zcrazyx

i find the mustang and spitfire the easiest to land, the p47 is the hardest but probs just lack of time in the aircraft

the nose blocking shots is something most warbirds have to deal with, the shaking is normal so i believe countering it is just a matter of practice. as for learning how to shoot and hit targets an understanding of the sight is key as it is fixed and not a gyro, essentially it works based on angles and distance, chucks guide properly explains this https://www.mudspike.com/wp-content/uploads/guides/DCS%20Spitfire%20Mk%20IX%20Guide.pdf https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-uSpZROuEd3V25mRlE2TDMzcXc/view I generally like to get close up and deflection shoot targets which is fairly hard to do but devasting to aircraft when learned. I generally set the wing span to suit and the distance at between 200-300 yards, this generally means that when the hostile aircraft is on a 45 degree angle i use the ring to hit, then if its a matter of division, 20ish degrees attitude half way between the pipper and ring etc. I have linked some good reads that may help to alleviate some of the issues, the biggest thing with the spitfire and dogfighting is knowing how to get close in to a target as most aircraft will be able to out run you, this is why i like to use high angle deflection shots on targets from very close in.

Automotive engines have been used on aircraft for a very long time, it significantly increased with home built aircraft and ultralights becoming mainstream, VW bug engines are the most common examples that can be seen in the application of homebuilts however there are also a few Cessnas flying with V8s as seen here https://youtu.be/rpZYfd0GzuQ, there are also a few kit builts flying with firewall forward CAM 100 engines which are based on the honda civic engine. Additionally the most commonly used engine i can think of for ultra lights are rotax engines which have also been used in motorbike racing. most of the issues and challenges faced by using these types have already been pointed out by people above, generally car engines tend to be heavier with different tollerances that are made to be run at varying loads throughout its use where as a lot of aero engines generally cruise at one setting, climb at another and descent with a third. Not sure what the failure rate is when using such engines but i suspect its fairly low given most are run on experimantal reg and the loads should be lower unless using gear reduction to stop the prop overspeeding. as for cooling issues well as stated above, not enough airflow through a radiator means not enough cooling and hence higher temps, bigger radiators generally mean more drag and hence more power needed to overcome this hence why radiators generally seem to stay fairly similar in size. a happy compromise so to speak. The reason you might find temps in the 109 stay lower then the spitfire is due to MW 50 being used which uses a water methonal mixture iirc to cool the engine and prevent knock, just how effective this would be in a stall with stupidly high power settings im not sure, i do know that a 109 recently crashed at duxford due to the radiators being closed and the engine getting too hot, that being said im not sure if mw50 is used now or not. i would think unlikely. edit: have also heard stories of certain aero engines being used as power plants for ground stations in remote places, might be the m14p from the yak though i could be wrong.

Lotta interest could be gained from transport aircraft, beech 18, percival pembroke, cargo variants of heavy bombers, c130s and so many more, wonder if we can expect any medium bombers or attack aircraft such as the b25 or a26 now the mosquito is here, i suspect unlikely

good find, would be interesting what it lists as speeds for different types if it does at all, also wonder if it includes a description on radiator controls.

I have gone through the LFDM stats before, there are things you have to remember though, the stats are scuffed because it normally only counts kills by rounds not kills per amount of rounds further more the reporting in both tacview and lfdm website is off, i know this as i have tracked them throughout my time flying on their server, the average hit to take down allied aircraft from 30mm was 1 shell for a spitfire, 2 for the p47 and p51 and at max 3 shells if you're lucky in the 47. For hostile aircraft i have shown hits of 70 rounds average however i have noted that they don't always track correctly in the track as well as they don't always correlate with visually seen damage and hits. obviously this doesn't take into account deflection angles into account as it is only an average throughout all engagements totalling some 150 for me at the minimum. Things i noted during this time is that the 190D9 performed like allied aircraft in terms of damage received. The 109 was tanking shots to where it absorbed over twice the rounds that the 190D could which also includes damaged engine, prop, radiators, leaks and control cable damage. most of these aircraft actually made it back and landed. The Anton was interesting, though it could take severe punishment to the airframe it seemed to get pilot sniped the most out of the group. Considering the Mustang carries 1880 rounds of 50cal ammo even if you only hit a 6th of these you're still hitting over 300 rounds on target which is far above average and to which i have seen 109s do on many occasions. The times they do go down is normally due to a straight up explosion normally occuring when the target is at low speed with high deflection angles. they can fly with leaking radiators, shot up prop, wrecked controls and smoke as has been reported countless times before and has even had bug reports on it due to smoke appearing for chasing aircraft but not for the pilot of the aircraft itself. i had tracks of them flying on burning skies for over 10 mins with such damage and while still maintaining distance from allied aircraft though this is reducing due to better damage modelling now, i.e shot up prop causes it to go out of balance and thus you lose speed. Spitfires have a tendancy to lose a wing when hit, mustangs tend to lose the prop governer and engine and the 47 does take a battering though the majority of the times i do make it back i have to hold the starter switch and can only maintain low speed. for the spitfire losing a wing i have noted that there appears to be a similiar issue to the 109 with the damage that people perceive versus what you perceive hence why some people have noted seeing them flying around with a single wing which i managed to do when it first released but that drastically reduced afterwards. that being said fire doesnt seem to have much of an affect accross the board though how much of this is just visual versus actual fire is an unknown. I think most people have an issue with the fact that 109s can take as much if not more damage then a p47 and can still fly away from a furball and land at an airfield while still maintaining seperation, leaking fuel, oil and coolant. this as shown by the video while still an issue seems to be becoming less, also in the video the temps would increase over redline when enough power was applied indicating that there was a new mechanic, previously you could push full power without risk of overheating. As for the new damage model there are many effects to which i am curious to see if they are implemented, these include, leaking fluid causing a rise in temperatures due to loss of effectiveness, leaking fuel actually leaking from the tank which i noted was a rare occurancy before and usually only occured when 30mm rounds hit the wing and i survived, this usually resulted in immediate complete loss of fuel in that tank. would also be interesting to see how self sealing fuel tanks would react to sealing up holes. smoke from fires in different locations, i haven't been able to confirm if this would cause grey out as in the 109 i have only had a fire to the rear and i popped the canopy too early, had one in the mustang but blacked out too fast to do anything.

