xvii-Dietrich

Yep... that was it. Thanks! So, I've since been messing about with the Kublewagen. This is a classy piece of work. It handles well off road, forward/reverse work, top speed 70 km/h, and is much better than the SdKfz 2 or Sdkfz 7 (which is what I normally use as forward observers). It can be destroyed (yes, I did some tests.) There are some very nice touches, such as animated steering - not just the front wheels, but the steering wheel and driver's hands. Even the driver's head turns. The driver even has a tiny photograph of his sweetheart stuck on the front dashboard. I'll try out some of the other features on the weekend with the squad, but so far this looks excellent.

Very cool – I'm just trying it now. Yet I am unable to see it in the Mission Editor. If I understand the above quote correctly, after unpacking and placing in the correct place, I should have a folder called: C:\DCSWorld\Mods\tech\WWII Driveable-FAC-JTAC which contains three files: entry.lua KubelWagenMod.lua WillysMBMod.lua Also, I am assuming these units are available for the USA and ThirdReich factions respectively?

1. I don't have the Mirage or Gazelle myself, but I have used other modern modules. Most airfields are short dirt strips, but I can take-off/land the F/A-18C from Caen Carpiquet, which has a longer, concrete runway. I've also tested the UH-1H helicopter and L-39C trainer on the Normandy map and they work fine. Be aware that the actual detailed area of the map (the Normandy landing areas), are very restricted, so a fast aircraft will fly into the hinterland pretty quickly. While coastlines, etc. are present, the terrain is simple tiles with no distinguishing features. I routinely use it for UH-1H training. The small scale is not a problem for helicopters. 2. No. The Avranches area (coastline, etc.) is modelled, but that is all. See the following screenshots. Pay attention to the Sat and Alt variants, and that is what you get in the simulator. (The Map-variant is just a period map, but I include it for reference anyway.) https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/964224510685921935/71D0715D5CBC5351848E56258DFA48A957B5424E/ -- SAT https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/964224510685921063/2D54D62A39AE429FF6C9B189131689336F2C5912/ -- ALT https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/964224510685923349/5ED8BC00EC5F5DD44816EB63F9079DD9A5FDCB9C/ -- MAP 3. No. (See above screenshots.) 4. It is Early Access, although things have slowed right down. There are some occasional updates, but more tweaks, rather than new content. The development team (Ugra-Media) have since moved on to a new project. Generally, the content in the D-Day beaches area is very good, and most things are in the right places for around early August 1944. It works well for the campaigns (e.g. Charnwood for the P-51D). However, outside that limited area, there is mostly just generic terrain.

Having an Allied WW2 vehicle that could be player controlled, would be perfect as a forward operator/director, reconnaissance unit or simply as an airport marshal. The Jeep would be great for that task. Having it integrated into Combined Arms would add a lot to our missions. Examples and references: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RAAF_controllers_Tarakan.jpg http://photobucket.com/gallery/user/Duggy009/media/bWVkaWFJZDo5Nzk4NzI3Nw==/ http://i.ytimg.com/vi/R5FOYmv6Ra4/hqdefault.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3a/ea/4e/3aea4ed357de43abf9f2fd9f949d2779.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_air_control_operations_during_World_War_II

In assistance to any developer investigation of this problem, I have found some historical documentation describing the system. This may also be of use for implementation of the Wgr.21 on future aircraft (such as the FW 190 A-8, Bf 109 G-6 or Me 410 A-2). The main source is the following link: http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/b/Bordwaffen/21%20cm%20Wurfgranate/21%20%20Wurfgranate%20BR%20Gereat.html It has a host of very useful documents on the entire BR21 topic. From this, I would draw attention to the following specific diagram. Diagram ref: http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/b/Bordwaffen/21%20cm%20Wurfgranate/Text/Angriff%20mit%2021%20cm%20Granaten.jpg Also, the following manual has some information regarding the installation and systems: http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/f/FockeWulf/Fw%20190/Handbuch%20Fw%20190%20D-9%20Sonderwaffenanlage.pdf

Fair enough. And I certainly agree with your sentiment! :) Well, in that case, add: - AI behaviour - Twin-engined Allied aircraft (Mosquito) - Twin-engined Axis aircraft (Ju-88?) - Period voices/callsigns/etc. Sorry, the list is over 10 now. Well, maybe not so sorry! :D

Definitely good news. And, combining that with what Ala13_ManOWar wrote about the F-series, it seems more than reasonable to add in SD2 (butterfly bombs) as an armament option.

