JG13Wulf

Ok, To not continue on post of the P47, I will go back to another post to talk about this. Let's not all get mad to each other ! Still only a game ! @Bignewy can we have official answer from DCS about this toppic please ? https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4110924#post4110924

If we could at least have the possibility to choose in a list of preset (fighter, ground attack, precise area, large area, ...), it would be awesome. A big step from what we have at the moment.

For RAF there was facilities for that (firing range) that were not on all airport. They almost do that all the day there. In previous post I made, a pilot refer about this range because he wanted to set his P51 gun differently. => https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4016715&postcount=28 If you read the doc I linked previously : https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28664/m1/1/ There was a 8 step procedure to set the convergence. Here is the pages : https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28664/m1/20/ https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28664/m1/21/ https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28664/m1/22/ https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28664/m1/23/ I think it take times, but not 1 day for a plane. And as they said, when bore sight was alligned with target, then it need only few adjustment. As they said in the text, this procedure is not so complex. And if you read in detail, they discuss the fact if pilot and ground crew don't have access to complete firing range. For this case, the target was put closer. Then it need a bit more calcul to set correctly the target to set the gun to the convergence point they want. Remember the movie Pearl Harbor. Funny to use it as an example but they actually do that. At a moment they use a small firing range to set the guns of a P40. (was looking for picture and found this) (don't tell me those picture were made at factory ...) Even if it is a movie, this scene of Pearl Harbor seems historically correct (following previous doc). And I'm pretty sure people at this time had the hability to set the target as they needed to have the convergence they wanted on the plane they were working on. Then, in the same doc you can find that armament need a complete inspection after 40 hours : https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28664/m1/28/ I think that air force of each country during ww2 had enough ground crew to set the guns of their planes to shoot at enemy planes. Your point saying it takes time so it wasn't done is a bit silly. By following this, you can erase all the "secondary" task they had to do. Such as inspecting engine or controls cable. I think at this time it was pretty important for ground crew and pilots to be sure that guns were going to shoot where it is supposed to shoot. Need more ... ?

I think I give you lot of evidence that it was common thing. But ok here is a first one : In french, an interview of Pierre Clostermann clearly saying the following about the spit. "If you loaded guns (7.7mm) with tracers to help aiming, you had one problem : tracers didn't had the same trajectory as 20mm shells. This was kind a problem and because we had other things to think about than making space geometry problems when shooting. So we could ask to mechanics to set 7.7 mm to shoot above 20 mm. But there would have still be problem because of the target distance it change the parameters of shoot. the result was we were all bad shooter." This is not a perfect translation (word by word). Hope someone could translate better than me. But he clearly tell that they could ask for gun setting modification. Remember that at this period he had few kills with Spifire (6 confirmed kills in spit if I believe this : http://www.cieldegloire.com/004_clostermann.php ). Most of his aerial kills were made with Tempest (table at the end of the page). Another one from Clostermann : First time on Tempest. So at this moment he had 6 confirmed kills at least and we are in 1944 (after DDay) as he was on Spitfire until this year. In this interview he said he received a new Tempest (completely new plane) and ground crew set his gun as he asked for. As you can understand, it seems that he knows the ground crew from the period he was on Spitfire (edit : correct half of the ground crew was from 602 squadron where he flew on Spit). So you could say that they do that for him ... But I still think it was common for all pilots. He refer in the same interview about the "spray setting" (probably not well translated) but he explained this in his book and in several interview as guns were set to fire in a large area. The four guns of his Tempest and his Spitfire before were set to not converge all to one point. But several point. I get another document about how the harmonisatiuon of gun was made. It not tells who could do that but it's explicit that you could set plane to a choosen convergence : https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc28664/m1/1/

Waiting for proof that only special pilots could have field modification. It's hard to discuss with people like you as you. You just say no but can't proof anything about it. I can't imagine that you think mechanincs that repair gun and replace them didn't have the possibility to follow pilots request to set their gun to shoot closer than usual (250m -> 200m) If pilot survive long enough to have gun replacement or gun reset, it was simple to ask for the reset to be at another convergence point ... It was just needed to place a plane on a shooting range to then move some little screw to slightly move gun up/down and left/right. The main difference for mechanics was to put the plane at different distance of the test target. Then move the screw as usual to have gun shooting at the target. When the gun was alligned as usual with the target, then the gun convergence was correctly set. At least if we could have variable preset for each plane and not complete personalised it would be a big step ! Show 2 different convergence settings for P47. Show how gun setting was made. Just remember that you only need to put the P51 forward or back ward to change the convergence settings. Then mechanics have the same work to do to set the gun. (and check the image, left and right are not the same => 2 differents settings for P51). If you read "The Big Show" by P. Clostermann, he said that lot of pilots asked for the right one. As he said, they were all bad at shooting so with this kind of setting, they had better chance to hit ennemy (even if it was with few rounds). This was common for new pilots !

If I want a game to unlock things I go play war thunder. Here I prefer to have full ability to make choice as I explained in my previous post. Choice of the mission maker to accept or not the personnal settings of players planes. And nothing can stop anybody to make a script that tell "if KDR under x then lock, else unlock" ... Sim is for simulate everything (or a maximum of things) to be as close as possible to the reality, even the smallest feature. Field modification is one of the biggest feature of WW2. Some pilot chose to modify some minor things to their planes to have better chance of survivability. Every pilots that had the chance to live long enough had the opportunity to modify their plane. Some example : Bf 109E with additionnal miror : http://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m83scidOU91rc7erjo1_500.jpg Bf 109F of Galland (didn't find a picture of it), but it was a F2 with Emil armament (built from the factory because of his request but yes he was an aces so he can ask a lot). http://www.thescalemodeller.co.za/content/images/thumbs/0000169_italeri-172-messerschmitt-bf-109-f24_550.jpeg Another but without picture was the Malta Hurricane MKIIc. Those used to have 2 canon not 4 because they didn't have lot of 20 mm ammo. They let each plane with only ammo for 2 canon so they removed the two other to gain weight. SAAF Spitfire used special sand filter that they built themselve. Those where as effective as original but smaller. Make those spitfire losing less performance than the Spit with the original filter. P51 with on or two miror. http://crosswindimages.com/img/s3/v39/p237166856.jpg https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS1BvBFDBH1N452NbIe6lb_7-1kVZIIktKbJSVHPA5sXHyc3u9N&s Ju 87 without the wheel cover for mud and snow in russia : https://www.fokkerc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/35629182_10216302281219180_696484188915761152_n.jpg same for Fw 190 http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2869032290?profile=original I can understand that DCS dev can't make all the different field modification that exist (too many). But the most classic should be accessible. Convergence, wheel cover (for muddy map), P51 miror, ... Those can be added easily to the game as it could work like the checkbox in Bf 109 that allow you to choose if you have a pistol or not in the cockpit. DCS should really think about it as all the other ww2 sim allow that since their release. All the other sim understand the fact that field modification of planes is not something that happen few times. It was a common thing. PS: In some squadron (in every country), field modified plane was the standard configuration. So this is another reason why i'm against that idea to lock/unlock feature because of a score/KDR.

I know it was requested again and again and maybe I missed it but I never see anything official telling anybody that it was on a "to do list". Would be enough to me to know thats it's going to be work and then I would wait. But I can't imagine this would not be implemented. Lock/unlock feature almost kill IL2 great battle. it was at first how the game work with all the field modification and the external armament possibilities (bomb, rocket, ..). I think this would be a really bad choice for DCS. Your point is right. there are lot of pilot that had to use not their plane because there were damaged or else. And I think all the personnalisation option on each warbirds should work like this : - Pilots can modify personnal preference in setup page (where you find takeoff assist, ...). So there they could change their favorite convergence, their trim (like we have now for Bf109), ... - Mission creator should have the possibility for each client/player plane to lock the convergence to a number of there choice (or a default valor). If unlock, the plane take the pilot preferences. If lock, the plane is set from the valor in the mission editor. This would simulate both the possibility that a pilot have his plane or someone else plane for a particular mission. Same for ammo belt and even same for the 109 trim. That would be awesome. You could even set group of plane with squadron set as some squadron have particular setup for all their plane.

I wasn't complete enough. He became acein 1 flight. As he use only one kind of round that was particularly effective on german plane, he was capable of destroying enough plane in one day to get ace score. Occasionally or not, it is somthing that was done. So to be a correct ww2 flight sim, DCS should add this feature.

It is historically correct. Lot of pilots set personalised convergence. See here, I made a post with some sources that explain it : https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4016715&postcount=28 So yes, It's a feature missing for a true ww2 sim lover. And for the ammo belt personnalisation is again correct historically. That's not something that you can find information a lot, but I can remember that IL2 1946 add an easter egg related to this. If you name your pilot with the name of a particular aces andtake a particular model of planes, they replace the ammo with only AP or incendiary (don't remember) as the pilot had done during WW2. And because of his special belt and his abilities he became an aces. Couldn't remember if it was a dutch or a norvegian.

I think guns are good. P51 pilots complain and complain but this is the same issues on both side. Some P51 and Spit do exactly the same as the Bf 109 you showed (but less as we have 20mm and 30mm canon). But still, sometimes we see allies plane take lot of damage and still flies. Today you can hit every planes and down them in few rounds. Or you can shoot everything at them and see them flying like nothing happen even if there are holes everywhere. I don't think it's a gun problem. But only the fact that some parts of planes have only 3D/visual damage model. So wathever the gun is good or not, if there is no internal damage modelisation yet, guns will not do anything. We just have to wait and see for the release of DM. After the toppic of gun effectiveness will be interresting. But still, I think they are good now and the problem come from planes damage modelisation itself.

