Rolds

Without getting too into the weeds on this issue just step back and think about the big picture. Could the R2800 possibly have achieved the reputation for reliability it had if it worked like it currently does in the Corsair? I suggest people fly the P47 module that ED did and compare the two. I particularly like that the ED radials offer audible feedback about operating out of limits, and have partial failures or will fail overtime rather than always instant and total failure. You can fail the P47s engine, but it puts up with a lot before it quits, matching its reputation.

FUSE SELECTION DOES NOT WORK.trkSee Attached Track. In this situation the bombs are equiped with 11 second delay tail fuses and instantaneous nose fuses. With Tail fusing selected, the nose fuse should not function, resulting in 11 second delay. With Nose/Tail selected, both fuses should function, resulting in instantaneous explosion. As you will se in the track, with tail fusing selected, the bombs explode immediately on contact with the ground. The nose fuse should not function in this situation (except in cases of weapon malfunction which is not modeled in DCS and in any case the results are consistent in all of my tests).

Search Lights Off too Soon.trk See the attached track file. When an aircraft being spotted by searchlights is "killed" as the game defines that term, the searchlights immediately switch off. However, the "killed" unit is still flying, typically just with an engine on fire. Real searchlight crews would probably continue to track the aircraft if only out of fascination at the spectacle, not immediately switch off.

The attached track features two bugs. First is the bug I'm reporting: The Mig 21's in this mission are set to option "Chaff-Flare Using=Never Use". Despite this, they use flares in the mission. Second not reporting this one here as it has been reported several times elsewhere over the years, the Mig 21's in this mission are not equipped with chaff or flares as they are not carrying the correct pods and the airframe does not come with countermeasures by default. Despite this, they use flares anyway. This bug has already been reported elsewhere several times such as: As a bonus issue, the AIM 9x "counter-counter measure" performance seems pretty lackluster. Mig21's Use Flares.trk

SO how is that Jester customization coming along? It appears we still have no way of asking him for information about the target, and cannot switch boresight modes to get that information repeated to the pilot?

lol never mind! Jester is making the call in all sorts of nonsense situations and I have no idea what logic is behind it. Would be better if he didn't make this call at all. EDIT - and while we are on the subject, if you are going to have this call could Jester please sound less panicky about it? We both have O2 masks on. The unpressurized altitude record is apparently over 70,000 feet. We aren't in any danger even if Jester was right about the cabin pressure.

If you disable the call for cabin altitude <11,500 feet that would fix the situation where the call is made if you dive below the cabin altitude and it takes longer for cabin altitude to catch up than the current jester logic.

This track breaks as when I watched it the mig's position isn't what it was when I flew it, but it includes the "WE'VE LOST CABIN PRESSURE" call which is occurring for me on every flight. WEVE LOST CABIN PRESSURE!.trk

I get this erroneous call all the time when flying on Nevada. Whatever logic is going into it, strongly suggest you reconsider.

Does it not work with the supercarriers or maybe I just don’t know how to do it anymore? I was using CVN 72, taxied into position, lowered the launcher, pressed the bind which I think was U, but nothing happened.

This was also reported in this locked thread. This problem was also in the game years ago and they fixed it, but have somehow unfixed it and left it unfixed for two months and counting now.

Could we maybe get the ability to manually connect to a catapult back to work around this vexing problem???!!! OR request which cat we will be directed to?

Any progress on this? I was planning to use the LUV tigr as a signal light for a mission only to discover its functionality changed and found this thread. By the way giving us more options for lights at night (spawn able and de-spawn able, ability to signal with morse, changing color) would be really helpful! Also, shouldn't all vehicle lights work like the LUV tigr? why is it special? Shouldn't we have an option to select if vehicle lights are on or off at night?

Here you see a couple images of an aircraft with its external lights on and a signal flare activated through triggered actions for comparison. In general, aircraft lights are only visible from a few hundred feet away. The signal flare on the other hand is visible from miles away. Everyone has seen aircraft with their running lights on at night, visibility in miles is accurate as that is the point of the lights. It would really help with night flying if aircraft lights in DCS had realistic draw distances. I feel like there must be a simple fix, just make them work like the signal flare!

I really think someone should look into this, for one thing I am pretty sure the fuses are independent of one another, therefore the implementation is wrong. And for another, someone who just buys the spitfire and tries it out is immediately going to wonder why the bombs don't work.

Reference this thread. @Flappie appears to think this issue is resolved but it is a bug that persists. Spitfire 250lbs bombs do not explode on contact with the nose fuse set to contact and the tail fuse set to the default 30 minute delay. These fuses operate independently and both are armed when the plane takes off, therefore the nose fuse will cause the bomb to detonate immediately, however it does not. Spitfire Bomb Fuses Not Working.trkSee the attached track. The bombs have the default instantaneous fuse in the nose and 30 minute fuse in the tail. The bombs hit the ground just after 5:25 in mission time and explode 30 minutes later.

