Mogster

I thought the “brain melter” was the AH-64.

The FW190 A8 is an armoured heavy fighter, mgs, 4 cannons lots of ammo, way heavier than the Spit IX with similar power. It’s primarily a bomber destroyer. Anti fighter duty is what the 190D was built for, less armour lighter armament, better fighter v fighter performance. Basically there’s no such thing as a free lunch and the FW190A8 has been to McD’s a bit too much… Most of the high scoring LW aces flew the Me 109. On the Eastern front the LW pilots shot down a lot if IL2s, they also shot down a lot of very green Russian kids with poor training. Russian losses were pyrrhic. The happy time for FW190 drivers was 1941-1943. It would be interesting too have an early/mid 190 and Spit V. As in the Pacific early war scenarios are more interesting and balanced imo, but there always seems to be more interest in late war super props.

More like a modern monocoque I suppose.

By accounts the P47 isn’t an easy aircraft to handle on the ground. There’s an article online where Richard Grace describes the P47s ground handling with the tail wheel unlocked as “feral”…

You can only imagine the level of vibration you’d pick up with a bent prop like that. It’s a wonder the thing wasn’t shook apart in seconds and that the pilot could see to operate the aircraft and navigate.

https://www.armouredcarriers.com/seafire-operational-history

I think the idea was to improve short takeoff performance. That way you could continue to operate from small fields or even roads if your primary airfields were destroyed. There was concern about the higher takeoff and landing speeds of monoplanes generally, especially when they became heavier.

Aye, 100% GPU is fine. High levels of CPU usage are more concerning.

The round hitting and only making small holes sounds like either a miss fire, deflection or one that’s exploded prematurely. He’s a lucky guy. Quite often interviewed frontline WW2 vets seem to have incredible escape stories. We’re only hearing evidence from those guys leading to survivor bias.

By mid 1944 engaging bandits wasn’t their role though was it, especially while dragging RP rails and bomb racks along. The RAF had some Tempests and clouds of Spitfires that were born for that, especially the small numbers of Spit XIVs.

The tactic seems to have been to wait at altitude then start a vectored dive towards the target once it was identified on radar. V1s flew relatively low (1000m-2000m) and flying at 400mph or so. It’s similar tactically to 109s hunting Mosquitoes over Berlin. A RN Avenger turret gunner shot down a V1. You can only imagine the faces of the Avenger crew out casually patrolling when the V1 came droning into view There was another probable with the forward guns it seems.

DCS Operation Pedestal…

I did say loosely… FAA did receive its first Wildcats in July 1940 though. https://www.armouredcarriers.com/grumman-f4f-martlet-variants

Single seat Axis just involves endless 109 and 190 variants though… No I meant the F4F Wildcat. It’s very loosely a BoB aircraft as the RN had inherited some early models iirc.

Nick Grey has said that the BoB is on the cards. But then he also seemed keen on the F6F… DCS Hurricane would be very interesting. You’d think having a Spit and 109 already would make the variants easier/quicker to produce. Of course the German BoB aircraft would also be useful for Barbarossa scenarios with the I-16. Now the early F4… I think that actually was a BoB aircraft

I thought the Sabre was always difficult to start, particularly in cold weather. Some of the structural failures seem to have been due to airframe stress caused by engine problems. Valve failures would cause cylinder explosions and immediate total engine seizures that would over stress the airframe and the tail would fall off. It’s always noted how quickly the RAF withdrew the Typhoon once WW2 was over. It’s almost as if operating an aircraft with the Typhhon’s deficiencies was much less acceptable in peacetime than wartime. No Typhoons were sold on to other nations either, even though the UK was desperate for cash.

I like the WH throttle but it really could have done with a couple more axis. The toggle switches are useless outside the A-10C and even there they tend to only be operated once then left as they are. I realise they were recreating the left side panel from the A10C but even so.

Aye, I think the C47 has been shoved onto the back burner though. I still think the BoB is a realistic aim for the next couple of years should ED choose to persue it. There are other advantages. No one talks about it but we have the very nice I-16 from Mr Octopus, the German BoB aircraft would be useful for early Eastern Front Barbarossa scenarios also.

We have the Channel map, it just needs expanding a bit. The Spit I and 109 E are variants of planes we already have, you’d assume that will speed up development significantly. The Hurri would be new, so would take some time. We already have an AI JU 88. With AI 110, He 111, Ju87 you could make very credible BoB missions. I don’t see any of that as a unsurmountable challenge, even with EDs usual development rate It’s 2 variants, 1 new aircraft and 3 new AI, TFC have access to examples of the flyables required.

Nick Grey did seem keen on the Battle of Britain. I agree there’s a lack of any obvious roadmap. The Mosquito is out now (the AH64 is soon), it’s unclear where ED is going from here. I do get the impression that EDs projects are only being revealed much closer to release currently so stuff may spring into view in an almost EA state.

The problem is the vast amount of work involved and how to monetarise that. Comparisons with the C130 are very wide of the mark. The large number of crew stations would be a serious problem, from several of them you can see most of the inside of the aircraft. Nothing could be left out. Other dev’s have suggested 4 engine heavies would involve the work of 3/4 singles. So that’s 3 singles we’d be missing while waiting for the heavy. Then you have the pricing, 3/4 times the price of a single. How many people would pay that much?

That’s what you’d expect though isn’t it, in the ETO the Spitfire was always in an arms race with the BF109 as thoroughbred pure interceptor. Dedicated carrier planes have concessions making them easier to handle at sea, the Seafire had very little of that making it a highly marginal carrier plane until the later models with more mods. Landing accidents were common, it seems the undercarriage tended to collapse or cause bouncing that caused a miss with the tail hook. Applying the brakes would stand the aircraft on its nose. Accidents were way worse than US types.

I think it was a fudge, Channel is like a tiny tech demo. Normandy is a bit more useable but not much. However I don’t regret buying both as I’ve had fun with them and at this point I’m happy to support the project. If you look at the other DCS maps they are much bigger. I accept that W Europe’s cities are difficult but ED are going to have to approach this. Tiny ETO maps will not be enough going forward if ED are serious about WW2. Agree about the dates, we shouldn’t be too hung up on them as long as the maps are from the correct period. Before/after D-Day is a good start.

The current WW2 ETO maps really are too small to do much with, tiny compared to the other DCS maps, especially The Channel. A larger or expanded WW2 channel map would also work for the Battle of France. https://stormofwar.net/2021/07/19/july-2021-dcs-map-comparison/

Molins