draconus

Either they're down or run on other (older) version.

Seems logical and by design. Why would it show what's not there? That's what it means exactly when qty=0. https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/DCS_func_getInventory

Sorry, can't help you with this one, I don't have Germany map. Only Caucasus, Nevada, Marianas, Syria and Persian Gulf.

Pro sims and game sims are much closer these days than ever due to tech availability and PC computing power but it's mostly the purpose and data accuracy (esp. on confidential stuff) which divides them apart. You can't deny the officially used definitions from wiki though.

Apparently some prefer it and even pay for it.

Try keybind Salute instead of the one from ground crew radio comms. If it's cold start - salute, wait a bit, if nothing happens, salute again. Can you share this mission so we could test?

No, it all works fine for the Tomcat. If you have problem it's probably mission related, so please, be specific or add a short track.

You feel? No screenshot or track? It depends on time of day and weather.

What entry barrier? Almost all modules are free to test and 2 are free permanently. Be it by yourself or with a friend as an instructor in the two seat trainer - it's all there already. For single player you just click Instant Action and you fly - just like I do it with 5-10 year old kids I used to let play my DCS. "OK, I fly, how to shoot? You click here, now gun trigger is working. Cool!" One thing at a time you learn if you want. Most don't want to learn. They just want to play. DCS lets you do that too but that'd be just like testing vehicles in WT. How seating back seat while your friend is flying is better than good video tutorial or a mission walkthrough with comments? You can take over the stick and ask questions. But you can't pause or rewind like in a tutorial. You don't see what your friend is doing or clicking. That's bad for learning. Again, I'm not against Texan. It's cool aircraft, alright. What learning possibilites it would bring as a new free 2-seater trainer? None. It's all already here with L-39 or C-101.

It's not mission related fyi.

Yes but only because they already sold P-51D and could provide TF-51D, 2 years later, with minimal effort. Note that AT-6B has more powerful engine and reinforced structure so it's not just an avionics, sensors and weapons upgrade, which means also FM model changes. I don't argue when someone just want to fly particular aircraft and we even have a few trainers in DCS but they are not needed at all in that role for the game unless you really want to recreate RL trainings. If someone feels overwhelmed there are Flaming Cliffs aircraft to ease up the first steps. As already said all available to try for 2 weeks for free.

I'm pretty sure pilots die IRL.

ED shared no plans for any more FC aircraft. Make a wish here: https://forum.dcs.world/forum/1027-dcs-wish-list/

But there will be more opponents for F6F and F4U:

You have to understand the reasons I mentioned above and also know the difference if the devs can't or just won't do a module. That the aircraft is old can make it much harder to do because there may not be many (or at all) real aircraft to choose from to get scanned and referenced, they may be very poorly documented, docs may be even all lost, most (or all) pilots may already be deceased.

We're talking about 2-3 years of development for the team of at least 2-3 very talented and experienced people to make aircraft model, full cockpit, systems, controls, FM, DM, sounds, textures and skins - who's gonna pay for their work?

You missed this newsletter:

Doesn't current M240 infantry lay down for shooting?

Nothing crazy about it. To make full fidelity module for DCS a lot of factors are taken into consideration: popularity, expected return of investment, availability of docs, SMEs and other publically available data, real aircraft availability for scanning and reference, possible manufacturer cooperation, licensing, governments related agreements/risks, aircraft role and features and how it fits into DCS, etc. You won't know all the reasons why ED have choosen or not certain modules.

Imho simulation is better when the cover blocks visibility and gun fire, it's more realistic than acting as invisible.

If they are in orbit they will be hard target to take out at long range probably due to MLC.

Yeah, typical old school, easy to learn, hard to master.

The covers are clearly too high for MBTs. They either can't see over or even move the turret (you might have put one of them too far forward).

Definitely MiG-29 this year, the rest is the future.