Jump to content

Redglyph

Members
  • Posts

    1644
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Redglyph

  1. On 8/22/2021 at 7:42 AM, SMH said:


    I would imagine some of that was the drag they caused as well. I know the FB variant was a bit slower than the bomber due to the flat windscreen vs. the split one on the bomber.

    I'd think the night fighters would have all had them. No?

     

    It could be additional drag.

    They reduced the problem with "multiple ejector and open-ended exhaust stubs". So was there a compression issue?

     

    Yes, I bet they'd rather have them at night, no matter what 😁

    • Like 1
  2. On 8/18/2021 at 1:38 PM, Bozon said:

    The two-stage chargers Merlins were installed a little more forward of the wing than the single stage Merlins. As a result, there was room for a 6th exhaust stub. The variants with a single stage Merlin had 5 stubs because the 6th was thought to be too close to the wind leading edge and may damage it.

     

    Merlins 21, 23 & 25 used in the FB.VI were single stage, hence 5 stubs. 

    That seems to confirm my preferred theory. I'm sure it can get pretty hot, but the "wing protection" idea seems a bit ludicrous, with the other pipes just centimetres away.

     

    On 8/18/2021 at 9:30 AM, SMH said:

    Oddly the earlier Mosquito bomber variant seems to have 6 individual stacks per side. They're often covered by a flame dampener too as they were night bombers.
     

     

     

    I've read that those exhaust dampers were a problem for the engine performance, on the early models. I'll try to find a reference on that.

     

    EDIT: it's in a book, "De Havilland Mosquito (Crowood Aviation Series)" by Martin Bowman, The Crowood Press, 2005. See for example here: https://military.wikia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Mosquito (search for "flame dampers")

    • Like 1
  3. On 8/13/2021 at 7:35 PM, rkk01 said:

    Can anyone enlighten me on Mosquito exhausts???

     

    The 10 saxophone exhausts on the FB.VI struck me as odd on a 12-cyl engine…

     

    A quick look through photo-refs suggest the unshrouded B-models have 6 per side and the FB-models 5 per side

     

    Apparently, those last two pipes were merged (as shown on SMH's photograph) to avoid the gas heat from damaging the wooden structure of the wing. But I could not find a valid reference to confirm that.

     

    It seems to make some sense, though I'm not entirely convinced it'd change anything. Perhaps it could be an issue when running idle, but it could also be designed that way because there was not much room for a 6th pipe at the back of the engine assembly.

    • Like 1
  4. If you're familiar with the Youtube channel Military Aviation History, by Christoph Bergs, you know how passionate and accurate he is about planes, especially related to WWII.

     

    I just saw that he started a crowdfunding campaign, together with Bernhard Kast (Military History Visualized), for a book on the German Stuka, titled Stuka - The Doctrine of the German Dive-Bomber. Obviously, it's a history book and not a novel.

     

    Here's the link for anyone interested in this project: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/stuka-the-doctrine-of-the-german-dive-bomber

    There are a couple videos on his channel about it (along with a recent video on the aircraft).

    • Like 2
  5. I've just finished this book. I'm not sure what to say.

     

    To its credit, this book may be interesting just for the description of the operations on a carrier.

     

    But the plot is below average, not really credible and the story has no rhythm. Moreover, the author has a poor command of English and makes a lot of mistakes, he is obviously not meant to write books. The need to make the US show its superiority over another country (this old Vietnam complex) and the childish arch-enemy duel complete this sad picture.

     

    The take away just doesn't justify the time spent reading this, so I can't recommend it. Instead, read "Viper Pilot: A Memoir of Air Combat" from Dan Hampton, even if that guy has a little superiority complex, he has a very good narration, very educational. And the story, which is real, is much more gripping.

  6. On 9/5/2020 at 12:23 PM, BIGNEWY said:

     

    Some bugs or in this case an improvement report are low priority, sometimes they do get overlooked. But as mentioned I have added this thread to the report.

     

    I can not promise anything, I am speaking with the dev about it and have highlighted your concerns, that is all I can do at the moment.

