rel4y

Sorry, brainfart... :D One of these hot summer days I guess.

Ok, makes sense. Another thing I noticed is that SRS shows for the FuG16 channel 1 and 2 are both on 40 MHz. Historically channel 1 was reserved for the Y Verfahren, but in DCS its not modeled and we could use it as another radio channel.

Why is Chipelle still available for blue pilots but its red at 100% health? Same for Cardonville etc? Am I not understanding the operation somehow or is this a bug?

I wanted to post this yesterday as well, but somehow forgot as I had trouble with several uploaders.. This should give you a nice overview.

Horizontal convergence for MG131 was 400m as well. Not that it makes much difference. The MK108 shells cross the gunsightline first at ~80m. At 130m they are around 30cm above gunsightline, with a max at 250m of 64cm. http://imgur.com/a/FY8Dd

Convergence is at 400m. Starting at ~130m the vertical trajectories of both weapons are roughly the same. (+-10cm)

I guess they did it initially because the P-51 also has a gyro sight modeled. Fact is, it was used operationally in Doras starting 02/45, but only in small numbers of around 30 aircraft total. I am not a fan of it though, I always lock it and would prefer a Revi 16 tbh.

I think someone posted this before, so it should be known to ED. Maybe it was in Nevada though, not sure. Anyway, one of the more amusing bugs. :)

No problem.

I don't think you understand the real problem here. I have been using my own version of cleaned up windows for all aircraft I fly for years. A 5 min Photoshop action of adjusting alpha layers in a dds is no witchcraft and certainly doesn't take much skill. Deferred shading however only has additive lights and unless depth peeling or similar is implemented glass will make everything brighter instead of darker as it does in reality. A fix of this needs a shader update. Working around the problem is making the glass unrealistically dark. Obviously this is not an elegant solution and not a fix and most certainly wasn't done for realism. If you don't like realism, then that's your choice.

I will most certainly not find examples of tinted ReVis no matter how hard I look. ED is trying to conceal deferred shading limitations concerning HUDs and glass in general. And it's not very elegant tbh. Hopefully a clever coding guy fixes this problem once and for all in the future.

Btw the whole Rucqueville airstrip is located incorrectly, it should be west of Martragny and not east of the town.

Just downloaded the patch and was shocked when I got in the 109. How on earth did nobody notice that you cant see jack through the gunsight while testing? Did anybody even test at all? It sure is a quick workaround to alleviate the fact that deferred shading only has additive light and for translucent objects you have to use different tricks, but its as far from a permanent fix as can be. This should have been at least thought of at the early programming stages.. Hope it gets actually fixed and not botched around like in this last patch.

1) On normal take offs flaps are not needed. If you are really heavy, like full fuel and rockets, you can use some flaps to decrease take off distance. 2) They go easy on the pumps nowadays in all warbirds as spares are hard to come by and expensive. For example you cant restart the engine in flight if your booster pump is off, because the engines mechanical pump would also be off in that case and you dont have any fuel pressure. Just leave it on in DCS as spares dont cost a penny. ;)

Oh nice, a Mammut radar. First phased array radar worldwide. That would be an impressive and useful addition. It was also used to coordinate the close by naval guns of the Atlantikwall.

The DCS Mk IX LF actually performs very well up to 32000 ft (almost 10000m) and even above, it can do above 400 mph at that altitude. It has also the best climbrate of all DCS warbirds at these altitudes, ~2200 ft/min or above 11 m/s. The DCS LF even outperforms the HF tests I know of in level speed at altitude, climbrate is pretty equal.

I only did one 20min test on release day, so its probably not super accurate. But what I noticed is that even in frontal attacks with closing speeds of above 1000 kph I got hit by the rear turrets on egress. The mission was to attack a 36 ship combat box formation, I was the only ac attacking. I did four passes, downed four bombers and on the fourth one my wing got taken off during egress. I never got hit when attacking from the front, but when behind the bombers the gunners hit me. I always flew in a slight curve, always doing around 700 kph TAS. The gunners dont even have a two second time frame in which to take lead, aim and shoot before I am out of range. Also the compensating gunsights of the turrets are completely useless in this situtation, as the speed difference makes the lead algorithm invalid. The algorithm calculates for a partial value of the own speed to adress faster approach speeds of fighters. In case of moving away from the gunner the calculated lead is in the opposite of the necessary way and completely off. Losing the wing may be attributed to well known DM problems, but even getting hit consistently makes no sense in this situation to me.

What happened to your website Kurfürst? I can't find it anymore and I need it for my daily fix of 109 flight tests. :)

That looks like the flak script that has been around for years.

I know we are both on the same page here. If I remember correctly you mentioned this in another thread earlier, I just wanted to clarify on that. Nice SoW videos btw. :) Id love to join in, but I am awfully busy the next two weeks. Be careful of the new gunners though, even at closing speeds of upwards 1000 kph they shot my wing off. PS: On the other hand I am doing around 480 TAS with 1.15 ata @ 2000 rpm, so maybe its correct. What do I know?! :)

RPM may be off, some documents list it at 2000 rpm others at 2400 rpm. Sparleistung though is definitely 1.15 ata for the DB605DB, it is taken from an engine card. Kurfursts page is down atm, but there you can usually find the corresponding Motoren-Karte for the 1.8 ata setting. These are more accurate than whatever is written in the K-4 manuals, be it LW original or DCS. In Yo-Yos picture he is flying at 1.15 ata which is Sparleistung => V(Ropt) and not Reiseflug V(Reise), thats what I wanted to clarify on. As you correctly said the aircraft were not trimmed for Sparleistung but Reiseflug = cruise. For the K-4 Prototype (1750 PS) Reiseflug V(Reise) velocity is: 477 kph TAS at 0 km 645 kph TAS at 8.4 km

I just wanted to clear something up. Sparflug is not the same as Reiseflug. Reiseflug translated freely means something like (combat) cruise and Sparflug means maximum range flight. For the K-4 1.15 ata/ 2400 rpm is Sparflug, not Reiseflug. Example from a G-14 Entwicklungsblatt: Sparflug 450 km TAS at 4 km Reiseflug 480 kph TAS at 0 km 525 kph TAS at 4 km 610 kph TAS at 7.1 km

It is the area around the most southern bridge.

Tried to PM you. I have uploaded the PDF, which contains around 10 pages of variable declaration and formulas.

I dont have a range table, but maybe drag coefficients help as well.