Mogster

Yes, I have to trim constantly.

... and it lives...

I really think this is the way ED should go with MAC. Aircraft, and helicopters, that are too modern and classified to make as full fidelity DCS modules. Maybe even experimental stuff. It could be a lot of fun.

From “The Big Show” Closterman says in cold weather the ground crews would start and warm the engines periodically, day and night. I think the Napier Sabre was particularly tricky though.

I would think the Mosquito FBs closely grouped quad Hispanos will give anyone in front of them a very bad day...

Typhoon would be good. They seem to have frequently covered FB Mosquitos on short range daylight ram rods. I’d love a DCS Tempest also but both the Tempest and Typhoon would probably be down the list because of the lack of flying examples.

Mk82 is only 500lbs. WW2 rockets were horribly inaccurate. The RAF reckoned on 5% accuracy on a vehicle sized target. Of course there is the psychological effect of rockets which was assumed to be much greater.

Strange/random things do happen. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/277775/XX177Part_1_4_1_analysis.pdf

The combo of Mosquito and Molins seems to have worked well with the aircraft being an excellent gun platform. Accuracy is supposed to have been 30% against vehicle sized targets, which I find amazing.

Why? After the Ju88 the He111 was the most produced German bomber though, still in production to the point when piston bomber production was halted in late 1944. It could legitimately be present in any mission where a German bomber could turn up, BOB, Channel, Eastern front, Med right through the war. The 188 didn’t replace the Ju88, not many were made and if the squadrons were allocated any they’d be left in a corner and used for special missions requiring more speed and altitude like solo reconnaissance. By the time they were allocated to squadrons upgraded Ju88 versions were available that meant it wasn’t really much better.

Great stuff. Love the bit about the Mosquito pilot engaging the approaching fighters with his 57mm... and the dogfight and evasion with the Mosquito on one engine. Incredible photos of the event and aftermath also. A historic North Sea map would be good. A modern day version would allow interesting Scandinavian WW3 scenarios also as did the old EF2000 map.

Jeez... The 4000lbs “dangerous dustbin” would be fun also but I think we’d need a dedicated bomber variant for that.

Once I followed these instructions from Chucks Guide everything is OK. My only deviation is stick back till the rudder becomes effective which I find feels safer. This follows real world pretty much to the letter I think. I’m sure more power at takeoff is possible but you need careful rudder application as the video says. So, rudder trim right, elevator neutral, stick back, 3 secs smoothly to 8lbs, stick eased forward to bring the tail up once the rudder becomes effective. I have the brakes on my Warthog level as in the real thing and tap it on the ground as Grafspee says. Once again this replicates real world advice.

Basically ED has created the sandbox now we need more developers providing WW2 content. There are good developers making MSFS content who could come over here. You can do a lot more with a combat aircraft in the DCS engine and more period maps are coming.

That sounds like the aircraft I have in the sim, particularly the takeoff. The left swing on takeoff, the difficulty in catching the swing early, the sensitivity in pitch causing prop strike danger. It sounds like an aircraft you have to keep on top off or things will go wrong. What he’s not describing is what happens when things go wrong which we tend to fully explore in the sim. I do think people’s controllers and setup have a massive impact on how an aircraft feels in the sim.

The CEII has 200bhp, the Spit IX has around 1500... After time in the DCS Spitfire I find the CEIIs flight model reminds me of the old days of IL2 or EDs original simple flight model. The CEIIs flight model isn’t bad I just find it hard to believe that a lightweight aircraft the prop and engine power settings have so little influence on the way it flies. I prefer the feel of the Yak52s FM , like the Spit it’s FM feels joined up with everything you do impacting on the way they fly. Surely we buy DCS warbirds for ultimate realism, there are other sims that provide the action orientated easy to pick up and fly fly warbird. When I fly the DCS Spit my immersion meter is off the scale compared to other sims, that’s mostly because I feel like I’m flying a WW2 fighter, EDs flight models make these aircraft like a living thing. Let’s not forget that the guys who flew these things may have been kids but by WW2 they weren’t untrained, by mid war they’d on average for the RAF at least have 18 months of specific training and around 250 flight hours before they reached combat.

User made maps aren’t possible currently.

There was that photo “love in” with Wags and the A2A guys at the trade show a year or so ago. Talk of future collaboration then we heard no more... A2A already have their accu-sim T-6... Obviously you couldn’t just drop it into DCS but even so...

Yes, I did assume that most of the islands would be covered with jungle but wasn’t 100% sure. It would make a spectacular and very useful map.

Not sure. Fighter Command is supposed to have specified the stick for the fighter and fighter bomber variants. As I understand it the original purpose of the yoke in larger aircraft was to give you more leverage on the control surfaces and in a large cockpit you have room to get your elbows out if necessary. As the Mosquito was a large-ish aircraft you’d think there was still some merit in giving the pilot something big to pull on. The reports say the pilots felt it was easier to throw the aircraft around with the yoke, although the variants with the yoke were probably lighter so...

The fighter and fighter bomber variants replaced the yoke with a stick. Pilots preferred the yoke iirc.

If ED were going to cover the whole archipelago it’d require a map of around 1k x 2k km. lots of it would be water though. For comparison NTTR 605 x 605 km Normandy 267 x 348 km Strait of Hormuz 550 by 550 km Georgia 500 x 500 km TFC have a late model F4F and various flavours of P40 to hand. I can see both of these arriving sooner rather than later.

Some good information regarding clipped wing usage and photos from this thread on the IL2 board. https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/38732-clipped-wing-spitfires/

The Battle of Britain does have some advantages. Unlike most historical scenarios the plane set for convincing historically based campaigns is really very small. For starters; Spitfire Mk 1 Hurricane Mk1 Me109 E Me110 (AI) Ju87 (AI) He111 (AI) You can add some others as AI but really they’re gravy. We already have an AI Ju88, that could be added. We already have a small but suitable map, we already have a Merlin Spitfire albeit a much later model, same goes for the 109E. Not starting from scratch with the early Spit and 109 would make development much faster I’d imagine. Additionally the Me109E would re-create another important historical match up with the fantastic I-16 we already have, the Ju87, He111 and Me110 would populate early eastern front scenarios nicely.

There are some extended posts about the Leatherneck CEII in its own forum. It has been tweaked in the last few months but it still feels less dynamic than the other DCSW props and at times odd. There are some posts trying to ascertain why it feels odd, lack of dynamic adverse yaw, lack of gyro effects in some situations. I’m concerned as the CEII is Leatherneck’s trial run for the Corsair and flight model nuances are vitally important in these WW2 era planes. The CEII is quite a simple plane, the Corsair really really isn’t.