     

     

     

    thanks

     

    I've heard from another player who bought the A-10C v2 that the same bugs have been kept in the new module (I'm glad I didn't buy it).

     

    So it's clear ED is making a point of not fixing it, without even saying why.

    • Like 1
  7. On 3/21/2021 at 6:53 PM, macedk said:

    Rgr, maybe talk to the isp and see if there is anything they can do. 🙂

    Come on, let's be realistic, they don't care a bit about that.

     

    I've checked other routers, not cheap ones, and that's not a usual functionality. Except for very expensive hardware like the one we use at work, which also manages VPN and where you can specify access policies.

     

    Anyway, none of that solves the problem on the PC itself.

     

    When a company imposes their own client to download gigantic amount of software and data, it should definitely have bandwidth control.

  8. 18 hours ago, c0ff said:

    Not ATM.

    I've noted the feature request.

     

    Ah, I must have been confusing it with something else. Weird. Thanks for confirming!

     

    17 hours ago, Flappie said:

    @RedglyphIn the meantime, you can give TMeterFree a go (see "option three"), or maybe Traffic Shaper XP, or Speedlimiter.

     

     

    Thanks for the pointers! I had already tried such a tool without much success, but I can have a look again. That should really be handled by the router, but it's not the case here.

  9. Hello,

     

    Many of the links of the updater thread are now broken and I can't find this info: is it possible to limit the download bandwidth of the updater? It's a huge amount of data (90 GB just for the base) and we are in lockdown, I can hardly use the whole bandwidth for hours since that prevents others from having remote sessions and calls, or even browsing.

     

    I'm pretty sure I saw this option long ago but I don't find it back, and there isn't any command-line help apparently.

     

    Thanks!

  10. I think any new format needs some time before having people voting in such poll, there is always the initial resistance to change that will bias the results. Re-do the poll in one month or so.

     

    Not sure why the change was necessary, but it's always good to update every once in a while. The view of the subforums is much clearer than before, and I'm not concerned about the theme which is indeed a bit sad at the moment, I'm sure it can be customized with time, that's just cosmetics.

     

    It's nice to have the 'like' back, they were removed from the old forums at some point.

     

    Multi-quotes are nice for the one who uses it. Otherwise, it can quickly become a mess of quotes of multi-quoted posts... one post per response isn't bad either, easier to follow sub-threads.

     

    What I'm really struggling with, is finding back the useful subscriptions I had, and how they're working now, because it's never easy to follow topics in such a massive forum. I suppose it's just the matter of getting to know this new version.

     

    That, and the way the post window is jumping up and down when we're writing into it, perhaps a reasonable default height would improve this? It's a bit small atm.

    • Like 2
  11. 1. As I can see thye completly changed lua files and command syntax.

    2. Your mod still works, so it's backward compatible, but...

    2a. Your mod is unusable, because they added to A-10C II HMCS, which have it's own power switch and with your mode it's non operatable. This switch has been added in last line of lua so I copied it to yours and it works, but I imagine 90% people using mods can't do that

     

    And finaly 4. answering your quiestion - they corrected SOME switches, but not all. Selection dials (libe under CDU, CMSP) are not looped now, but 3-position switches (position lights, landing lights, AHCP IFFCC) are still looped).

     

    Thanks for the info!

     

    I suppose it's possible to merge the fix with the new Lua file. But if the switches are still half a mess, I suppose the intent is to keep them that way, or it's not a priority and they'll do something about that in a few years, who knows. Either way, it's doing the patch all over again and maintaining it after each update, hoping it won't be necessary in the end. I've tried once and I know where it's leading...

     

    For now I'll focus on the other aircraft then.

  12. Thanks, but I think there is a misunderstanding. This bug had already been reported more than 4 years ago, and the fix provided (via Derelor, who also pinged it several times in the dev's bug tracking).

     

    So this bug must have been visible to the devs for a very long time. What I would like to understand is why they refused to integrate the patch, does ED prefer to keep it that way, or do they fear that changing now would cause an issue? And more importantly, do they want to keep back-compatibility with these incoherencies of the cockpit-mouse interactions with the new A-10C II?

