algherghezghez

I’m not sure if the plane ever flew in this configuration or it was only for static display. What I am pretty sure of is it never flew operationally in this configuration. The usual configuration for the S version was one aim-7 on one side and one aim-9 on the other, plus the two tip tanks

I didn’t even know the underwing BL-75 could be wired for sidewinders. Italians surely weren’t, both G and S. As far as underbelly racks are concerned I remember something like that they created aerodynamic problems, but I’m not sure. Also being behind the landing gear the missiles would get dirty up to covering the seeker and rendering it inoperable. But hey, if others used it as a standard load out cool.

Half Europe used the G: Germany, Italy, Greece, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, Spain and Netherlands. hopefully we’ll get all those skins

I’m not sure if any air force extensively used the belly racks. Italian air force for example only tested them. If I remember correctly they created some problem and were deemed not worth it.

MFD? HUD? the S has a better engine, with the ability to shoot aim-7, the ASA a better radar, aim-9L and Aspide missile. it’s not about the latest variant, it’s about having the almost pure intercept version. No version has mfd, hud or any of these heresies. instead of newer version read as Italian version.

Not developing the S ans ASA ans ASA/M versions later would be passing up on a great opportunity given the habit of Aerges to provide lots of variants

Now that the others warbird got the chocks is there any chance that the spit won’t be left behind?

Thanks for the reply as always. For the fuel tank it seems I’ve just been too impatient . For the loading I get your point, having read the book I find more immersion breaking taking off and returning from another airfield. But I totally respect your point and decision. Also taking off from ford means almost no fuel management is needed anyways from my experience. keep up the great work! Love it

Hi reflected, just two curiosities: I'm at mission 9 now and I've always had the slipper tank installed so far even if Clostermann mentions flying with the torpedo fuel tank. Why this choice? Do your sources point out that only the slipper tank was used? And for the channel map, I get that it's only a free bonus and already required a lot of unpayed effort and work. But did you consider reworking it a bit more to have all missions on channel map and correct mission briefing pdfs? For the missions that have an objective in the normandy map we could take off in the channel, load a new mission over the water etc etc much like the speed and angel campaign. I cannot speak for others but but I would gladly pay for a The big show 2.0 campaign. Thanks for your great work!

Not sensory feedback; but different feedback is in my opinion better than no feedback. Can you honestly say the difference between 2 or 3 G or between 4 and 5 or 6 with the current implementation without watching the Gmeter? Because I can’t.

Of course, I’m not saying that they would. I’m just saying that this proves that a quick way to determining your Gs is needed to properly fly and fight. For us gamers I think an on screen overlay would be the best option. I don’t understand what the problem would be, we already have tons of optional onscreen overlays: ifols, controls, crew status, etc.

Tell this to the real fighter pilots who say they suck at the sim because they bleed too much/not enough airspeed because they are unaware of the gs unlike in the real thing. Look at speed and angels, almost everything is g dependant and you must be quite accurate about it. Exactly, we have no way of determining gs other than watching at the instrument below, 8/9. Most of the time in most of the planes you want to be way under that

Exactly, you need your eyes on the target, and with planes like the f-14 with no FBW and 6.5 g limit you always need to look down at your gmeter.

Since we lack the feel of the Gs we should have a way to display it onscreen, since real pilots don’t to constantly watch the gmeter. Maybe a superimposed slider like the ifols. That goes from green to red or something, to understand roughly how much you are pulling.

I think reflected already discussed this. Since the Dora wasn’t operational in Normandy there will be no Dora campaign.

In mission 5, from Detling to the RV point the briefing card calls for a course of 152 which is completely off, the correct one should be around 180. Can you give it a look? thanks!

Hi Reflected, I am now playing The Big Show after reading the book and loving every second of it; I plan to fly V for Victory right after. DO you have any suggested reading? I already have Cover of Darkness, but anything else you can suggest I will get!

But thanks to everyone anyways!

I used gamers by night guide with no luck already. I tried vr with the cv1, then the quest 2 and how the g2, unfortunately even if it looks great in the first few hours I think it just isn’t for me: nothing beats the crispness of a 4k screen for me. To each his own I guess

The point is that with the same default settings steamvr has double the fps of openxr. And motion reprojection in openxr doesn’t seem to work even if it’s selected on. But I think I’m giving up on vr anyways…

Hi all, I just bought my reverb g2 and I was trying to set it for DCS. I don’t understand why but I get way better performance with steamVR (40ish fps) rather then with openXR (not more than 20). also with openXR motion reprojection doesn’t seem to work, I tried both with the openXR mixed reality app and with the toolkit but nothing, I get stuck at 20fps (CPU bound: main thread). what am I doing wrong?

Does anyone have any reference on how the pilot hand would be put on this weird contraption? was it possible to shoot both mgs and cannons with one hand or were two hands required?

It would be great if we could have a high resolution map that you can actually pan around in the kneeboard instead of the present “map”. or at least a map divested in grids where you can up, down left and right to the next grids, like a real folded map.

I use that workaround as well, but we need chocks and ground crew to hold the tail if we want to properly test the engine without nosing over

I noticed this happens sometimes in other ww2 campaigns as well when i slightly enter the runway with the other traffic not having departed yet. Usually cancelling my takeoff clearance solves it (atc menu, abort take off). I think the ai is unable to takeoff because the player is the one cleared to, so the runway results as occupied.