xvii-Dietrich

Then you should log on at a different time. Such as when I'm online!! Switching sides is non-trivial. a) you need to own an appropriate module (this is not one of those games where you get a nice set of aircraft for both sides) b) you need to have learned how to fly it (systems, key-bindings, technique, procedures, etc.) For these and other reasons, people are a lot more dedicated to their chosen DCS airframe. I would suggest that "gallantry" has little to do with it.

Sort of... the rockets are rather bugged though. (REF1, REF2, REF3) That, and the fact the screenshots show a blank panel on the weapons control, means I suspect we will not see rockets on the A-8 / F-8.

AN-2V for the win. That'd be a true first for DCS !! (and any seaplane is an insta-buy for me)

I agree... it is rather vague. The use of "included", rather than "includes" and "could" rather than "does" suggests that the product description is more a discourse on the historical aircraft, not the DCS module. Additionally, the product page states: Ref: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/anton/ And yet, Yo-Yo from the ED team stated: Maybe this is only for the A-8, and the F-8 will be different. Not sure. On that note, I've no idea about the F-8 variant at this stage. It was certainly being discussed at one point by ED, but it is not clear if this will be a separate module or not. That all said, I have no doubt that the A-8 module will be superb, but if you are specifically after air-to-ground weapons, I'd suggest waiting until either the module is out and there are user reviews, or ED clarify what their module will actually contain.

So, the forum has been renamed from "Normandy 1944" to "Western Europe 1944-1945". I'm guessing there will be no speculation from anyone reading into this... :D

Performance (esp. performance at different altitudes). Date introduced (A-8 was introduced earlier). Appearance (short-nose/long-nose). Armament (guns, bombs, rockets, etc.). Where it was used historically. Armour and robustness. Engine (and hence sound, engine management, etc.) It depends. For example, you may want a period-correct, July-1944 German fighter to use on the Normandy map? Perhaps you prefer the aesthetics (sound, appearance, paintschemes) of the A-series over the D-series? Or maybe ou would prefer to have 2 extra guns over extra speed/performance? How high the number is does not necessarily equate to better, merely the sequence in that variant that development was started. The FW190 has several series, A, B, C, D, etc. which were developed - some in parallel, and some independently. These have some different technology (such as an engine type, or fuselage configuration) or role. Within the series, then different improvements, hence A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, etc.. Some of these sequences reach higher numbers depending on how successful they were or how much development was being made. In some ways, it could be argued that the A-8 is a step backwards, in which case why get it? But that could be said of nearly every aircraft in DCS... why get it, when you can get the Hornet? Yes, the A-8/D-9 pair are pretty close, compared to the I-16/F-16 pair. But then, some people appreciate those subtleties.

I suspect with the use of the FW 190 A-8/F-8 on the Eastern and Western fronts, the liveries will be a mix of dirt-snow and forest-green. But could we also get something yellow-brown? Although the FW190 A-8 / F-8 never flew over Afrika (at least as far as I can tell), could we nevertheless have an "official livery" with desert colours. Do mark it as "fictional" of course, but having something with desert-tan would let us use it for some Desert War, Sicily, Malta, Italy mock-ups on the NTTR and SoH maps... and any new WWII map that *might* be in the Mediterranean? While I appreciate that we can always make skin mods, having an official livery will let it be used on MP-servers. Perhaps using an A-4 or A-5 as a prototype might work. Both II./JG2 and III/SKG10 used these in the Mediterranean theatre. References http://www.germanaircraftwwii.org/2015/02/book-review-focke-wulf-fw-190-in-north.html https://www.ww2.dk/air/attack/skg10.htm https://www.ww2.dk/air/jagd/jg2.htm

I just want to put in a massive THANK YOU to the original poster for putting up that video. I already had the UH-1H Iroquois and had found it insanely frustrating. Although I liked the look of the SA342 Gazelle and would have liked to have flown it in DCS, I'd been baulking at it, on account of a lot of hostile reviews and complaints about the sensitivity of it. Having watched the video, I finally was brave enough to get the module, and yes... I definitely needed to apply those tweaks suggested. And they worked a treat. I am REALLY enjoying this module. :) In case it helps anyone else, here is precisely what I am using (I have a CH-Products Fighter Stick pro and CH-Products Pro Pedals). |<-- STICK -->| PEDALS Z Y X Z Coll Ptch Roll Rddr ------------------------- Deadzone 0 0 0 0 Saturation X 100 100 100 100 Saturation Y 70 40 25 60 Curvature 0 0 0 0 I also "invert" the collective so pulling the dial towards me is adding lift.

^ This Motivating the pilots at different levels is what makes a mission compelling. This applies at the individual, tactical, strategic and meta levels. As has been demonstrated in years gone by, LW players will happily fly 2-3 hour sorties at 8km altitude to accomplish objectives that motivate them. Merely being scenery/targets for the RAF is hardly an incentive. However, it is a good use for the AI.

Valid point. So, if people are worried about exactly what is available (or any other aspect of the module), they should wait until there are some reviews or user reports.

