Wizard_03
-
Posts
1647 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Wizard_03
-
The EULA doesn't state that or even imply that. And even if it did, that's not necessarily legal. "Everything subject to change" I'm pretty sure doesn't mean that you can take people's money and walk away. If it does then I say "Everything is subject to litigation"
-
If I were a dev I wouldn't charge people money on a project Im not committed to completing. And if I had to quit work for whatever reason, I would absolutely feel obligated to refund anyone who has paid. I would consider my store front description a contract that I have agreed to fulfill. Those are just normal business practices. Can you imagine if this was the service industry?
-
That ED can just take your money and bail? no honestly It didn't, in most countries that kind of behavior is considered criminal.
-
That wouldn't fix the issue. The issue is that early access is a good faith transaction that eventually the modules will be completed. However the devs can evidently just quit at any point leaving the module in an unfinished state. If modules can be abandoned in the early access period then we can't do business. I need a guarantee that what I paid for will be delivered now. At this point my trust in them has been completely eroded. I can stand delays, I can't stand having my money stolen.
-
Will not be pre-ordering anything from ED until work on DCS: F-15E is resumed AND an official timeline on development and release date is published or I'm issued a full refund for that abandoned module. Extremely disappointed and unsatisfied with the state of things right now.
-
What are: "Additional MSI functions?"
-
Depending on the outcome of this situation, the F-15E may be the last DCS module I ever purchase. Absolutely unbelievable, what a complete slap in the face to all the loyal supporters who really have no where else to turn for modern high fidelity study sims, many who have been here for more than a decade. My eyes are on both companies the EULA doesn't cover false advertising. The product page has a list of features that the module was supposed to ship with on release. So Either Deliver what I paid for or give me my money back. Period. Customers shouldn't be held hostage over disagreements whoever is right or wrong in this case or any case. Even with a best case outcome, this situation has seriously degraded my trust in both parties, and going forward I will be much more careful about supporting either side with my wallet.
-
Are patches on a multi month month cycle now? This year we have only had a single update to the game.
-
Expectation on Air to Air missiles of the MiG-29A?
Wizard_03 replied to pepin1234's topic in DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum
R-27 is never going to be competitive with AMRAAM period. So to the forum title question, I would expect to be shot down in a BVR situation facing anyone with a ARH missile, and super shot down if that missile is a 120C. R-27 should be more then competitive against early Aim-7s and the ER versions (if we get them for game play purposes, as the MiG-29A 9.12 historically didn't carry them) should be very competitive against late sparrows. R-73 should be about the same as a 9X with a little less resistance against flares. -
Possible UB, G, GT and/or AS variants down the line
Wizard_03 replied to NSAdonis85's topic in Wish List
https://forum.dcs.world/topic/341517-mig-29a-ff-capabilities-and-how-will-it-fit-into-the-metagame/?do=findComment&comment=5363978 -
Now that makes perfect sense. Also Didn't consider asymmetrical loads from missile firing.
-
The MiG-29 is very dangerous in a dogfight. unless your in a viper or hornet, I'd kill it quick and far away. However its very hard to master energy management in the MiG-29 so most players won't be able to take it too its full potential. Its far to easy to over pull the stick in tight turns because the aircraft will very quickly give you more and more AOA unlike the viper which slowly looses speed when you pull to hard, or practice HUD BFM. But if you can find the MiGs sweet spot, don't cross control, and watch your AOA, you can out rate almost every jet in the game. staying on corner speed is the trick. Over speeding is likewise a no no and will get you shot down in a lot of situations. Once you do master energy management you can then intentionally Pull hard when you see someone screw up and take nasty snapshots the same way the hornet and flanker can (though not quite as dramatic), in lots of situations against the viper or any other dogfight monster. It not as punishing as the hornet when you get slow either you can dump the nose and get fast again real quick as long as your not on the deck obviously. Don't expect overshoots from the bandit though, that type of energy dump is do or die in the fulcrum down low. But I feel most online players will be dead after the first few turns with the MiG for not managing their energy well. So i don't expect it too perform any better then it already does on the servers. But its a heck of a little airplane in the right hands.
-
Thanks all! I will ignore the light, pretty interesting quark of the viper. Sounds like the SMS and FBW are still pretty old and don't just figure themselves out like you might expect from a more modern system. I do know that centerline stores can cause instability at high AOA in most jets so I guess it's not that surprising that ECM might be CAT III. Given the vipers dislike of high AOA in general.
-
But the ECM pod on centerline station is CAT III? So I'm getting a stores config caution, with 4 AAMs two wing tanks and ECM pod on centerline, with the switch set to CAT III. Is that correct behavior? Because that is a CAT III load.
-
Hard to believe the ECM pod is CAT III on the centerline station. Centerline external tank is not according to the manual, and it's both bigger and heavier then the short pods. The TGP and HTS are CAT III certainly.