same thing though this was the case even way before the update, infact going back to burning skies the 109 has always been able to tank hits, i will say this though, the engine is now more temprementle after being hit, that being said it does still last longer then allied aircraft.

yeah i meant with respect to the flaps themselves, if you did that in a yak 52 the engine would cook faster then bacon

Most Fighters with non radial engines use liquid cooling to stop the engines from over heating, they achieve this by cycling the fluid through the lines to radiators which rely on air being rammed through them to achieve this effect. with less airspeed comes less airflow, with higher engine settings comes more heat. In short dont use high power settings at too low of an airspeed, this applies in most aircraft in general. as for the 109 it does also have this occure however the 109 uses MW50 water injection which helps to cool the engine and fight knock despite being at higher settings. It does still occure and i have tested this in the new damage model multiplayer servers, the mustag and spitfire also have this. Before the update for new dm testing the spitfire would pour out smoke and the mustangs engine would just fail without smoke. not the case now. as for the 190 i havent tested it however it should be fairly similar to the 109. The P47 is a radial but does feater water injection and i've noticed that even with the cowl flaps fully closed that the temps still stay low despite lack of airflow.

Everything in the latewar scenario are things i have been hoping will happen for years but there has been much discussion on 150 fuel, Not sure what i'd be more exited for, Tempest or Spitfire MK XIV

havent done much testing after the patch but i always have had to manually adjust the radiator for all phases of flight except cruise, gotten so used to it i have really tested it after the update, could have something to do with the new damage models though?

I'm 20 and i for one would love to tear ass around in a mustang, i myself prefer analog but i can see the advantages of digital in specific situations.

if you wish i can make a video explaining techniques for taildraggers and specific to the p51.

I would echo what others suggest, use the same tactics repeatedly and dont change on the fly until you're comfortable with a particular method, get to know the gunsight, theres fixed and gyro, the markers on the sight can be used for ground attack though i dont remember the angles, it will show on the manual somewhere. another thing is to not expect to be pinpoint accurate, start on buildings, they're actually harder to hit with dumb bombs then you would expect, then work your way down to smaller targets, nail the speed, nail the altitude, nail the attitude and release point and you shall see consistent results. i've done bombing with most ww2 aircraft, the migs 15 to 21, sabre, mirage, harrier, f14 and f5e. even with manually adjustable sights it is very hard to be consistent. its defo an art. if you are struggling to keep a certain profile control wise as the speed might climb fast in a dive then it could be worth looking into the control scheme to see if the curves can be used to help in getting the fine control. also trim, personally i like to pre trim for high speed and then manually compensate, messing with trim is just another thing to worry about and in that situation i believe having your hands on the stick and throttle is priority.

Speaking of funky engine behaviour, ive recently flown some hours in a 1936 rearwin sportster 8500 with an 85hp 5 cylinder leblonde radial engine, what works on somedays dont work on others with regards to starting it up, thats for an engine that is soon to be 90 years old. for shutdown simple things like idling it 100rpm too low can actually let the engine turn over with the mag switch off. point is all engines are different, even those that are of the same type, there are many factors that can affect how an engine performs be it mechanical or environmental, i for one would love a very complex engine system for realisms sake but knowing what is real now is like comparing apples to oranges. a lot of the aircraft in service are flown regularly and properly maintained and repaired after damage from combat, it is my experiance that an engine that makes it past a certain amount of hours will almost always continue to run for hundreds if not thousands of hours to come if properly maintained and regularly started. much in the same way a car engine would. my experiance only being around 110 hours ppl with 5 in a tigermoth, 5 in a supercub and about 30 in the Rearwin. That being said a lot of the people i have flown with and spoken to operate aircraft that still use the original engine castings much in the same way that the rearwin is. that being said for a sim its a balanance between cooking someones computer and having as much realism as you please. being a combat sim i would like to see enhanced damage models first for hostile fire.

