msalama

Me too. I quit years ago already, and leaving the Yak twisting in the wind was one of the main reasons. Anyway, getting my coat now since I was just passing by

Well, one of the reasons why I junked DCS was that I was "kind of worried" for years, then finally had enough because the only thing seemingly making headway is the bugs count.

Yes. The Normandy and the Channel maps both have dirt RWs and they're payware modules.

Nice. So how much rudder (and perhaps aileron) deflection do you need per a bird, i.e. do you deem the amount of torque, as modelled, realistic?

I'm apparently on the verge of giving you just 6/10 for snarkiness because I'm sure you can do better if you try. So I'll se ya the next time I'll remind ED of their tardiness, OK?

Is it significant in any way if I sound overtly dramatic to you?

So you're happy with the Yak's current state, I take it? Well, good for you if so.

The Yak's project management - or, rather, the lack thereof - is nothing but ridiculous. Do ED not understand what this may do to their reputation in the long run?

"Super simple to fix"? Well, taken into account that absolutely nothing has been done to this bird in ages, I'd just count on them ignoring your request as well. Anyway, my personal stance is clear. Meaning no further purchases from them, unless and until the Yak is completed first. Because they either honor their promises of finally getting their AC out of EA. or they do not. And so far, their track record for completing them isn't too much to write home about.

Every now and then, yeah. I'm still interested in simulators per se, and DCS to my knowledge is one.

Indeed, and for me, one of the reasons why I've uninstalled DCS and won't be coming back soon - if ever.

Why? Air-cooled vs. water-cooled. Although there may well be something wrong with the Mustang's modelling as well, but that's another matter altogether.

I know you said "so be it" and I've no idea of its modelling accuracy myself. But if I wanted it changed, I'd now gather as much hard evidence as possible, because claims without any will be ignored - and rightly so.

Fenrir, just save your breath. I've always said to all complainers, Red and Blue alike, the very same thing about evidence needed and it's like talking to a brick wall. So I've just decided to ignore all these idiotic "I-feel" complaints - and ED will no doubt do alike.

Yet, what disturbs me is why that guy obtusely keeps on claiming there's no torque and thus no subsequent need for trimming, while the rest of us clearly _do_ perceive both torque being present _and_ the need for a retrim every time we change our power settings. So WTH exactly _is_ wrong with his setup, I wonder?