-
Please apply the new Hi Def S-3B 3D model to the tanker version of the aircraft or add buddy refueling pods to the new version. Quite disappointing that the only carrier based tanker in the game looks like it was made for the gameboy advanced.
-
The boost lever has nothing to do with the regulator, the regulator simply blows off excess manifold pressure through the wastegates above what ever setting the aircraft is configured for, 64" wet in this case. Regardless of throttle or boost lever settings. Full safe power should be the absolute limit in any case, they didn't include a self destruct button at the end of the throttle travel. In any case it's up to ED, they have the bug report now and they can provide an explanation as to why their aircraft is the way it is.
-
It only makes sense, with that much boost, and the inclusion of water injection with 47C they need to protect the engine from detonation especially during combat. Bug report
-
see thread and attached images Currently the P-47 is far more susceptible to overboost and can overboost above 64" under a wide set of conditions because the aircraft is modeled without a manifold pressure regulator. Images attached in the above thread show the available and part numbers of the missing regulator and its installation on the aircraft and instructions for installation on aircraft as early as the P47C in contrast to the version modeled in DCS erroneously without one. The regulator should keep manifold pressure at or below maximum (64" wet) for most or all of the flight envelope with the throttle full open 100 percent.
-
Thank you so much, so according to this parts catalog as far back as the P47C they were equipped with manifold pressure regulators. Now the question is why does the DCS Version not have one, as earlier versions could and did use manifold Pressure regulators to control boost. Can't really get more conclusive then that, literally written in black and white. I will submit a bug report.
-
We need to find out if the real one did, because I see having to manage the throttle to stay below max allowed manifold pressure and or opening up intercoolers and oil flaps in the middle of a dogfight as a huge disadvantage. And nowhere in pilot testimony or the manuals suggest it had that limitation. Other sims dont model it that way and there's no information in the DCS manual about it at all. If it is true then they need to place that in bold all over the operations section. Because it's a big deal and It means you have to be much more careful in the P47 with managing power then you probably think, certainly much more careful then all the other aircraft in DCS. In the P40 in the other sim, its annoying but your not really going up super high and certainly not fighting up high so its not a huge deal because you don't in fact over boost that much since as you get higher your engine runs out of breath anyways just need to watch out when diving quickly, not having a regulator in an aircraft designed expressly for high altitude fighting seems like a really big oversight. Especially since the pilot absolutely needs one to breath out of in any case, but they evidently forgot to put one on the engine? I don't buy it.
-
Both, a regulator can map for both water injection on and off. The first part is referring to the P47N loosing it's boost lever which is not what we are talking about. The second part is also Hardly conclusive, you can still overboost in both the spit and the mustang too and they have regulators as well. That quip in the manual is referring to the take off stop which is not modeled in DCS. You also have full military power all the way up to 33k in DCS so that manual is at odds with what we have in the sim anyways. Unless it's referencing military power and not WEP which is what matters for this discussion.
-
Paying attention to the engine is not the issue. What happens when you push the throttle forward is. The burden of proof is on them, because even their own manual makes no mention of this phenomenon. Anyone can simply pull power to "fly with in the limits" in game that's not the issue, the issue is their model of the R2800 I shouldn't be required to use 95 percent throttle for max safe power. That's not listed in their manual or pilot manuals of the period. Short of a providing a blue print of the motor and giving a lecture on forced induction applications. I'm not sure what you want from me. I simply asked a question that no one has yet given me an answer too.
-
All the German planes have regulators as well and every other sim I've played including the other three letter one with two P47s and they certainly have them. I can't prove a negative. Should I provide a source to show the engine has spark plugs too? ED should provide the source that shows the R2800 in 47D-30 did NOT have a manifold pressure regulator. Because I've never read or heard anything about the aircraft that even suggests it didn't, and for good reason because it makes absolutely no sense. I could maybe understand an aircraft set up for 150 octane fuel with its regulator dialed up to run 70" running lower grade fuel and you being able to go above limits but that's a very specific situation and the aircraft still has a regulator it's just tuned wrong. Not having one is so dangerous it's silly. We would have a laundry list of sources backing that up if that were the case. It would be all over the pilot manuals telling pilots be extremely careful not to overboost during BFM because the engine not protected from detonation at WEP Rather most sources suggest R2800 is actually a very tough engine and could take lots of abuse, and keep running even after sustaining battle damage.
-
I'm not at home so I can't test anything for you right now, but I assure you the DCS P47 will allow you to exceed 64" under a wide range of conditions because it's modeled without a manifold pressure regulator. Quick and dirty get above 15K arm water injection, put the prop, throttle and boost either connected or disconnected all the way forward and fly around. You'll exceed 64 very quickly and if your not checking the MP and manually retarding throttle/boost back to 64 your bearings will go within two minutes. Because of detonation Well before the engine oil, carb air or cylinder head temp overheats, well before you run out of water, ect. If the engine was equiped with a pressure regulator exceeding 64" should be very difficult or impossible under most conditions