Quote from the store page (REF). "Armament included two fuselage-mounted 7.92mm MG 131 machine guns and four wing-mounted MG 151/20E 20mm cannons. The Anton could also be loaded with unguided rockets and bombs." Also when queried earlier, this was confirmed by one of the Decs (Coyote): "4x 20mm cannons on the wings, 2x 13mm machine guns on the nose and ventral pylon for extra fuel tank, or 250SC-500SC bomb." Ref: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3646360&postcount=49

Yes, the F-8 had additional armour... and that will certainly be appreciated! But some variants of the F-8 carried additional ordnance on wing pylons and a larger variety of weapons, than were deployed on the A-8. Additionally, there were modifications made to the injection on the supercharger for low-altitude performance. The posts from Coyote (see refs) suggested that at least the ECT50 mounts would be added. The F-8 would therefore represent a better ground-attack aircraft... at least for those of us who prefer ground attack, and I concede that many do not. References https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3759613&postcount=285 http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2004/12/stuff_eng_fw190_02.htm

Looks superb! I am very much looking forward to this one. I wonder if it will be possible to arm it with bombs. The scene at 1:58 in the official trailer suggests maybe, although none of the A-8s are shown with bombs. Or maybe that is waiting for the real gem... the F-8.

It has been announced that the PG "map is now content-complete" and only fixes will be made. That means there will be no new airfields added. Ref: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3880187&postcount=191

Superb. Many thanks! I know. It gets in the way of all the important stuff! :joystick:

Does anyone know what the key binding name is for this dial on the front panel? I've tried searching for selector, horizon, artificial, etc., etc., but cannot seem to find anything.

I flew on the Command-and-Conquer mission today. One thing I noted was that I was unable to load any weapons onto the SA342M. The helicopter starts empty, and I could load the IR-suppressor and the Filter via the rearm menu, however, I was unable to load HOT3 missiles. I tried at the spawn point (Krasnodar-C) and also flew to a nearby airport (Krasnodar-P) and tried again, but no luck. I noted that in the resource list, there is no HOT3 under A2G supplies. Perhaps they could they please be added? If the HOT3 are not allowed on the server, could the SA342 be changed from the "M" variant to one of the others which could be armed? Thanks!

I don't know, but a few things sprang to mind. 1. I wonder how it compares to other 7.62 cal rounds fired with other aircraft? I can't think of anything off the top of my head, but perhaps there is something else which could be used to do a similar test? That at least would confirm if the problem is the infantry or the PK-3. 2. DCS has a long-term on-going programme to upgrade the damage model. Although it is still a long way off from completion, it may be that this will be improved in future.

The high-fidelity nature of DCS means (amongst many other things) that the developers really must have a passion for the aircraft to give it the level of attention needed to bring it to fruition. This in turn results in a collection of those aircraft that appeal to the developers and that can get financed. It is inevitable that there will be some "outliers" which don't form part of a set to the minds of certain players. Then, the community has been asking for the Eastern Front for a long time. The first aircraft for that theatre is, by definition, going to be without an adversary. Many other aircraft in DCS are without adversaries (or at least were, when they first came out). The first DCS warbird, obviously, was one. Not every aircraft needs to have an adversary to make it an enjoyable model. Yak-52 for example. With that all said, it strikes me that in the meantime, the best adversary for the I-16 is... another I-16. With the skins implemented, we have: Finland vs Soviet Union Nationalist Spain vs Republican Spain and, hopefully one day... Japan vs THIS SUGGESTION That's not what the Cristen Eagle II pilots are saying about the I-16. :D

Not just for the Persian Gulf... this would be extremely useful more generally (esp. for Normandy)

I can't comment on the I-16 (yet!), but I note that there are some suggestions to use the Yak 52 as a trainer. The problem is that the Yak has a tricycle-gear configuration. Often the issue for newcomers wanting to learn the WWII aircraft is not just the "prop" but also the "tail-dragger" aspect. Yes, the Yak-52 is no doubt superb, but it may not necessarily help learning the like the 109 or Spit, as the original post asked. PS: I have the FW190, P-51D and Bf-109... for me, the 190 was easiest to learn (although still difficult and frustrating until I got my head around what is going on with it).

There are some problems with the spawn points on Khasab: There are two spawn points (11 and 12) which are "helipads". However, you can only spawn a helicopter on position 12, and not position 11. There are two marked helipads with no spawn points at all. Additionally, the spawn points generally are too far to the west. This applies to points 01 to 10 inclusive. They currently are on the taxi line rather than the park points. This means that you cannot follow the taxi line if there are any parked aircraft.

I have a CH FighterstickPro and CH Pedals. My settings are: |<-- STICK -->| PEDALS Z Y X Z Coll Ptch Roll Rddr ------------------------- Deadzone 0 0 0 0 Saturation X 100 100 100 100 Saturation Y 70 40 25 60 Curvature 0 0 0 0It could still use some tweaking perhaps, but it works for me.

If you don't know what to expect, then getting into auto-hover can be very difficult and frustrating. Here are some suggestions on what helped me learn it... First, a video tutorial about firing the HOT3 missiles, which covers the topic of the auto-hover. Then, another suggestion is to tune your axis curves a bit. If your controls are too sensitive, you will also struggle as you keep "over correcting". Here's a video that discusses that issue... Finally, I would recommend very gently lifting off and trying to go into the auto-hover almost immediately. Just to get some experience of what it should be like. If you do so just on take off, you can't really be going too fast or be tipped over too hard, which should make it easier. Once you get the hang of that, try flying a bit further and gain experience trying to get it under control. You can also try putting it into auto-hover as part of your landing routine (that's also good practice!).

For AUTO HOVER, your ground speed must be lower than 18 km/h, and the roll and pitch both lower than 30 degrees. Ref: p130 of the DCS SA342 Flight Manual (en). If there is a cross wind, then it is easy to keep slipping outside of these limits, so the AUTO HOVER will not engage. Note, you can use the DOP setting or the ground-speed on the NADIR to help get you in limits.