Teapot

Yup .. I've been doing this low level as well ... Then it could be a bug because I think you just said that operating below optimum temps for extended periods will wreck the engine (which operates best under specific temperature limits/viscosity etc). That makes sense to me and it also means I'm not flying it properly. I haven't experienced engine damage doing this, perhaps because I tend to keep an eye on the gauge and when it creeps too far north I switch back to auto rad to also gain as much aerodynamic efficiency as I can (I recall reading somewhere radiator being open increased drag). Also .. using the big stick approach I've been opening the oil as well as the air radiators (the two switches mapped to 2 adjacent switches on my joystick so it's easy just to mash them open or mash them auto). Maybe I'm gaming the game (I really hope not .. because then it IS a bug) .. but it sure works and allows me to mix it up below 4000' ... I think it's time to re-visit the manual :).

I most strenuously deny that allegation monsieur! My wife can confirm that for 55% of a daily cycle I am practically 95% flatulence free! Ah .. My first fart joke for 2015 on this forum! :megalol:

LordBaldur will have to grow a thick skin if he's putting out his *Reviewer shingle* for public consumption. It comes with the territory. Reviewing is serious business and it can have a powerful effect on a product both good and bad. Foremost, one should be responsible with their *opinion* and not be flippant. I don't respect a review if it is mealy mouthed and shoddy in execution with a brazen proclivity for ignoring the EULA ... it's just bloody well not cricket. The Edit: I'm perfectly calm.

When someone decides to get into tennis or any other sport, they generally pay what's required to get the level of involvement to make them feel the sport is worthwhile. It's true with any leisure activity and people generally don't quibble about it ... or else they find something else to do. Why should fligh-simming be any different? No other sim on the planet can rival DCS for physics/systems fidelity. Sure there are some that have found compromises ... e.g. A2A, PMDG, some of the stuff in X-Plane ... but none of them have hit the sweet spot when it comes to those two things. Sure DCS has it's limitations ... but I'm working on having ED change their mind and integrate the whole world ... make it a really big sandbox .. but I'll probably just be a dead visionary by then. Anyhoot ... it all cost 'cause nothing is produced if the workers don't get to eat. So short version ... don't expect things for free ... haggling is only valid when the participants are all equally familiar with the cost of production. My 2 cents.

I too will get all WWII modules .. just to show my support. To date my DCS collection is only missing the Hawk and the Mi-8 .. yet I fly them all very rarely .. if at all. For modern aircraft (jets etc), apart from initial flights to get a taste for flying characteristics .. I know zilch about how their systems work, because my interest fades. It keeps on being a project for another day. The WWII birds on the other hand get a workout every day ... :) ... and I'm waiting impatiently for the P47 and the Spit. I really hope that the project keeps on track.

Thanks Buzzles! That worked flawlessly. I can do the P51 in my sleep, the 109 is fairly simple for me with information gleaned from http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/articles/109myths/ ... and now I have prettier take-off and landings in the Focke Wulf thanks to you. I don't know if it's covered in the manual ... but it feels like the tail wheel locks while you keep back pressure on the stick ... similar to the Mustang .. except it doesn't stay locked :). Rep inbound!

Different strokes I guess. See, I think the full price is very reasonable considering the amount of research that goes into the creating of these planes. If it was FC3 quality I'd probably agree with you ... but these aren't.:D

? I think you're being unreasonable. You're paying for a hi-fidelity study level aircraft, so they're doing what they do best. It's also a sandbox sim, and DCS:World comes with a complete and well appointed Mission/Campaign builder. Make one yourself ... or wait until some other talented individuals come through with the goods. I'd much rather Belsimtek focus on building aircraft! I guess it's partially a style and an era thing ... but the review wasn't my cup of tea, though I'm sure it hits the spot for others. I specifically didn't like the argument about *lack of content* for the same reason that I've stated above.

It would've gnawed away at the fabric of your sub-conscious ... trust me on this. You'd know that something wasn't all "A" OK but you just couldn't put your finger on it ... My aunt Ethel had that pheromone happening about her all the time. The scientific name for it is prescience ... which actually means before science ... and my aunt Ethel was defiant-ietly before ... science. :pilotfly:

+1 When I get the Corsair I probably won't be inclined to fly anything else; except for evaluation purposes :D

smells fishy ...

The book is a gem. Very well written and difficult to put down. Those men ... an honest code that elevates them to be heroes and gives us all aspiration that we might also be cut from a similar cloth when life comes at us with our own personal challenges. Also makes flying DCS: WWII that much sweeter! :)

Reading it on Kindle now ;). Thanks for the heads up! Cheers,

Using DCS as my source, it has the 109K weighing in @ approx 6173 lbs empty weight, whereas the Mustang weighs in @ 7824 lbs ... which makes the Mustang a whole 1651 lbs heavier (approx 749 kg ... sorry, I don't understand what you're saying).

Nice! Thanks GrapeJam!

http://jalopnik.com/5971023/why-a-german-pilot-escorted-an-american-bomber-to-safety-during-world-war-ii These things happen every so often ... a noble story ... had a catch in my throat. Update - Here's an interview with the 109 pilot in the story! http://www.virtualpilots.fi/hist/WW2History-Stigler.html P.S. Thanks moderator's for moving this to the right forum (I'm such a dunce, and apologies in advance for I'm sure it won't be the last time! :doh:)

Agreed. IMO the 109 is much more forgiving in a sustained coordinated turn than the Mustang. @Otto .... On the face of it that sounds odd. While my observation is only via my general observation (haven't actually done a *proper* substantiated by numbers kinda thing ... will try to remember to do that when I get home). No disrespect, but make sure that the metric conversion is done before comparing, because isn't the P51-D in Mph? 250 Kph = 155.34 Mph; and 250 Mph = 402.33 Kph ... just on the extremely unlikely chance that it's not being factored in. :D

IMO, you shouldn't use *that* observation to make an informed opinion on Mustang engine heat management vs. other planes. The Mustang overheats quite handily unless you fly it properly. From my perspective as a flyer of all DCS props; engine management is a crucial aspect of ALL the WWII planes, and none are any easier than the other ... IMO.

No offense meant Yo-Yo ... it was very early morning and honestly I'm an enthusiastic but mostly shitty pilot still with the 109. I love your work and it'a a privilege to be able to experience this. Thank you :thumbup:

Confirmed as well .. no prop strike for me. Seemed pretty steady actually. Got MW50 working as well ... thanks for the tips Buzzles!

Ouch jcomm .. I'll give it a whirl tonight when I get home. I did manage a short flight @ 4 AM this morning and didn't notice anything much different then (still the large ballooning pitch up immediately after take off seemed to be worse), but not really concentrating on small detail either.

Pugnacious fighter! Those curves ... definitely a Rubens model and she's beautiful ... I think I'm in love.

Indeed; and it's why ED are (and always have been) the finest flight simulation creators/designers on the planet ... bar none! (Fond memories of Flanker 1.1 / 1.2 ... The perfectly poised statuesque & beautiful Sue with those pendulum like air intakes ... my first love ... and I remember the raging debates in those days too!)

So you say, and you're welcome to your opinion. :) That's ok too ... and as you can see there appears to be no shortage of *opinion* fielded on either side of the debate!

Propaganda? Human nature being what it is ...what they *knew* and what they made available to the public could be two different things. E.g; On the one hand *they* told us that the Japanese forces were substandard soldiers who all had bad eyesight and couldn't shoot either ... :D ... on the other hand they said they were merciless killers. Alas my old friend, you've truncated my quote ... the full sentence implied my empathy for any existing suspicions. :smilewink: