Teapot

@ Pilum. As an interested albeit uneducated bystander I am curious why you said this; "I think there has been a general consensus about what figures to target in earlier high end simulators like IL-2, Aces High etc." They don't appear to be high end simulations to me :). Particularly IL2 .. with the possible exception of CLOD.

Each to their own. As for me, I'll buy everything with a propeller and preferably WWII vintage. Historically each side jumped at the chance to fly and evaluate the adversary's planes and in DCS we can do that quite easily plus we help to insure longevity for the historically accurate flight simulation genre. :pilotfly:

Thanks guys :). @golani79 ... love your work! Cheers!

It makes sense in an oddish sort of way. Which fighter produced the most kills in WWII? Which fighter was flown by the highest scoring aces in WWII? Which fighter had the most aces flying it in WWII? So, if you average it out it makes sense that the "average" of the Bf109 AI is of a higher order than the rest :smartass:

Never heard of the A-10C tail dragger tbh. Is this a Russian wwii prop perhaps? Maybe it's a transport; they're slower and generally more stable ... so it doesn't really count in this discussion IMO, as the thread has evolved to be comparisons about the currently modelled DCS props. :D

Great stuff Sith! By golly I love DCS :wub:

It's actually quite easy for the Bf109 First of all find a plane that has the swastika and copy the file .. usually it's bf-109k-4_cross.dds for the 109 .. the 190 seems to be actually on one of the main templates. Paste that file into the root of the Skin folder of the plane you wish to add a swastika to and make sure the following line in the description.lua (for the skin you're adding the swastika to) is as follows ... {"Bf-109K-4_KIL_CROSS", DECAL ,"bf-109k-4_cross",false}; That should be it! Cheers :) P.S. Make sure you make a copy of the skin folder for the skin you're editing before you start messing around with the skin ... just a precaution. THE EDIT - PPS .. Um .. I guess this isn't much help for the Dora, I've just checked and all of the Dora's appear to have the swastika as part of a major template ... sorry.

Bugger! I'm only half the globe away from you guys. Tell you what, why don't you guys come over during the Oakey Airshow and I'll throw you a BBQ?

I agree. Feels scripted.

Yeppers, very good idea.

Good point's Echo .. and I'd be happy with a -1D :)

My experience is the same as Wild Bill's and Sith's. A couple of rounds and they're toast (when I hit the target). I also like to wait until the target fills the windshield and when the rounds hit the P51 loses it's tail section and wings, the cowling on engine, canopy is gone, plane ablaze and the pilot's dead.

Funny thing is for me it's got nothing to do with *bad habits* from other sims. I've been doing 3 pointers; which had been the prescribed method for the Mustang by ED. And .. I've never been able to get a 2 pointer to work in the Mustang .. tried again last night but still an epic fail. Probably too tired, so I'll devote my practice tonight to perfecting this considering it's been done on a regular basis it seems.

Alrighty lets call it pax; I over-reacted. I agree to chalk it down to misunderstanding and a lack of coffee on my part. :( Fwiw the only servers where I get a decent ping is the Aef and they appear to do a mish-mash of all periods ... not really my thing.

I get the same impression. He definitely pushes the stick forward while taxiing.

True.

Yeah .. I think this kind of opinion masquerading as advice is bull ... People have different levels of what they'll accept when playing any sim ... so far I think the responses have been pretty reasonable w.r.t. what people have said regarding the choices they're making. Obviously for you the existing servers are fine. For me there's a 400 + ping rate that makes it untenable most of the time ... what I'm saying is that your *bull* statement is thoughtless. For others it might also be the loss of immersion because of a lack of WWII units etc. Bottom line is the reasons are many and varied, but one thing is clear; people who respond to this thread obviously want DCS: WWII to become a reality sooner rather than later and your comment is not helpful. :mad:

Me too .. unless labels are used it's just a waste of time for me (I prefer modified and unobtrusive .. E.g. a period). CLOD's system works well for me without labels. Yeah, I understand this too. Though my flying is probably 80% in DCS's favour. I just see it as practice time .. perfecting my tactical flying and airmanship (props only) until the WWII environment fleshes out more in the future. There's quite a big community out there imo ... build it and they'll come sort of thing; just hope it will be in my life-time ;).

Thanks for sharing. I'll give it a go tonight! Cheers!

Don't you mean "Blue side has to escort some bombers at high altitude, and destroy a bridge"? :huh:

Just make your own training mission! Open the Mission Editor, place an airplane at the airfield of your choice, set Player as the pilot and make it start on the runway to begin with (ramp starts require you know how to start the engines) ... and don' worry about waypoints, just make it really simple. After you've done that, practice take-offs and landings to your hearts content! P.S. It's definitely worth it to explore the Mission Editor and it's fairly straight forward for simple stuff. It can get very complex if needed but I just use it to create simple missions :).

Yes it does. It improves your *feel* so much more. You not only hear, but you *feel* the onset of a stall warble .. in fact you feel it before you hear it. The control you get is very precise for dogfighting ... however my Saitek Evo is old and past it's use by date .. and a bit sloppy so when it comes to landing and slow speeds I have a terrible time .. in fact my sloppy stick ruins most my landings and I've gone back to my X52. If I could find a new FFB stick I'd buy it in a snap ... I wish manufacturers would make one but I think there was some sort of patent infringement thingy that stuffed it up for flight simmers :(.

Guys, this isn't a pissing contest. It's been said over and again that these observations need to be supported by hard evidence ... not anecdotal evidence. At least that's the DCS that I want to fly. I think anecdotes are fine in context. They're usually interesting and can spur further investigation, however .. we really need to supply the evidence or just leave the anecdote as that .. an anecdote. IMO when the argument is supported/bolstered via using our *own* dogfights in DCS as evidence .. it's just a bit silly and unreasonable ... and dare I say, off topic? :music_whistling: The EDIT: We're ALL fan's of DCS props aren't we? Otherwise we wouldn't be so passionate about DCS ;)

Fantastic skins! Thank you +1 ... I love this skin! Chief, I think they're supposed to represent the *show* pony's ... as opposed to the battle weary war-horse. At least that's how they look to me, and I agree, it would be nice for a set with a bit of battle wear and tear :).

Thanks Otto; made a really interesting read! Regarding the P51 in the article, I kind of feel that the DCS representation is pretty close to what was described ... but that's the problem we encounter when the representation is *feel* based I guess. However, I hope that the modules will always be open for re-interpretation until we hit the sweet spot ... whatever that is lol!