i would imagine remoddling the engine fuel and temperature characteristics, meaning higher temps, less headroom for errors in handling and higher fuel consumption, not to mention with the new dm they would then have to worry about the enhanced characterists that i assume are coming with those changes. also locating documents on changes done to the engine, fuel flow etc would need to be located which may be easier said then done as it was a field modification and not standard from factory, though i'm sure someone has found them in some other threads. i for one would love to see 150 for the mustang and spitfire as at least after d-day it was being used enough to warrent substansial shipments of the fuel, i believe http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ has the numbers somewhere for 1944. i'm still holding hope for the mk XIV Spitfire with the griffon engine though with ED' effort seemingly going toward a 1943 scenario i dont see us getting one.

if it were a fighter it'd be a Tempest of any varient, if it were a varient of fighter itd be the mk 14 spitfire, if it were a trainer it'd be the tiger moth

Storm of war and LFDM are the popular ww2 servers, i prefer LFDM as it allows lables

I really like the P-47, it brings new things to dcs mechanics wise, bigger radial engine, water injection (think it still needs implimenting) and turbocharger. that being said i believe that on the multiplayer side it isn't a particually competative aircraft in a 1v1 fight and hence isn't used a lot. mostly i have seen it as a ground strafing aircraft though i believe that for those that don't have an issue with spotting aircraft in VR from higher altitudes and further away then i suspect the 47 is a first pick for boom and zoom. When it released there were many of them in multiplayer but as with any module its use slowly declines with time, at least when looking at single servers. maybe a lot of people fly it in single player.

All i will say is that engine torque is defo a factor in most warbirds, most warbirds also dont take off from full power static when they have a tail wheel due to said torque effect, when the tail is down it is less effective, true however there are various techniques for this, a modern spitfire pilot managed to crash one after he used too much brake with too high power on take off and nosed over, while a lot of pilots tend to land with the tail slightly low of level for a wheeler, yet the manual states 3 pointers if i recall correct. as for aliaron being inneffective sure, it might be less effective then at higher speeds however i can say from experiance that you can still wing scrape by using aliarons, i had a rearwin up on one wheel at 40mph due to wind picking up the wing, it took near to full aliaron to counter it. Another point is the method for taking off and landing, short take offs such as in a mustang are from a 3 point attitude and i believe it describes this in the manual, it also states to be cautious due to the torque and less effective controls. the second way is by raising the tail and then letting the aircraft fly off the runway which from what i have seen is the prefered way of taking most taildraggers off. the sketch part of this is the transition between tail down and tail up as the controls will require changes and as such over correction can occure. another point about using high power on take offs is engine cooling, it is very easy too cook a merlin or db if you have the radiators closed while at high power, a 109 pilot damaged their engine and ended up in a field due to having closed radiators and overshooting the runway. as others have pointed out with the spitfire thread this pandaros box, every aircraft behaves differently for every player with every control setup. i would say its generally about right, he said he hasnt flown it in a while, he might have control reset, nostalgic memory or something else. all i'd suggest is lock the tailwheel, stick back, gradual increase to 1.4 ata, use a small amount of brake in jabs at lower speed the same as you would the rudder, then as the rudder becomes more effective, stick forwards, use more rudder to counter the swing, increase power and your off once you get the speed.

anything more armoured then a half track would likely struggle, the way dcs does damage is strange though, i've destroyed ships with a few thousand 50 cal rounds yet i can't kill a tank.

generally seems to be the case as in single player it happens much less of the time. i know the pain of chasing planes that are smoking, on fire or lost part of a wing or even all of the above at once. :lol: hopefully the new DM will result in a better sync between client and server.

109 for the longest time was a flying tank able to absorb an insane amount of damage so long as the wing doesnt fall off or doesnt catch fire. seem em for for 15mins leaking out of both radiators. thankfully the new effects work wonders, the prop being hit on all aircraft causes imbalance and slower speeds, engine being hit now actually causes performance loss, radiator hits seem to have an effect now and at least imo pilot sniping a 109 seems more common, could just be that ive had better shot placement though. that being said some of the other problems that have now arisen is that the mustang can have missing wings and still fly which wasnt present before, seems like a visual bug and not a flight model one though, the spitfire used to have this issue badly. i know that either the 109 or 190 now have engine issues when the generator stops working allowing the battery to be trained and the electric to run out thus shutting off the elctric pump causing less flow and engine performance. I know the P47 has had some updates as well with warming the engine.

has occured on the spitfire multiple times as well as the 109, 109 will spew smoke for ages and fly as normal, spitfire used to have the wing taken off and fire coming out and could still fly, sometimes fine, sometimes as if half the wing was gone. mig 21 has always been an interestign one to me

i second this, there is a reason raf pilots where good pilots, cause those that were not crashed. most were low hour pilots when they hopped into the spitfire and they had the benifit of real rudder pedals :P get some rudder pedals and enjoy the challenge.