No.401_Wolverine

I just spent a ton of time setting up the Mossie again for the 2nd time after giving up on it since release. I'd completely forgotten about this issue and it being the reason I stopped flying it. Instantly hit this problem again after my first take-off. Very sad to see that this issue still makes flying this aircraft such a frustrating experience for those of us with FFB sticks. Very sad I won't be able to join my friends in their Mossie formations and bomb runs. It's just not doable with this trim and FFB stick.

Just here to confirm I'm having quite a bit of difficulty with the Mosquito and MSFFB2 stick. It seems to be the only aircraft I have to suffer from this effect. I fly Spitfire, F-14, F-5, F-86, P-47, all with good success and enjoyment, employing curves and using trim easily. The Mosquito is nearly unflyable and requires so much input against the stick due to trim problems that gunnery/bombing accuracy is nightmarish compared to the other aircraft. If there's a good work around for now, I'd love to find one.

Started having this issue myself as well. I've reduced the number of plugged in USB items as much as possible, but if the solution involves disabling controls I need to play the sim, then it's not much of a solution. I can run the sim if I don't run the TARGET software for my warthog throttle profiles (which adds the 'virtual' joystick as a device and brings the controller devices to 9) but then I can't use my warthog throttle properly. This only started happening recently and I hadn't changed any inputs. Very frustrating. Hopefully the 2.7 update resolves this....

We are having the strangest issue. It seems that when playing multiplayer, when I join a server someone else (and always the same person) gets booted off the server with the 'Client is tainted' message. If I don't join, he can join and play no problem. A minute or so after I join the server, he gets kicked. If I stay on the server, he is unable to rejoin. As soon as I leave the server, he can rejoin. He is using the Huey module and I am joining in a P-47D-40. We tested this a few times this evening to confirm and it seems we can replicate it easily. He tried doing an install repair last week, I tried doing a repair this week. No change. We haven't had this issue in the past, flying all sorts (Spitfire, F-18s, F-14s, Sabres, etc.). We're going to try turning off the client checks on the server for next weekend, but we shouldn't have to do that. We both are running clean (well, he has the A-4 mod but so do lots of other people on the server and they don't get kicked for client is tainted). If anyone is also encountering this, info is welcome. A fix is even more welcome! Thanks.

Not sure if I'm reading this right, but you absolutely can have two players in the same F-14, Pilot + RIO, so the precedent is there. I would love to have the Mossie be multicrew, even if it's just the navigator role. Would make for some great night time action which is where the Mossie shined quite a bit (pathfinder stuff for marking targets, etc.)

Yes, we had the same set up as McTschegsn. RIO was hosting mission. We've since switched over to a dedicated server setup and the other night I had no problems calling the tanker and getting the hose. Did a full refuel from empty tanks and half empty aircraft as well! :pilotfly:

Yes, we've seen this behaviour as well, as he hosts the mission typically. Tanker comm options appear for me as pilot, but they just ignore me and reply to him. And that works up until the point when the hose is out but I can't see it. Trust me, I look very very hard :P I believe we will be attempting with me hosting the mission tonight, so we'll see what happens. We'll also try doing this on a dedicated server and see if that changes anything as well.

Anyone been able to do refuel with a player RIO in multiplayer? Every time we've tried to do it, he sees the refueling basket and I (as the pilot) do not.

I'm getting (and have been getting for a while now) similar issues. Desktop res is 3840x2160 and game res is 2560x1440. Game settings set to Full Screen Typically, the game will load in the top left corner of the screen, occupying 2560x1440 space on my desktop. I can alt-enter or otherwise make it full screen, but mouse selection of controls in game is only in that one area of the screen (as if the game was still running in that space of the monitor). If I quit the game immediately after it loads like this and then restart it, typically the game will load full screen as it should and I have no problems. Other weird issues are when quitting the game, it doesn't always return the resolution to desktop res of 3840x2160. The desktop comes back at the game resolution of 2560x1440 and I have to manually return the desktop to its original higher res.

Agreed with pretty much everything here. +1

Yeah, beta update on the March 27, 2019 seemed to really drop the centering force and there doesn't seem to be any noticeable difference whether at .4 mach or .9 Also seems to be not much difference in force if deflecting the stick just past center or all the way to the stop. Figured out the trim swap thing (happened before with Sabre I think) but I find the 'Cat significantly less enjoyable to fly with the reduced stick centering. I was getting stick movement when trimming previous to this update so not sure what the change was there. Pleeeease increase stick centering forces back to where they were or close to it. MSFFB2 stick here, if that's relevant info. (Seems like there might be a bug in the forces update? Someone reported the forces snapping back to high levels after being in flight for a while or when they ran out of fuel. Maybe this just happens when starting already in flight. Will test more.) EDIT: Yup, cold start was fine, flew great. Air start was wonky..

That'd be great. Do you have a link to official reference to this?

MS FFB2 Stick + TM Warthog Throttle Saitek PRO Flight Combat Rudder Pedals 2x Saitek PRO Flight Throttle Quadrant

These are great choices to maximize playability with what we have and what we know is already coming. A good jump into twin engines in advance of taking on even bigger projects (B-17s, Lancaster????). Fully support this.

Very good news! Fantastic.

Not to mention any combat power time you'd need. If you do any sort of medium range escort right now, even at lower altitudes, running into trouble gives you very little time to fight before you need to run for a friendly place to put down.

Reporting same exactly as escaner describes it.

Hm. Well, my best recommendation then is just keep at it. I spent a few hours just taking off and landing. Taking off and landing. Over and over. It wasn't easy to sort out, but after a while, there are subtle visual cues to help. Best thing I can think to do after what you've just described is practice just flying down the runway line. Don't even worry about landing. Just do the turn to final with gear down and flaps down and just fly down the runway. No sudden throttle movements. Get slower and lower as best you can until you feel you're as slow and low as you can go while still keeping control. Once you reach the end of the runway, slowly put power back on, raise gear and flaps, and go around again. Over and over. Then once you get that part, move on to the actually setting down bit. From the sounds of it, you're just not getting low enough while in control of the aircraft. When you're parked on the runway before take-off, make a mental picture of the horizon and its position on the canopy and the angles etc. Remembering that will help when you're trying to fly low and in control but still be only a few feet off the ground.

I made a take-off landing vid with the view pulled back so you can see my rudder inputs. Not sure if this will help. Like JimTM says, don't stay on any one rudder input too long. As soon as I see indications that my rudder input is being followed, I reverse it to eliminate any possibility of going too far, then reverse it again, and again until you're slow enough to control direction under braking. You shouldn't need any brakes upon first touching down and rolling for a bit. Only once you get slower. And depending on your speed on touchdown, you may need more or less deflection of the rudder to get a resulting response. It'll take practice and keen observation to get a sense of what you're going to need based on how fast you're going. I rarely look at the MPH of my approach any more. I just make sure to fly down the runway around 5 to 10 feet off the ground until I'm tracking straight down the center with no side slip and wings level. Once I'm flying down the runway, I gently bring the throttle back until I can keep it flying at that 5 to 10 ft but just above stall. When I'm confident I have the stability and angle, I just edge the throttle a TINY bit back and keep the nose up until touch down. The majority of my landings now take place after flying along the runway for at least 4 or 5 seconds. It bleeds speed and allows you to get centered and stable so you don't have to think about that part when you touch down. Just think about back and forth on the rudder. Just swim down the runway with your rudder like the tail of a fish. Maybe that analogy will help? Here's the vid I did:

I felt my post made it clear that I was aware of there being issues for other AI aircraft and that I was making an anecdotal report of an incident with the 109 specifically. I searched for a very long time to find an AI Bugs section, but didn't find it, so I put it here. However, I should know better than to make assumptions about the intentions or motives of other people's remarks. So, for that I apologize to you DavidRed. I'm sorry. I was hoping that DCS and Normandy and the WWII aircraft here would be a better place to move to from other Sims. Those of us who build co-op missions are desperate for a good sim with AI that can be relied upon. There will be a lot more people coming to DCS over the coming months I think, many of whom won't know which topics are 'tired' or have been beaten to death. It's important that they be able to make their wishes known I think so that developers get a sense of what things really are important to people and deserve proper fixes. So, no, I don't believe that adding new posts on old topics is pointless if it's new people joining in. 5% of your customers screaming and crying isn't as compelling as 50% of your customers asking for change nicely. Now, where's that AI Bug section? EDIT: I spent some more time digging and finally found the spot, so I'm sorry all of this ended up in here. I'll post about AI bugs and issues here from now on.: ED Forums » English » Digital Combat Simulator » DCS World 1.5 & 2.0 Open Alpha » 2.0 Open Alpha Bugs and Problems » AI

Note from my post: I post in the 109 bug section because I observed this on the AI 109. If I observe it on other aircraft, I will post it there. Also note from my post: So while there may be issues with the 190 as well, they may be different and are not as readily apparent to me. If I come across any glaring issues for the AI 190, I'll report them. Right now, the only glaring issue I can speak to is the 109. Everyone suspects everyone's motives for reporting things. This is crazy behavior. If I shoot at AI 109s, I'll report issues that I find when I shoot at AI 109s. I can't speak to shooting at Mustangs or Spitfires because I don't do that. If you do, then report them there. Why feel the need to lurk on the 109 bug section and make remarks about bugs for other aircraft? This is the 109 bug section. If you have a remark to make about a 109 bug, then do so. I suspect you shoot at Mustangs and Spitfires and all the rest of them a lot and have the experiences with those AI issues. So go post in the Mustang or Spitfire or whatever relevant aircraft bugs section.

Not here to debate how accurate the damage models are compared to each other, but something IS up with the AI 109 one for sure. I know people have mentioned it, but I'm mentioning it too to put another bit of weight behind getting it fixed. Spitfire and Mustang vs two AI 109s at Good and Average level of AI ability. Both 109s were hit and leaking white and black smoke. Close inspection of the aircraft showed damage to about 75% of the surfaces of both aircraft. Both 109s kept flying and fighting with no noticeable change in performance for another 15 minutes after leaking white and black smoke. At this point, one of them was hit AGAIN and started to leak MORE black and white smoke. And yet, the fight continues for another 15 minutes, at which point, both 109s leave the encounter and RTB. At this point, one of the 109s begins to show SEVERE performance penalties. Spitfire has long run out of fuel at this point. The Mustang follows and prevents the 109s from landing (he's out of ammo now) by buzzing them on their final approaches. After at least two approaches, both 109s seize engines and crash. We're talking about at least 40 minutes from severe coolant and oil issues, 30 of which were at combat power, until full seizure of engine. Again, I know this has been reported, but it seems it's been reported quite a while ago. Want to keep this on the radar. If this is an issue for other AI aircraft as well, then hopefully it gets fixed there too. Incidentally, we have NO problems with 190s. Spitfire guns carve them up like Sunday roast. I'll get a video of it next time to post if needed.

I haven't found this either. I think you have the option of fully open, or automatically managed in the IX. There's no manual radiator controls to adjust specific aperture. Probably this was to prevent over-confident pilots blowing engines....

I think, even in the conditions they were in, if the cockpit glass had been as dirty as it is in this representation, the ground crew would have been torn a new one by the pilot... . This was their lives at stake. Being able to see the enemy first was paramount to survival in many situations. I don't mind the various scratches etc, but it's like someone smeared oil or vaseline over parts of the glass in some areas. No halfway intelligent pilot would have taken off before it was cleared.

401 liveries please and thank you!