@michelip : Interesting suggestions, and I agree that some attention to WW2 would be very welcome. However, your list does suggest a certain style of mission (I'm guessing Allied single-player campaign-style), which is not necessarily relevant to all (such as multiplayer air-controllers). For example, check this section from a recent video from Philstyle (1m48s to 4m3s): I'd agree with Phil that a watch tower that can be manned would server both sides well for ATC and ground control. I also agree that a Jeep is a necessary counterpart to the SdKfz 2 for the Allies to use a forward control/observer points. Compare this to your point #2... from my perspective, controllers are more important than fighting vehicles. For period radar, I'd suggest Wurzburg and Freya for the Axis and an FDT (Fighter Direction Tender) for the Allies. The latter would serve not only Normandy, but also contrived Italian scenarios (which use the Caucasus map, REF). Regarding your own list, I totally agree with #1 (AI behaviour, although it is not an "object wishlist" as per the thread title). Regarding #3, I agree, but this is hardly just an object and we know there is a Mosquito in development already and a Ju 88 as AI. Basically, my list would be somewhat disjunct from yours. My list of "objects"? 1. Editor-placeable dirt landing strips (incl. spawn points!) 2. Player controlled WW2 Jeep for Combined Arms 3. Player controlled watch-tower (both sides) for observing/ATC. 4. Freya radar (REF) 5. Würzburg-Riese radar (REF) 6. FDT (Allied radar ship, REF) 7. Allied field artillery; ideally the QF25 pdr (REF) 8. Camouflaged netting for dirt landing strip airfields 9. Small, period WW2 buildings that can be placed on airfields 10. More period WW2 items for airfields (crates, drums, munitions)

As Coxy_99 mentions, they were on the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 F/G. As far as I can tell, the F/G are direct low-altitude conversions of the FW 190 A series (BMW 801 engine). In the 24-Aug-2018 DCS announcement, ED said there was an FW 190 A-8 in development. If that is human-flyable (hopefully!!!), then it would make a lot of sense to add these low-alt munitions.

Not sure if this is the issue, but there are two sets of Bf 109 K-4 controls. Something like "Real" and "Game". Check to make sure you are setting controls in the correct one.

Nice idea. DFS 230 or Go 242 would be fantastic. Just need a Ju 52/3m to lift it. :)

In the FW 190 D-9, there is a MBG (Motorbediengerät) emergency handle. It is red, and labelled with "Notzug für Bedien-Getr.". According to the DCS FW 190 D-9 manual (page 68... sorry, I couldn't find a version number on the document to report), it states: Now, if I use the MBG handle, it seems to make no difference to my speed. For example: Throttle ATA RPM MBG Speed km/h ~90% 1.37 3000 off ~565 ~90% 1.71 3000 on ~565 100% 1.92 3250 off ~590 100% 1.95 3250 on ~590 Tests were done in level flight at low altitude, with the aircraft trimmed as carefully as possible. In all cases, the MW50 was switched on and there was good MW50 pressure. While the ATA certainly jumps up when the MBG handle is pulled out, I am experiencing no change in aircraft speed and the RPM remains the same. Also, the manual says never to exceed ATA 1.55 and RPM 2700. But... I fly at RPM 3000 without any problems. I've also checked these threads: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=128818 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=134922 But they a) seem old and b) again report RPMs that are quite low compared to what I use normally. They also don't really answer the MBG question. So, could someone please explain how the MBG is supposed to be used, and what I should be doing if I want to get maximum speed (even if only temporarily) in level flight? Thanks.

I share your lament about having the "same old fighter set" on repeat. And having flown 1000+ Ju-88 hours in flight combat games, I can assure you that I appreciate the bomber aspect of the air war. However, the strategic bombers are a difficult match for DCS, as it currently stands. The B-17 is better suited to a character-based game, or even a civilian sim. I think philstyle has neatly covered the relevant points on that (LINK). One of the latest DCS updates (LINK) indicates the inclusion of twin-engined aircraft; an important step in diversifying the DCS WW2 planeset. The DH-98 "Mosquito" will be human-flyable... hopefully the others mentioned will be too. The DH-98 also serves as reconnaissance and pathfinder — roles better suited to individual pilots. In this sense, I think DCS is moving in the right direction. After that, I think photo-recon is the best option after fighters and ground-attack, as this is a genuine single-aircraft role, suits the fast twin-engined aircraft, and has a vital impact on any campaign... I do wish it was better catered for in DCS. Ultimately, the "big formations" of the strategic bombers make them a massive challenge for any simulator, especially as levels of realism and the corresponding demands on computer performance escalate. Yes, strategic bombers are vital AI units in DCS WW2, but there are far more practical and interesting choices for upcoming player aircraft... and choices that are not just-another-fighter. I am very grateful that the B-17 is an AI unit. That is critically important. But I think the implementation of a flyable B-17 would be a mistake.