In fact it doesn't appear to work at all. See the attached mission which tests a few embarking/disembarking things. LCVP 1 is supposed to start the mission with Commando 1 aboard, similar to the way Commando 2 starts aboard the UH1 Huey. As you can see it doesn't work, they spawn on the beach rather than in the LCVP, despite apparently being set up the same way as Commando 2. Commando 3 and LCVP 2 shows the LCVP embarking feature working surprisingly well when picking up a group from a shoreline. The LCVP ramp is animated, the commandos get on board and are visible on board, the LCVP backs away from the shore and sails away. All good stuff, I just want a way to have infantry aboard the LCVP's at mission start for amphibious assault scenarios. I can't right now think of a way to accomplish this. Operation Forager.miz

lol I get the sense actual spins aren’t taught at all flight schools, are they at yours? Mine did them dual from hour one, but had a rule that spins were prohibited for solo flights. The spin during the intro flight I believe was seen as a selling feature!

If you guys want specifics why not just compare the DCS F4U to descriptions from actual pilots? Spin as described by a pilot, 2000ft apparently needed to recover: And what we now have, prompt recovery and only 550 feet lost! About the same spin characteristics as a Cessna 172 which I have spun in real life several times. Spin was much more dramatic pre July 23 update. Torque as described by pilots: Torque as we now have it, aircraft in landing configuration, full throttle rapidly applied. A little bit of left yaw, no real roll. The first two I don't touch the controls, the last one I hold to show how it can be countered by just the tiniest amount of right pedal and stick. Nothing even the least experienced pilot can't handle, but apparently a fatal danger to fighter pilots? It will "turn the airplane over"? This also was much more closely aligned to testimony from real pilots before the July 23 update.

I don't think the experience of flying a 160hp, 1400 lbs c172 (which I've done) offers a good comparison to a 2,000hp 12,000lbs warbird, but the new FM is easy and boring now, and I want the old one back. For those interested, I tried switching this flag in entry.lua to "true", and it did fly more like the old version... HOWEVER, several bugs were immediately apparent evem in brief testing. It would be nice if this could get cleaned up for those of us who want the initial version back. null

That would have worked fine, pilot on approach and landing would eventually get there and notice with enough time for a go around, even if it is just on the roundout. Many retractable landing gear aircraft of this era had no comparable system. The dealbreaker for the current DCS implementation is that the horn sounds loudly in the cockpit throughout a large part of the flight envelope that would regularly be used, and for prolonged periods of flight (economy loiter, descent, others). I don't know what has gone wrong here but it is something. I encourage people to simply step back and ask if this makes sense. For pilots more familiar with the mosquito, I am finding that the horn appears tied to the throttle setting rather than its position in the throttles range. I tried to put a user defined curve in to have a very low power setting just outside of the HORN ZONE but it isn't working. I have noticed that the horn is only tied to one throttle so idling the other engine kindof serves as a workaround.

This issue reminds me of something that might be before a lot of people's time. In 2018, ED changed the wheel friction for a lot of warbirds to make them slide across the ground. The move wasn't made to increase realism or improve FM's but to improve accessibility to the module, "The ground handling was changed along with Spitfire ground handling improvements, it does feel 'easier', but the wing tipping was pretty easy before. Its felt this is a better representation taking into account that you lose a lot of that feeling you would have as a real pilot to prevent such issues." Nineline, Aug 9, 2018. DCS does have an issue with rudders. A lot of people in this day and age don't even have rudder pedals, let alone good ones, and modules need to be sold to keep the lights on. Aligning a plane on a runway with rudder is important, and if you do it wrong in a real aircraft you get a screech and a big kick in the pants and several words from any nearby CFI. But it is hard to do in sim so they make the planes slide around the ground without biting into the concrete to make this task more doable. Same thing with engine torque, and spins, and basically overall ruder use, which plays an outsized role in warbirds. There has to be a balance that works commercially, and I know I will always be in the minority on these things. I liked the K9 better back when it tipped over and smashed a wing if you weren't lined up on touchdown. If you make the skill ceiling too low these things get boring quickly. Too high and no one wants to play. I don't know what the right answer is to these questions.

It is this. The first iteration of the Corsair was unlike any of the other warbirds, responsive and dangerous to fly, required a lot of attention. It even had wild stall/spin characteristics, unlike all the other warbirds which end a spin obediently with any application of opposite pedal. The new version of the FM is like a 2000hp general aviation aircraft. Old FM required good technique and I think would have been quite difficult without good peripherals. The new FM probably works just fine with a couple hours experience and a twist grip joystick. I would pay for the module again several times over to get the old FM back.

Where does it say that? I'll bet you $20 the real horn comes on in the first 1/4" of the throttle's travel, not the first 1/4 of the throttles full range of motion, then someone misinterpreted it, and no one went back and checked.

This horn cannot be right at all, min rpm of 1800 lets me run a little over 33" of mercury (+3 boost) before the horn sounds, and the mosquito cruises along at about 230mph. Fine, but what if I want to loiter in a spot, say in a maximum economy mode, perhaps while attempting to communicate with the navigator, or via a radio. Why do I need to listen to this horn throughout that? Please someone show me a source that says it was really like this, otherwise common sense was not consulted on this module.