Schwarzfeld

The power loss results from the turbocharger and supercharger being engaged/pressurized: the engine has an internal supercharger (Americans call it a "Blower" at the time, and still today in car culture often) as well as a turbocharger that is controlled by a wastegate moved by a motor. A diagram of the system is below. A turbocharger is driven by the pressure of engine exhaust; therefore it does not "pull" very much power, if any, from an engine at all when it is metered (via wastegate closure) to increase boost. I say "not very much" because in some cases, when a turbo's gate closes up to generate boost, this increases backpressure in the engine exhaust runners, which, in some engine designs can lead to reduced performance. A supercharger is a linear-drive air compressor that is driven directly by the engine's crankshaft rotation - in cars, this is typically done with a belt. In WWII era radial engines, the supercharger was (as shown below) driven directly by the crankshaft, or a direct gear drive from the crank. The supercharger "screw" or "turbine wheel" depending on where you're from "pushes back" against the engine a little bit; the engine must expend energy to spin both itself, it's load (the propeller) and also the supercharger screw. On a graph, there is a point at which you can point out where the "parasitic loss" of the supercharger is overcome by the boosted air its feeding the engine generating, and the engine is generating more power than it is losing by a profitable factor. Because air is thick at low altitudes, allowing the turbosupercharger to run full tilt would literally blow the motor up in pretty short order; the turbosupercharger exists for performance at altitude, solely. The Severskys were very smart guys, they designed the T/S system of the jug (and the rest of the plane) to protect the pilot from himself in many ways, so if you move the boost lever forward at low altitude, you'll close the wastegate some, but it won't allow you to close it enough to make (at that altitude, dangerous) boost; I assume this is achieved by a simple pressure switch (responds to air pressure). The supercharger is always "engaged" because it is physically attached to the crank. Presumably, looking at the layout below, closing up the wastegate at all at an altitude where the air is thick and the engine is outside of its volumetric efficiency envelope, you're just beating the crap out of the motor trying to force feed it far more CFM (volume of air) than it can physically pull in, combust, and exhaust, due to the air density at that altitude, so as a result, the engine will perform poorly and also get beat up. As the manual states, never move the boost lever ahead of the throttle; reason is, if the boost lever is ahead of the throttle in position, you are asking the engine to take in more air volume than you are allowing it to exhaust... you are asking it to bite off more than it can chew.

..... wow, why does this thread even exist, LoL. If you don't like the idea of spending alot of time doing things the old fashioned way - in every way - if you will, choosing to fly the hard way... the 1920s/30s way... then absolutely, the I-16 is NOT for you. This plane is an acquired taste in the simulation world for sure, its not for everyone, but the challenge of safely operating the aircraft while also managing the ancient clockwork mechanisms required for the landing gear etc is THE WHOLE POINT and what makes it fun, for people who enjoy that sort of thing (admittedly, not that many of us do), so... no. The I-16 is undoubtedly, the hardest taildragger to learn in DCS, and that is the appeal of it to almost all of us, because it is great fun mastering that challenge. It is a great feeling to safely complete a flight in this thing on a multiplayer server, taxi straight, land and takeoff straight, dont break anything etc, and fly with other people... I have actually won a couple dogfights with 109s for example where the other player just couldn't handle the slow speed turns, its novelty fun thats for sure, but great fun. So... yeah, not for you if you like simple planes :)

Saw a discussion on this in the OctopusG sub-forum thread on an English cockpit, figured I'd post here in case anyone hasn't seen it on User Files, came up over the weekend: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3312282/

English cockpit? Here ya go.... https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3312282/ Looks like that author made english pits for the 190, 109 and others as well.

I did recently try uninstalling/reinstalling the audio device previously, that did not resolve the issue, I will run windows update...

Flappie - Log is attached; I checked all the configurations you've mentioned, everything is set correctly. DCS appears to be playing audio in surround sound properly, however it is very, very faint/quiet with everything turned up to max. dcs.log

Following the latest DCS Open Beta update, audio levels are extremely low in DCS in single player and multiplayer, with DCS audio set to 100%, and my machine's volume levels all set to max. For example, I can sit in a P-47 with the canopy open and perform a max-power takeoff, and I can barley hear the engine... I've repaired my installation just to be safe. Any suggestions on where to begin troubleshooting?

