rkk01

We’re going to need some more Axis aircraft pretty soon...! Currently 4:3, Allies:Axis with (hopefully) 2021 release of the Mossie and Corsair that will really shift the balance. Seems like a Zero and a Gustav are very much needed, although a continued focus on the highest performance, late war Allied variants does increase the justification for a Me 262

With me flying... Dora is 100 kph faster and I can kill AI Mustangs 1 on 1 Anton speed bleeds to 300kph stall in any BFM, but makes a great jabo

What would have been better than Warspite? More Battle Honours than any other Royal Navy vessel - wrecked, then salvaged on tow to the breakers 15 Battle Honours...

If only someone could find a couple of boxed up Rolls Royce Peregrines in the back of a shed The Whirlwind was criticised by many, but loved by its pilots - fastest plane in the world at the time and concentrated 4 x 20mm in the nose. Like the Typhoon, unjustifiably extinct or thereabouts (With the benefit of hindsight) The Brits were scandalously bad at retaining key pieces of WW2 kit... We really should still have one of the key battleships, aircraft carriers and at least one destroyer as museum ships (probably Warspite, one of the surviving Tribal class destroyers - carriers were extensively modified post war) my father always reckoned a combination of post war austerity and no desire to look back to dark days

Would be good to think that some of the EA strands are also being progressed in parallel to the external model - ie, rockets available by the time the Mossie launches Remind me of timescale “news”? Have heard nothing (or seen nothing...) since the delay announcement. Was it backtracked to late Q2 or was it pencilled in for Q3???

Lol... my rudders aren’t TFRPs... ... they’re the original vintage Rudder Control System, with a flattish parallelogram set up - pre USB even

I suppose I was wondering if an upgrade would give more precise rudder control for warbird take offs and landings probably just my bad flying

More modern propellant in the low flash photos? seems to go with the low-vis paint schemes - ie a more recent development

I was working as a contractor at RAF St Mawgan winter of 90-91 and remember a lone Tornado coming in to land. Parked up right next to where I was working... Desert pink scheme, but absolutely plastered in dirt, dust and tail area black with smoke residue from the thrust reversers So yes, 91 ish era GR.1 would be very nice...!

Looking very good

Thanks - I’d kind of focused in on the Crosswinds... expensive, but not much point moving on from my existing Thrustmasters without seeing a major improvement

All in the balmy tropical sunshine...

Posted here in preference go “inputs” on the basis of wanting warbird specific feedback - especially for take off anc landing control My existing rudders are an old Thrustmaster set and I wonder whether a newer set would allow more precise control

Some interesting responses... As a scientist and engineer, there is a world of difference between “making things up”, “educated guesswork” and “sensible assumptions”... yet all three cover the areas of “lack of knowledge” or “hard data”. By all accounts, the P-47 was very much lacking in hard data, but with airworthy examples and current pilot experience. No amount of pilot knowledge will tell you how much lift for a given speed and AoA or how much hp for a given manifold pressure - you still need the numbers.... (but those numbers could be derived from engine output measurement, comparison with a known similar installation, or just assumed on a scale of 0 to x based on a known max). Some of my work includes modelling of natural systems and it always amazes me how really good (accurate) simulations can be produced with sensibly selected parameter ranges (taking account of feasible min, max and “normal” ranges of values)

Agree that F-4 makes sense with the carrier... but there is that issue around ED plans On the other hand, ED did state that they weren’t going to take on the Tornado but did seem to say that that was one for the third party devs

F-15... pointless ... dull

Interesting, and obviously correct observation on the value of warbirds vs the value of flight data... my biggest steps forward in taming the DCS warbirds has been looking at cockpit vids of current take offs etc - all conducted under much reduced power settings to conserve engine and airframe life So, possibly as I suspected... there may be a bit of “hiding behind” availability of data and airworthy examples

The SC500 causes a lot of hurt Been using it on NTTR to practice FW190 raids - one hit can take out 4-6 parked vehicles and a couple of parked aircraft Now, I’m not sure if that is the bomb modelling or WW2 vehicle damage modelling, or both. The Anton is also very effective on strafing runs - stable gun platform = accurate and 20mm API / HEI mix (I think) seems to be quite devastating on soft targets like vehicles and AAA

I’ve always been keen on the North African and Italian campaign camo schemes... and we have plenty of arid terrain maps My question though - we have desert skins for the Spitfire and the Luftwaffe aircraft, but not for the P-47 or P-51... The Americans seemed to have used desert camo for P-40s, P-38s and US operated Spitfires. Were the P-47s and P-51s just used in Northern Europe? and therefore wouldn’t have received desert / Med schemes

A few Ho-229 articles have hit my social media feeds over the last few years, mostly from the Smithsonian as they work on the V3 restoration I fully understand the reluctance from some quarters to have a Ho-229, but as NineLine frequently states... it’s about interesting aircraft and this certainly is. (If nothing else, simulation is all about doing something that can’t be done in real life) Did the v3 ever fly? There are no RLM / German records, but based on the restoration work it does seem likely that the airframe was at least ground run at some stage as scorch marks were found beneath the engines. Personally, I find it inconceivable that either the existing airframe or a contemporaneous replica was not run as part of post war research - so the scorch marks might have been from US based trials even if the airframe wasn’t tested in Germany... Also, oddly, this thing was captured in 1945, but didn’t turn up at the Smithsonian until 1950 or 1952 . Four years in US storage with nobody crawling all over it - seems pretty unlikely...! As a minimum you’d expect that a full technical assessment would have been completed to evaluate the design and construction, perhaps more likely with that information feeding into US designs rather than the airframe being flown itself https://airandspace.si.edu/collections/horten-ho-229-v3/

F-111, F-4, Tornado... Any, all, either would be great. F-4 seems a more logical fit with Forrestal F-111 would be “next gen” in terms of module tech / development because of the side by side cockpit layout and ejection capsule Tornado seems a logical step using the F-14 tech, but not sure it offers much in terms of “next gen” module features???

Well, I didn’t see exactly which taxiway he turned off on... as I was expecting his roll out to come down to where I was... Looking at Tonopah on GE it was either 10-20m for the first taxiway of 300m for the second - I suspect the first!!! Either way, the Chucks Guide gives min landing roll as 380m - just about possible if he landed short

Certainly not the case as far as my OP is concerned It was a genuine question - as much about reference material requirements as about aircraft. There has been much debate about the feasibility of both the Me 262 and the A6M. For both of these examples it should be a question of WHY NOT, rather than can we / can’t we around (or hiding behind?) availability of reference material. Both of these aircraft exist today as ground running and flyable airframes - if anything they are both “less extinct” than the Mossie was until very recently. And as for the replica 262s not flying on Jumo engines, surely that just equates to a different mark number, as per Lancasters using Hercules engines or Beaufighters using Merlins - and way less significant than putting a Merlin in a Mustang...! I list those two aircraft as examples to illustrate my question, not as a somehow veiled wish list- and certainly the Zero isn’t a wish list item, it is essential for Pacific... At the other end of the scale the Whirlwind truly is extinct - no complete airframes and a defunct, dead end engine lineage. Similar limitations on the Typhoon and Tempest... or Ju 87, 88, Do 17, He 111... but that’s the real thrust of my question - where is the appropriate cut off between having everything, nothing or “enough”

Fascinating....