Burning Bridges

I don't have the Fw190 but the 109 looks pretty weird compared to other planes like the Mig-15. The shading makes it almost blue and the whole thing has a hand painted look which is not right. Certainly a welcome idea to see how it can be improved.

it's online now. I will write more later but I absolutely love it, especially the red lettering and the huge Soviet stars.

Ok, thanks. So the aircraft always flies to the left because the rudder deflects in flight. Can this somehow be adjusted by the ground trim tabs in the main menu? Because frankly they seem to have no effect whatsoever.

You are great! I will report back when the download is online, but I can already say the screenshot looks like a wet dream!!

Here is a screenshot, the rudder pedals were disconnected

Sorry but add me into those who are confused. I spent 2 hours trying to fix my pedals until I realized that the rudder is deflected to left. It is actually visible from outside that the rudder is not centered. Even if I remove my rudder pedals physically, and it makes flying very annoying. All trim tabs are at Zero, Auto Rudder and TakeOff assistance off.

My favorite plane is coming together nicely :thumbup:

Just a few images that I found, not that I think helps much but there should not be much except on it but soviet stars

What is it you are looking for exactly? The skin in your photo looks already fantastic, why not release it?

Is there a simple metal skin with Soviet star as in the pictures? The default skin has a red ring around the intake which kind of nice but not what I like. It's something that should be very simple, and perhaps it already exists. In the mods section there are many such nice plain metal skins like Chinese, USA, even Congo-Brazzaville but not Soviet, which is a bit odd.

Vietnam would be a major step to make DCS the best future platform for air combat. I mean it took decades but it's slowly all coming together. P51, Mig15, 21, 19, Huey, aircraft carriers and possibly one day we got Phantom and a Vietnam map. The only negative I can think of is that people would then cry for a whole lot of other planes.

I would like another historic map, for example: Korea 1950s Vietnam 1960-70s Falkland 1980s Afghanistan 1980s East Germany 1960-80s (could be interesting for example because of West Berlin) Of those options, Vietnam is probable the most desirable.

What a wonderful plane! I would love the Texan and it makes a lot more sense flying on let's say Nevada. But on the other hand we have the Yak, which is the ideal beginner plane. By your logic it is the Yak that should be the free module but then you'd have people who have been convinced to offer their professionally developed module to gamers which was a great move and they would never agree. To give away modules for free you first need the module and second you need to offer compensation to the creator, and this could be from half a million $ to several million. Who is going to pay for that? The only way out I see is the development of planes on sort of "open source" basis, perhaps this will be possible in the future but again, if it threatens the future of ED and DCS it's not likely to be considered.

Just got the Yak during the sale and encountered no problems whatsoever. In fact it is one of the best if not THE best module I have seen so far. Completely enthused by it right now. This should be everyone's first plane from now on, I am learning so much and it's rewarding to actually bing the plane home every time, finally a plane that even I can land without any problems :D

Unless you love tinkering I would strongly advise to get the i7 8700K. This might be my personal opinion but overclocking these days has become completely superfluous. With an i7 and a GTX 1070 (or higher) you get a nearly maintenance free system - just add a good industry PSU (Seasonic or Super Flower) and simple efficient cooling (a couple of large fans that dont cost a lot, eg Skythe). Chances are your system will run for a couple years without you even opening the side panel. Whereas with the i5 it's more like people love to tinker and to think they are super smart. You spend 100$ less on a 2nd rate CPU then spend endless time and money to crank it up on 5.0Ghz which is probably not sustainable and causes a ton of crashes. Or in other words, the overclocking path is also possible but you might be entering a world of pain, just to be able to say that you spent 100$ less on the CPU, which no one else gives 1 shit about. So be smart, get the 8700K right away and spend your energy on other things than overclocking.

Of course. I had it running on a 250 GB SSD plus Windows, DCS plus my modules takes ~ 100 GB and was getting impractical because I have other games too. Now I have installed it on a secondary 500 GB SSD together with a dozen other games and have 260 GB free. However, as to "all upcoming planes and modules", well .. if you plan to spend so much money, I recommed you rather get the largest SSD you can get because the price of the hardware will be your least concern. I mean why be miserly over about 200$ hardware when you spend 1000s on software.

I also own a couple of modules which I regret and was also mostly looking for one plane that I can just fly and enjoy. Actually, if you disregard combat the Albatros is by far the most user friendly plane that I own and definitely the one I would keep if I had to choose one. Other considerations that you have not listed are the view from the cockpit (which gets even better because you can remove the gunsight). It's also remarkably easy to fly, and a complete functioning module. And if you are still looking, you can also have a look at the Mig-15 which is a close second imo, but very regrettably has not removable gunsight. This gunsight takes up ~40% of my forward view including the variometer which annoys the sh** out of me. Otherwise I would rate it as a potent trainer too.

