grafspee

I agree with it, this is enjoying to reopen covers to check them if they are depressed or not. Same with gear or flaps latches, this is the most enjoying thing in Mosquito. Why i am not allowed to let those latches or cover to remain open or unlatched all the time ?? Are we slowly heading to pre-scriped cockpit interactions, i am sure i won't pay a single panny for this. If ED wants to make more pre-scriped cockpit interaction, just go ahead but give us an option to choose. If i would like to close covers or latch landing gear handle or flaps handle i will do by myself, i don't need any script to do it for me in matter of fact i fu..ing hate it.

War time P-51 has different setup then modern P-51s. As soon as you flip starter ignition system is energized by booster coil which takes magnetos job at low rpm. For example Spitfire or mosquito has booster coil separate button, but in P-51 starter and ignition booster are the same switch. Modern p-51 for safety sake has booster linked to magnetos switch so it is possible to crank engine without spark but in war time P-51 it wasn't possible. And you can check if engine can freely rotate without ground crew. Running engine on booster coil alone has draw back like significantly reduced power.

Trim in P-51 is rather quite sensitive. You should check special tab and turn off trim assist and take off assists. And check if game mode is off. In P-51 main trim which you should use is rudder trim, elevator trim and aileron trim you can get away with out touching it.

Mosquito was designed initially as bomber, but in Spitfire gear handle is at the same spot, right side of cockpit, so pilot has to switch hands just right after lift off to retract landing gear.

Oil gauges in german plane shows engine outlet oil temp and allied planes probes engine inlet oil temp , that is why german planes have limits at 130C and allied 90C-95C 110C oil temp in K-4 is completely fine.

Question is does accuracy or rate of fire drops with taken damage or is it only speed which is affected ?

It is still far far away from how it works irl.

This is long term issue with DCS. I think ED siad that they will re do whole damage model for ground units, right now damage is based on health points, if you damage some units beyond threshold, they will blow up after some time. And damage is represented in %. Question is what is 100% damage for DCS, for example lets take pak-40, 100% mean that cannon barrel is damaged and pk-40 can't shoot or 100% mean that pak-40 is blown from surface of earth ? Second thing units perform exactly the same no matter how much damage they take afaik. This pak-40 is operated by crew which has no protection, even if gun was fine after near 500lb bomb detonation would kill the crew.

A lot things i british cockipt lay out does not make sense. For example why gear and flaps handle is located to the right so pilot to operate those need to switch hands on stick.

Yep, over revving K-4 can easy kill engine. But someone had to not pay any attention to rpm gauge in flight to do so.

From my experience, this knob works like automatic temp control override, you can open them to get lower temp but if you close them completely, cowl flaps will open when temp got high. For me it looks like this cowl flaps knob works as offset setting for thermostat system. For comparison P-47 cowl flaps will stay fully closed no matter what, in case Fw190 D-9 those cowl flaps will open when temp hit critical level. So i agree with @kablamoman, turning the knob affect set temp not the cowl flaps position.

Yes they did, but "experts" said that it is wrong.

It is not quite funny for me, it is quite serious for me. If someone post topic in ED forum saying that all ED is bull<profanity> and when he or she is asked, it responds that you can't understand so back off, and other guy comes in, and says DCS is spot on, and provide evidence in form of recorded of RL flight. What i can say more ? I can say only one thing, "so called experts" it is time to buzz off !

I very well recall so called experts complaining about wake turbulence being way off in DCS. That wake is too strong. Fun fact is when you ask so called experts calming the DCS is wrong, they are never are capable to provide any proof. If you question then, they react with "there is no sense to argued, because we are right and you are wrong".

Can't be !

For me it doesn't look like engine is overheating, when you engaged mw50 and engine blows after couple seconds. Look like another Dora engine bug.

If your batter is depleted you will not start engine in K-4 despite fact that you can crank engine via inertia starter. First main thing which prevent engine starting is lack of ignition system being energized by battery, remember that at slow crank engine speed magnetos aren't capable of producing spark, so ignition system needs help there from battery, second thing is fuel pumps, those require electric power too. Thing that ground power do nothing as well as running repair is obvious bug.

@Art-J is right none of ww2 fighters were designed to fly neutral or negative G for longer periods, fuel tanks sumps were located on the bottom as well as oil sumps were located on the bottom of the engine. Direct injection or injection carbs prevented engine cutting out instantly when 0 or negative G was applied, which happened with float type carbs. IIRC P-51 is cleared for 10s or 15s of that flight. Even modern fighters aren't designed to fly inverted for longer time because it brings no advantage, you can't fire any weapons being at negative or neutral G what so ever. Only aerobatics planes and not all of them are designed to operate inverted for long periods.

Why designers put coolant/cyl heads and oil temp gauges in cockpit? If time on WEP or on MW50 was primary issue designers would put clock gauges in cockpit not temps gauges. Primary things for pilot to keep on are temps, coolant / cyl heads temp and oil temp and carb temp are within limts. Ofc you have to apply to power limits but this thing is obvious and very easy to apply.

When you shot guns, drop bombs or shot rockets you want to be coordinated too.

I hope that, what you are saying will come true.

I aware of this, this pacific asset part will be part of f4u module. But development pace is extremally slow and i would not be surprised if ed hellcat would launch years ahead .

@Cliffhanger31 I don't know but i think you are unaware of plane set available in DCS, german plane is only thing which hellcat will face in DCS, I'm not aware of any Japan plane in development right now. If we get AI proper counter part then yes but multi session will still suffer.

It all depends what kind of planes hellcat would face, if only A-8 then no one will complain but when it would be K-4 or D-9 that change things. In multi session you can mitigate this by flying with fiends but in single session flying with stupid AI can be enjoying when your foe out run you in every aspect.

Limited to 10min at a time does not mean that engine will blow up right away. It is very hard to determine how long engine can run with mw50 but i think it is safe to assume that engine will survive whole tank of mw50, if temps stay with in limits. Definitely it would have impact on service time of the engine. Much easier is when engine blows up faster in DCS then it was rated for in RL manuals, the task is easier you can show proof and ED can reconsider modeling approach. But when we are talking about high power endurance things get complicated. Engine could run 40min with mw50 and blows up and engine could withstand couple hours as well and providing proof for this is nearly Impossible. Timie limitation is no near point when engine would fail, from simple reason, this would require ridiculous precision in engine production to have every single engine fail exactly after 15min or 30min or what ever time was determined by factory. So games where engines fails right after time limits exceeded are just pile of garbage in that regard.