+1 to both. And by "placeable" airfield, this also means you can spawn there (i.e. cold start). I know there is a "grass field" object in the mission-editor, but you cannot start there... only land and then leave again (as per the recent Yak-52 example).

Is that "quality standard" written down anywhere? Just so we know a) what us modders are aiming for and b) so we don't waste anyone's time with something that is way under (or over) spec'd.

Very interesting. Which linux? what gfx card? what screen resolution? what sort of FPS? I'm also a Linux user, but keep a windows box for DCS and some other stuff. Would be nice to go pure-linux one day, but I realise there are performance hits. That said, things are definitely getting better, so I'm curious to know what so of linux system you're running and what sort of performance you're getting.

Count me in. I'm happy to see any radial-engined aircraft in DCS. :) But if it is the AN-2V "Vodnyy" variant you'll REALLY get my support! :D

True. But building a Bf 109 G-6 by modifying the existing K-4 and adding alternative weapon loadouts may be easier than building up the Tempest or Me 262 completely from scratch.

Hang on... do you mean there is no reply when you ask to "run the starter"? In other words, you ask to "run the starter", but the ground crew do not say "copy/clear" nor do they do anything? It might be related to the radios? Or perhaps to the coalition to which the airfield belongs?

A well-placed mid-euro map would also serve the WW2 interests. Especially if modern assets were mission-placed, rather than baked into the map. Personally, I'd prefer something waaaaaay further north. Fenno-Soviet border or Arctic Front.

Using mods is a great way to set up some "Adler Tag" style scenarios. The He 111 that has been suggested is a great idea. There is a Ju 88 bomber planned as an AI unit for DCS. It is currently in development, although there has been no progress mentioned for some time. REF Once this AI unit is implemented, you could certainly do some German bomber formation missions. The Normandy Map does cover part of the area of Unternehmen Steinbock - a German bomber offensive against Britain in early 1944. Although the operation was largely ineffective, it did include some large raids with Ju 88s (e.g. Feb 1944 REF). There were several squadrons operating Ju 88s at the time of D-Day, either in that area (e.g. KG6) or further afield and flying in. This would make it feasible to attack smaller groups of AI units in a DCS context. Two Gruppen from KG54 flew Ju 88s to attack between Ouistreham and Lion-sur-Mer (where the British Sword sector began). I cannot find the total number of aircraft for the different squadrons taking part, but 3./KG54 lost 2 Ju 88s during that mission and III./KG lost 3 of 7 aircraft. So, that's at least a flight of nine in that raid, but probably more. Between 6-10 June 1944, I./KG54 lost 13 x Ju 88s and III./KG54 lost 10 x Ju 88s. 2./ZG1 also operated Ju 88s, although these were type Ju 88 C-6. On D-Day, this squadron lost 5 x Ju 88s while flying on an offensive mission north of Caen. Of course there were lots of Ju 88s in operation during that time, some lone and some in small groups. E.g. RNZAF No.485 Sqn shot down a Ju 88 on D-day itself. And the ship FDT216 was torpedoed just off the coast from Sword Beaches by a Ju 88 on 07-Jul-1944. Also, for anyone who can read French, I have attached two snippets from the following two references: 1. Méal, X., "La Luftwaffe au face Débarquement", l'Aviacion. 2. Ehrengardt, C-J., "Operation Overlord".

+1 Yes please! @astazou ... that is such a cool airfield you've made there. I do so hope we can cold-start all our prop-aircraft on one of those sometime soon.

^ What philstyle said. The only thing I'd add is that there are only a few concrete runways and they are not particularly long. As a result, some "long takeoff/landing" jets might struggle a bit. But it is certainly fine for the helicopters and the propeller aircraft.

The StuG IV assault gun does not have any gunsight. This applies for all of the vehicle's positions. (Example screenshot included.) Version: DCS v2.5.2.20143 + WW2 Assets Pack + Combined Arms

I would also advocate fleshing out the Normandy map in preference to a new one. Any new WW2 map would need to very carefully consider what aircraft and what assets it has on it... for both sides! Given the P-47, F4U, P-40(?), Me 262(?), Mosquito(?) and some AI (Ju88, ) are on their way, the best map would be the one that supports those the best, in addition to the existing ones we have. Actually, an improved Normandy would do an excellent job of this.