World War II-era single seat fighter training went like this: 1. Stearman PT (primary training) for first solo and basics/fundamentals of flying - biplane taildragger air cooled radial 2. AT-6 Texan (advanced training) for high performance flight dynamics training, gunnery & air combat maneuvering training 3. First flight in a P-47 or other single seat warbird was done solo with an IP (instructor pilot) wingman, which continued to be an air force tradition for single seat fighters w/ no 2-seat trainer version aside from 2x TP-47G conversions (built out of Razorback airframes). As a side note, just like with the TF-51, two seat training models were tried here and there, but for sake of training time, practicality, safety and so many other factors, two-seat trainers just didn't make much sense in most cases during WWII, and the doctrine of patterning single seat fighters off of the T-6 (or vice versa, depending on who's telling the story) proved out to be pretty sound. To be totally honest, sitting in the back "seat" of a TF-51D for example, which I recommend you do should you get the chance at a museum or airshow (or go for a ride in one!) - you will rapidly notice just how little "trianing" the backseater is in a position to really offer, aside from moral support and explaining instrumentation over the shoulder. Single seat fighters of the era were designed specifically with the AT-6 in mind for flight fundamentals in a rough sense; in the warbird world today (read: airshow flying) any foundation/museum etc will require a pilot to have a few hundred hours in T-6s before they'll even let you sit in one of their warbirds (as a pilot who they will allow to fly their aircraft). The rule was, very practically, and its still true today, if you can safely take a T-6 out for a spin and bring it back in one piece, you'll be able to do the same with [insert US single seat warbird here] as well. Naturally ground handling was different for each, cockpit layout, switches, engine management etc varies to a certain extent but... that was about it.

For the Boost, Throttle and Prop RPM levers, I have set axis (set as a slider) saturation values to account for my Virpil T50CM2's idle/shutoff detent feature at the back of the throttle which simulates other aircraft's idle/shutoff movement of the throttle such as the F-16C. To account for this "lost" travel distance with planes like the P-47, in DCS controls config I simply set a saturation value of <100 to "start" throttle travel. Example: My detent latch at the end of the throttle accounts for 8% of throttle axis travel. In DCS for the relevant aircraft, I desaturate that axis and set saturation value to 92%, meaning that 9% of throttle movement, DCS reads that as 1% travel, etc. This process of setting a saturation value works properly on all other DCS aircraft for me at this time, but does not work for the P-47 - I set saturation at 92%, however as I move my throttle physically back into the idle/shutoff detent, the throttle continues to travel aft through the desaturated range.

OctopusG team - I have a question for you, its not a bug with the I-16, but I am working on creating an English cockpit for the I-16 in DCS. I have finished translating all the textures; however, some of the Normal maps are saved by your team in a strange format I am not able to replicate. Specifically Cockpit texture # 02, it reads in my DXT editor as " file type .DDS - Targa: 32 Bit", which I have never seen before. Please see screenshot below... if you could please let me know what file format (maybe a screenshot of your Photoshop NVIDIA Texture Tools settings?) you guys are using to save those Normal map textures, I'd greatly appreciate it!

Phoenix - the pedals on my MFGs are F-18 replicas from the DCS OpenHornet project, they published the STLs online, I don't have the link handy but printed at 30% infil PETG they are extremely nice and very sturdy. I dont own a Winwing but honestly if I were gonna do that for my Obutto I'd just reach out to a local welder/fabricator who does rollcages for cars etc, and have him come over to jig it up and make you some tube steel mounts to work with the stock obutto stuff.

Folks - this is all prototype (first print) that is in-revision at the moment, thought I'd share here to gauge interest. I designed this on paper for personal use then had a US defense contractor CAD buddy of mine cad it up and print it; this is for use ONLY with Obutto seat rigs and ONLY the Virpil T50 base (any grip of course). The idea here is to get the deepest mount, as close to the floor as possible, while maintaining clearance of the seat throughout full range of movement while also placing the grip at a very comfortable and ergonomic height and angle. This is ABS plastic, it is a five-piece extension designed to be easy to take apart to service and replace components such as the female threading at the base nut - this is plastic so people will no doubt ruin threads getting things cross-threaded against the metal male threads of the T50. Here's the prototype installed and working; my first task now is to design and implement a cheap & simple stick tensioner of some kind on the front to hold the stick in pitch neutral when it is idle, as obviously it is offset, so it sits aft when not in use. Barring that, this thing is almost good-to-go as-is outta the box, I will post here with updates but I would like to gauge interest and see who all would want to grab one of these once we're all done with revisions. Note that if customizations of this extension were desired, the designer tells me its quite easy for him to change the path of the tube, so, we may be producing a printable paper/PDF template you can print, cut out and put in your rig to gauge whether or not you want customizations. Here's the setup thus far, I tried it this morning and I love it - one really cool feature here is that the designer chose to print the tube in two pieces so that the halves are laying flat on the print surface. This means the "grain" of the print is in the direction of load bearing, so unless you REALLY shove this thing much harder than you need to, it SHOULD never break.

Agreed to all above, ground roll behavior w/ regard to rudder inputs is extremely wonky, very similar to the MiG-21bis when it was in Beta actually, probably a DCS simulation system issue. I find the NWS absolutely retarded sensitive even with curves set, though I've not tried a curve of 20. I have MFGs, very tiny deadzone (2), and often times on landings I find I am holding full right or left rudder depending on the wind (always very gentle wind...) to keep it from the dirt, takeoffs frequently get pretty cartoony in the same way. Once its airborne this is no issue of course.

NWS on the viper is... its un-Godly sensitive, or at least it seems that way, even with a curve dialed into the rudder axis... would be awesome if we could dial this down manually in special options to prevent shopping cart tipover accidents lol

I remember my CFI teaching me the "correcting your corrections" thing in a Piper Cub, but this is a whole new level LOL

Can we have RustBelt write the manual instead of Octopus LoL no offense to the developer but damn that was a way more clear description of the mechanism

Yeah I noticed it gets rudder/elevator authority almost instantly. Can stand it up on the mains like a total pro at an airshow but damn LoL. Will try out the full power brakestand and let it rip I guess lol

I disabled auto rudder and disabled takeoff assist, always do first thing for any module... would like to learn to fly it as realistically as possible... However, having logged some real hours learning real taildraggers, I have a VERY hard time believing this thing was THIS schizophrenic on the rudder, it makes the Spitfire seem like childs play lol

So this thing is epically more difficult to keep straight down the runway than the Spitfire, wow, lol. Anyone got suggestions/recommendations on User Curves for this thing? I'm playing with curves when I have time to try and dial it in but this is one helluva little demon to keep straight, which is gonna be tons of fun, but man this I haven't even got off the ground yet LOL

I'm resting it on my thigh, center stick mount with the X56... I know its not the top notch stick but its not garbage either, with a reasonable dead zone and zero curve, there's simply no way I can even do so much as hold a set airspeed and maintain level flight by hand in the Tomcat. Just tapping it aft sends the VVI climbing, so... gotta have some kinda curve... I know I'm a twitchy dude and CFIs bitched about my inability to relax and all but damn

With respect to the pros who really flew the plane - unless our sim rig includes a floor mounted stick with extension (mine does not) - flying on a completely linear axis tune is just not realistic or practical for almost any DCS module, some are worse than others - the Hornet requires very little curve for standard sticks, but while I only have flight time racked up in GA little birds and obviously am no authority on a mil jet, when I make fine adjustments on a Piper Cub's stick, it's... on the floor. My X56 or even an TM Hog on a standard stick base, totally different ballgame. I messed with a user-curve last night an Embraer left seater helped me out with that he uses, its alot less radical than the one I started with, but it seems to be making much more sense. I'd love to do a floor stick for a totally linear axial tune but thats just not realistic with my Obutto cockpit especially considering I work my day job Mon-Fri 9-5 in this rig so ergonomics are important.

It took me a decade to pull the paint kit down from the link provided, must be alot of demand, I hope nobody minds but I mirrored the paint kit on GDrive if anyone wants to pull it down faster - if Google denies the download due to limit, just hit "copy to my Google Drive" and you'll be able to DL it there: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1px26gSQ91z3a_2aNrPp_AhwY3mAqcdJL

Holy crap... anyone got a hosted mirror link for the paint kit by chance? Taking a year to download from the primary host lol

Control Curves: I've been having a helluva time tuning my pitch/roll curves for a standard stick (non-floor stick), X-56 in my case, haven't really found a setup I'm happy with as I'm still "chasing the rabbit" on pitch oscillations getting in fine in formation as well as AAR - figured I'd throw this up and see if folks would be willing to discuss control curves amongst ourselves by stick type, here are mine, would greatly appreciate any suggestions from anyone else, lets see those curves: