msalama

So I'm saying nothing of the sort, actually. Take your strawmen elsewhere, please.

Ah, OK. But I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on the DCS AI because of their SFM and whatnot...

But isn't that realistic? I remember reading somewhere that the 15 outclimbed the Sabre high up...

As stated above it's an excellent plane, even for a pure groundpounder such as myself. The only problem I've had was an occasional system freeze and sometimes BSOD with it and some other modules, but even that seems to have gone away after switching off my NVidia overclocks. So get it, it's a real 50s hotrod and a ton of fun to operate! It still makes my hair stand on end when I'm screaming down the runway at full power... :D

No-one's crazy enough to do them I'd think, but I've been told the real chopper (as well as the Mi-24) is capable of them.

Of course Yo-Yo. I just stressed it because at a constant high AoA, you can't glide forward and thus gain airspeed and get out of the stall.

High AoA and no propulsion equals decreasing airspeed equals a stall after you go below Vs.

No, of course it should be fixed, was just flapping my lips. IIRC the release version of the module had it right, but the next patch broke it already and it has been broken ever since.

Righto, and nothing wrong with that of course. S!

Or WTF, maybe this particular batch of machines had the upper annunciator disabled and only used the lower bulb for both. The thing is, you don't know one way or another - well unless you happen to own a RL example and are very well versed with all the RL mods and subtypes and what have you ;) EDIT: And yet, it most likely is an ED bug that's been there for ages already...

Well how do their RL operational characteristics differ then? No clue since I've got none.

Exorcet: bloody well put as a whole +1

Except that said control isn't useless at all, because without it you'd be even more up the creek. Which, OTOH, isn't to say that the AI isn't pretty bad when jumped on in a one-to-one situation for example, because it is. So you're both right and wrong IMO ;)

Or is it just Wintendo doing its thread management? EDIT: DCS is the red graph of course.

But couldn't you just make it simple and put something in there, test and rinse & repeat as necessary? And if nothing sensible comes of it, no harm done.

Well at least the Harrier seems to have gotten some attention lately.

Documentation? No idea. The files contain aerophysical and mechanical quantities that may be hard to find in a finished, off-the-shelf form for the AC types in question. You'll probably have to do some calculus, or just wing it and do some trial and error. I'd do the latter myself.

All DCS aircraft have a bunch of SFM Lua scripts in their module directories. You can always make copies of them, edit, and reinstall with JSGME or some such to see if it makes a difference. Never tried this myself though so no idea how it'd turn out... Please report back if you decide to give it a go however. :thumbup:

At least the one where he claimed to have shot both ailerons out was not, since the AI aircraft in the picture still has them attached.

I understand that you, for some reason, want to come across as a haughty b*d again. Apparently a myth. "It makes a good story, but the very small amount of extra weight on the left tire during takeoff, produced by torque, contributes very little to tire wear." And there're other pretty interesting anecdotes in that article as well, such as being able to take off with your feet on the floor if you knew how: https://captainbillywalker.com/aviation-history-people/nazy/ ...has happened to me a couple of times just as you explain, even with less power applied. I augered in every time, so here's again one difference between our experiences. Huh? No change needed? Not the last time I flew. Yet another difference in experiences. Huh? Not required? Not the last time I flew. And yet another difference. More anecdotes: another interesting quote as regards engine and prop effects during takeoff. "I had forgotten to use the recommended 6 degrees right rudder trim, but I had applied power so slowly that the torque/P-factor buildup had been negligible": http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepMustangBurch.7.html But I don't know. To wrap this comment up, I suggest you convince Yo-Yo of your being right, and this you can't do without presenting tangible evidence. Just to say that it's EVIDENT because you say so doesn't cut it, regardless of how much you like to tout your superiority. Anyway, I'm not the one to win this debate regardless of what I say, so what says Yo-Yo again? Care to comment please? EDIT: And oh yeah: You don't? Well THINK on it. Being such a know-all clever guy, you'll undoubtedly get it some day. EDIT2: And since I don't want to come across as another haughty b*d, I'm only really questioning these large differences between our experiences and perceptions flying the DCS WW2 birds, since I'm seeing significant aerodynamical and engine/prop-induced forces at play and am also having to counteract them with large controller inputs. Are you sure you don't have any training-wheel aids accidentally turned on? Because the last time I asked, you couldn't be bothered to answer.

Pretty much what you guys feel. Given the myriad amount of wildly different controllers out there, I'm not at all sure this is the general truth. However, if you can present unequivocal evidence supporting - or even better, proving - this, I'll then of course believe you and join you in requesting an FM change.

We've been through this before and AFAIR I asked you whether your controllers in any way replicate the feel, response and stiffness of those of the real machines. You never replied, but accused Yo-Yo of wanting to be right instead, yet regardless of you yourself feeling that you're 100% right, never presented any tangible evidence of this being off-kilter. So let's begin again: how realistic are your controllers and how are they set up?

Not sure about that. I'm using gamma 1.8 and mornings and middays are as bright as before. Dawn and dusk however seem to have been changed for the better IMO. Can't put my finger on what exactly has been changed though, but something's different now...

You'll find it elsewhere. Not saying more since I don't know if mentioning other sites here is OK. EDIT: Well it's there now.

No, it isn't you. And what's more, apart from looking spiffy it also feels better optimized now. I just ran a QM with a couple hundred units and it flowed like silk. A good patch if you ask me.