Yes that's why I add that it's probably something that wouldn't interrest people here. But the 4 guns with more ammo or the "field modified" with the possibility to use half guns to save ammo for later in the 4 other would be a good thing. Not for short dogfight like on BS server. But for long mission, it would be great addition.

There was multiple set for the armement. Heard about US planes with less gun but more ammo per gun for long flight. Heard about some with a switch added as field modification. Pilots have the ability to shoot all guns, or to shut down 4 of them to save their ammo for later. (heard about that for lot of different US fighter planes). Heard again about training squadron that used only 4 guns (but maybe not somthing that interrest lot of people). But as I didn't read lot of books about US P47 pilots, I didn't have precise information about this. But as I'm more interrested for campaign and realist mission than going on burning skies for only quick dogfight, I think it could be a great feature for this plane (and maybe more). It's a dream, but DCS would became a lovely WW2 sim if we had a complete gun managment (choice of the gun and their number, choice of the ammo, choice of the convergence of each guns ...) This image had as legend : training P47 with only 4 guns. http://368thfightergroup.com/P-47-armament.html

So let me talk about my favorite plane the Fw190 ... No it's a joke :D Real question about the P47. It was quite common to have the plane carrying extra ammo or sometimes only 6 or 4 guns to be lighter. As the other module now don't have the possibility to "drop" a gun or set the ammo for one gun in particular to zero. Will it be implemented for the P47 ? And if yes, will it be implemented for all the other warbirds ? Thanks.

Could be interesting, but I think It would be better to have the ability to modifiy convergence point for each gun. That's another topic. But I would love to have the option to switch from EZ 42 to classic revi in the mission editor (as not all the D9 had the EZ 42). Maybe a futur post in wishlist ... :music_whistling: Until then, thanks for the answer ! Time to go improve at the shooting range to not miss anymore those Spitfire :pilotfly:

So the gunsight don't adjust the level of the sight to match the bullet trajectory like in the P51 ? When setting the sight for 200m target distance the center stay at a 600m settings ? It seems weird as it's a simple feature related to really simple mathematics and as pilot often shoot with stabilized planes. But ok. I find short doc about EZ42 but not I'm not german. If it can intereset someone : EZ 42 hand book.pdf

Yes but still no answer on it so I'm coming back again ... Track was needed. Track was then posted (not by me). Still nothing from anybody. So I come with my log, track and video because it's an annoying bug :(

The gunsight didn't make up and down correction when changing the target size and distance. Guns are set for 600 m (more or less) shot and center of the sight always placed for where the bullet are going to be "in 600m". When shooting a plane at 200m, you have to place the plane a bit over the center of the sight as the bullet "goes up" when shooting. I tried to make a video to show it (but that's not easy to be perfectly placed to show). dcs.txt Fw 190D.trk

UP This time with track, log and video Made with quick mission start in flight (caucase). Note : Vaicom team answer to me to place easy com to off but it don't work. This video is made without easy com. Bugvaicom.trk dcs.txt

Happy to help :) I get the last try on Burning skies server. This time with cockpit closed. No one of the audio from ground crew was working (all broken). Get answer at first try for inertial starter and "rearm/refuel". Get only the refuel. Had to ask two times for rearm. DCS.log rename into txt this time :) NORMANDY1944_ANTICIPATION-20191103-152433.trk dcs.txt

Oh ok ! I'll do that next time ^^

Second try. This time on Burning Skies server. 17 people on server I think. Got trouble to contact the gground crew again. But no problem with the audio. (I make all the call with the cockpit open). I will do it again with cockpit closed. Wet transfer link for the log : https://we.tl/t-TKYiHEBoWg NORMANDY1944_ANTICIPATION-20191103-151703.trk

Here it is in Solo with the quick mission (rampstart caucasus). I had to ask 3 times to have inertial starter. I had to ask 2 time to rearm and refuel. I get only the refuel. No problem with audio. Edit : the files DCS.log is "invalid" (that what the forum tell me when I want to upload it) So there is wet transfer : https://we.tl/t-1tpeTde7QV To be complete, I made a Repair and clean of my game yesterday and it is on last Open Beta. I have no mods activated. Only skins and Kneeboard as "non original files" in game. BugSolo.trk

I think I first notice the bug with the arrival of Fw 190 A8 update. Since I had the bug on several server (as I don't play offline often I didn't remember if I had the bug offline). But for multiplayer, I had the bug on several different server. On Burning skies, there was always lot of people. But I had the bug on less populated server. Sometimes we were only two to fly and we both had this. I will make some test this afternoon (online dedicated server, online hosted server and offline). And I will save log for each one.

The problem is quite random. Sometimes I have almost no trouble for 3 to 4 hours playing. But most of the time I have this. I'll make some flight tomorrow and get the log :)

The track is too large to be send in attachment. Here is a wetransfer link : https://we.tl/t-q5gKrjI0on And to show you clearly what is wrong, I have done this video to show you. My English is far to be good, Hop you will understand what i mean :music_whistling: :lol: So I took a random Bf 109 on Burning Skies Server and press fly.