Well, one thing that gets me thinking is that if a Hybrid HD with 32 GB Cache already performs that well, then what happens when you combine SSDs with something like Intel Optane Memory? The idea is not new by the way. I don't know who remembers the so called "cache controllers"? Those were ISA or VESA local bus cards with RAM modules as cache. Of course technology has made huge leaps since then, harddisks now have their own onbuilt cache but with the new harddisk accelerators we are now getting into Gigabyte cache territory. This mean entire applications can be run entirely from the cache.

Good for you

Do you have a better idea? I currently fly with -12 aileron 0 rudder.

Thanks for your settings. It's incredible how many pages have been written on this topic and how little in terms of usable settings. I have tried and tried and used -16 aileron and 0 rudder. Now as to what you call "negativity". I never expressed a problem with the takeoffs and landings, that much has been reported by real pilots. But I don't believe either the Spitfire was so instable as it is out of the box, and I also don't believe the German put their pilots with planes that had no modicum of horizontal stability. I listened to real pilots accounts and get the impression and it seems to me they were very inexperienced (20 year old men much less flying time than 40 year old virtual pilots) and found the planes easy to fly, with the exception of start and landing where the forces were not in balance. This may be nitpicking from the point of view of very experienced pilots, but my impression is that a lot of people develop pains in their arms and legs and give up on the planes - which would be a shame. I agree though that a lot of it comes with the control settings, one needs to find optimal joystick curves etc but it's so damn hard to develop those settings all on your own. The planes may eventually be perfect recreations but as it is it seems harder to fly than in real life because you have no experienced ground crew to give you a plane in a flyable condition.

Now I know why I never wanted to work in a computer shop. m.2 drives are usually connected via a dedicated port on the mainboard and run at 2xPCI-E. So no, not a bottleneck but unless we know your exact drive we can't tell. most first generation m.2 drives were just bogus labelled SSDs. Inside they are normal SSDs and only marginally faster, completely independent of the bandwidth of the connection you use. That means, 2x PCI is enough for those drives. So, there is a lot of bogus out there. Right now the only true M.2 NVME drives I know are Samsung 960. You recognize them by a maximum transfer rate of 3,200 MB/s which is currently the limit of 4xPCI connections.

I would recommend setting the Pagefile on all your HDs to zero and tell us if it gets better. In my understanding having 2 pagefiles is actually worse than one, even if one of them in on a fast SSD, because you never know when the system decides to access the slow one which leads to a slowdown on the memory bus. By making it larger you just increase the problem. Better take that slow HD pagefile away from it, so it has no choice but use the one your SSD.

And just to clarify what I just wrote. With most current mainboards you only have only "one shot" at one of those new, super fast drives, so it may not hurt to wait till the end of 2018. Explanation: since we obviously leave the 16X PCI of our video card alone, we are left with remaining 4x PCI lanes and the new drives use them up entirely - there is no other way to get that much data to the CPU than to bundle all available PCI channels. It's like a rail system where you have 4 rails and you use them all simultaneously to get as much coal to the destination as possible. So, if we ignore some expensive boards with a 4x M.2 controller, an NVME drive needs a controller card which takes up all available bandwidth (except your graphics card). ie if you were just to have 1 extra card in another slot (eg soundcard) the PCI lanes would halve and the maximum transfer rate of the drive would go from 3.2GB/s to 1.6GB/s. This is the reason a lot of people wrote reviews "M.2 is a dissapointment", because they did not realize it was limited to 2x PCI-E usually, and their drives capability was halved. So, I recommend to wait until you really know what you are doing, prices are right and only then fill this one slot. There is no rush by the way. Intels Optane is also on the horizon which has about the same bandwidth but is better in practical terms because it has sensational low latency. Currently those drives cost 500-600$ but this could quickly go into normal territories. A Samsung 960 500GB NVME has currently gone down to ca 200€ and a controller card is another 30-40. So you must know if it's worth it to you already.

NVME is a new controller standard and term for the newer generation that is significantly faster than SSDs. They are also known as M.2 but that is just a bus that is not very well supported. The tradeoff is: a) 2-3 times more expensive and b) you need to understand how to get transfer rate. I n brief terms, you have one 16x PCI-E slot for your graphics card and another 4xPCI that the NVME uses up. To get the true 4x transfer speed you must use a controller card and cannot use a sound card, otherwise they share the PCI-X lanes and the performance is wasted. Sorry if that sounds confusing, but it's a new technology and there is no other way right now to get at the maximum 3,200 MB/s. I assume that future generation of mainboards will support these new drives much better, so it might be a good idea to wait. With a normal SSD on the other hand, you just connect a SATA cable and power, and you're set, but are limited to ca 500 MB/s