     

    It was a surprise when I bought the 1st, I prefer not to have the same surprise if I buy the 2nd version (especially given the bad experience by trying to fix it).

     

    Not having any feedback despite asking repeatedly for 4 years is just rude, and I don't mean to me, but to all the users who have to update and re-install the patch manually every time.

  13. it happened in my F-86 as i switched to external view and back... (F2 -> F1)

    Sound in Cockpit disappeared but if i switched back to external view, the sound was still there.

    After landing i choose another slot and sound was back.

     

    Similar to what I got. It's strange that we still get the sound in one view, but not in another one.

     

    I got this problem today, trying the 2nd mission of 'Hunters over the Yalu'.

     

    DCS/2.5.5.41962 (x86_64; Windows NT 6.1.7601)

     

    Here is the sequence of operations:

    - start-up, take-off => no problem

    - external view on closest airplane to check wingmen => no problem

    - back to internal view => no problem

    - fly-by view => no problem

    - back to internal view => NO SOUND

    - external view => no problem

    - fly-by view => no problem

    - back to internal view => NO SOUND

  14. I'm excited to see the new features in store for the A-10C II!

     

    Seeing there is a talk of that in the news, and also a mention of those bug squashing sessions you have at ED, it's the perfect time to ask if there is any chance you fix the cockpit switch interactions which are inconsistent and confusing on this otherwise wonderful module. Either on the new model, or on both, which would be fair.

     

    Since I've provided the fix 4.5 years ago and it takes a few minutes to integrate, I'm perplexed as to why you've always refused to do it.

     

    I'm talking about this, to clarify: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/2268038/

     

    The Warthog is a great asset to DCS, and it also have a great choice of campaigns. Seeing a new, improved version coming up is really nice :) I really enjoyed the current version, except for this major issue, that's why I decided to ask this question one more time, even though I had given up on that (perhaps also because I'm stubborn).

     

    God speed with the current developments!

  15. I'd also really recommend the qualification campaigns by Maple Flag. They are not training missions in that they mostly don't tell you how to do stuff, but they do present a structured way to learn the aircraft and build up your skills, and they force you to learn how to do things right rather than just going straight out to blow everything up. I took perverse pleasure in the fact that you don't even carry a weapons until part way into the second campaign, but instead have to make sure you can navigate efficiently at night and then land in a cross-wind, or carry out AAR reliably (that one took me a good few goes!). I also like the fact that the first examiner is a real hard-ass - forget to test the pitot heater during start up? "You have performed poorly - do it again!".

     

    One or two missions had the odd bug, and the progression of difficulty seems a bit off in places, but overall these campaigns added a great deal to my experience of learning the A10C (to the extent that I have). I just wish other aircraft had something similar.

     

    +1 on that, those are great to improve the skills on A-10C, very thorough and interesting. It's definitely not for casual flying.

     

    (Don't confuse them with the more recent BFM campaigns from the same author, they have nothing in common.)

     

    Those, and the other great campaigns for the A-10C really make this module one of the best entry choice, IMHO I would even say the best by far. The fact it's being revamped could be a reason to hold off until it's released, though (that, and the terribly buggy mouse mapping of the cockpit switches...).

  16. -1

     

    Does anyone ever use the default assignments without changing anything? No. Does joystick, rudders & throttle usually get assigned sensibly? Yes

     

    How complex would it be to make every external controller on the market get the "correct" assignment? Impossible. What is the "correct" assignment? Varies person to person.

     

    Do we want ED to waste resources on something we always tailor for ourselves anyway? No.

     

    That's pretty much all wrong. ED did make a poll and a recent change to have correct setup for the most used hardware.

     

    The default is changed to some extent, now (regarding the sensible part) when you have to remove POV, throttle, ailerons and so on on all devices because DCS deems appropriate to preset that on a rudder pedal, there's clearly an issue that can be quickly fixed by what seems to have been implemented already (just not taken into account for some reason).

     

    Once again, if for you it's not necessary, it may well be for other users (which seems to be the case here), so please don't be so selfish by saying it's not necessary, and let ED reply instead of second-guessing them.

×
×
  • Create New...