbound. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Just as a point of interest, I read that the Spitfire with the most kills that is still flying is a Mk V with, yes, you guessed it, clipped wings. :thumbup: This specific Mk. VC, EP120, is the Spitfire with most kills still flying - 7 German aircraft. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

I am just pointing out that the direction of travel in the development of the wing was away from the initial type of wing tip shape and that there was good reason. Prior to the Mk24 plenty of other Spitfire types continued to move away from the initial type of wing tip. The comparison trial between the two Mk V Spits of the same specification and the dog fight trial appear pretty conclusive to me. For my money, that is the best information I have seen. I don't see how other tests/charts between Spitfires that were not the same specification can be relevant. For me it is the test between the two Mk V Spits that is most useful; also, the clip wing Spit having the better of 4 dog-fight tests says to me that the clip wing was king for a low fighter. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

The comparative trials of the 2 Mk V Spits appears to show a clear advantage to the clip wing. Additionally, the combat trial between the same spec 2 Spitfires Mk V show that the clip wing comes up trumps in all cases. I have a copy of this report too in my copy of the Alfred Price book named 'The Spitfire Story' (IBSN 1-85409-305-3). Moreover, it is worth noting that it was not for nothing that the clip wing was part of the natural evolution of the Spitfire. Spitfires were eventually produced with clip wings at the factory and eventually the Spitfire evolved to designed squared off wing tips on faster later marks of Spitfire too. This takes nothing away from the success of the early 1940 Battle of Britain era design with standard wing tips, but the need for speed and manoeuvrability was constantly changing as the war moved on and the Spitfire wing changed to meet the new needs of air combat as it developed over the period of the WWII. At the end of its development to Spitfires wing was squared off. So, the squared off wing actually ended up as the standard wing. That should tell us something about the advantages of changing design to meet changing requirements. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Nah, High Fighter was absolute pants! lol. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Understood. Holding tight. Thank you and happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

It would be a shame for the devs work to be lost to a considerable chunk of the potential customer base for lack of quality air-to-air visibility. The WWII MP enthusiasts that I fly with have been attracted to dip their toe in DCS by the WWII project. We fly many hours a week on flight sims and are mad keen. We fly with each other as squads, we fly against each other as squads, we meet up at airshows and sometimes travel between countries to do so. I would have thought the developers might see our community as a valuable resource to be tapped and want to attract us as customer stakeholders for a long term future. No one likes to feel that they might be being treated as a second class customer, particularly if all they are looking for is an improvement in product quality for the good of all concerned. Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman

Finally getting the hang of the Spit in combat, and really enojying the server. Now bring on some crappy weather! :) Yep, every time I log on the sun is shinning and no weather challenge :( Would be good if we had less than stellar weather continuous for at least a week at a time, followed by a week, or maybe just a couple of days of decent weather. Thanks for the server :thumbup: Happy landings, 56RAF_Talisman