birdstrike

while the 190A8 is a welcome addition, i doubt that a server with only the mk9 and the a8 would be really interesting...to my knowledge the mk9 holds pretty much every single possible advantage over the a8.

they said today...the changelog is already released here in this forum...so normally its only a matter of seconds, minutes or hours until you can download it...but it should be today.

the patch is not even out yet

regardless of its performance...a p38 would be an interesting addition to dcs ww2, and its a beautiful distinctive aircraft.

while fixing bugs and improving/creating features, isnt directly making money like releasing modules, in the long term, it very well creates income. less bugs, more complete features attract customers, and also keep customers happy...and guess what they do...they buy more stuff... on the other hand, a totally bugged game, can create modules with no end, and still commit financial suicide i suppose, because what is a "put any aircraft into here" worth, if the core game is not playable...

you mean that pixelated area on the upper side where the fuselage connects with the canopy? i was thinking the same.

in such cases i hate when im right. :)

i guess thats the plan...but until we can download it, or at least get a changelog, we cant be sure about it. happened more than once, that updates had to be shifted to the next week due to unforseen circumstances.

i only have 1 sensor and it tracks flawlessly in dcs. i just placed it on my desk right of the monitor once and never touched it again. direct sunlight or darkness dont affect the tracking at all...it was a nice switch from trackir.

YEAH...you are right...we have our answer.:noexpression: wish they would make the FMs more detailed tbh. thx for your input in this thread shadoh

if you do this you will not be able to fly online to my knowledge.

wenn wird das wohl heatblur fixen müssen und nicht ed....sieht ganz schön lustig aus...bin mir sicher das dieser bug nicht lange bleibt. kann mir nicht vorstellen das sie genau bei diesem modul so einen "dumm" aussehenden bug einfach ignorieren vorallem wenn man sich die sonstige qualtiät dieses modul ansieht. wer weiß, vielleicht is das problem ja sogar behoben bis wir sie zum ersten mal in der hand haben.

how do you use snapviews in vr?...to my knowledge thats not possible, except setting the standard view...

read the op? nobody is doubting that a general drag effect is existent... an answer from the devs would be interesting. and jets are absolutely off topic there

first....its an easy test...just come in in a complete slipped attitude, and keep it during the touch down and even roll out....no problem now with magical physics. second....there is and never was a difference between the concrete runways in caucasus and or normandy and the dirt fields in normandy. its the same ground with the same friction just with a different texture.

well...not much to navigate with, as there are no period correct beacons or landing systems in dcs...hopefully yet. about being a handfull on the ground...that was correct until they decided for whatever reason, to adjust the ground physics...now you can land in a complete slipped attitude without worrying about a crash...sure it lost its appeal with that decision. anyway...for the OP, there is always the option to use take off assistance( hence why im confused and much against the arcade ground physics that are now forced upon all of us) and the option to use auto rudder....so even without a rudder device, you will be able to manage it with a little practice.

thats the real question here.

thats an interesting question indeed. but my concern is, why should the ball half off center or a little more not cause any drag? shadoh's test confirm my/our tests. while i cant say how much of a speed loss u should have in the various types at certain slip angles, ultimately there should be drag by any slip in any aircraft except when flying perfectly coordinated.

yes...we tested this and came to the sad conclusion, that drag due to slips are not modeled detailed enough. it seems very simplified, where slipping/skidding with too much rudder will cause some drag above a certain threshold , while at the same time slipping with too little rudder or no rudder at all will not...everybody is welcome to test it with their friends online. take the exact same trim and fuel settings, same engine settings and fly next to each other with one flying coordinated, keeping the ball in the middle, while the other doesnt give any rudder and flies in a slipped attitude...u will not notice a speed difference even after several minutes. another nice example is when both go into a vertical climb...guess who is falling out of the skies first. the one using rudder to coordinate the climb, or the one not using any rudder but countering with ailerons? :) dcs was orignially supposed to be a jet simulation, and i have the feeling thats why we see these behaviours in the prop FM. and yeah, u are absolutely correct in with that energy retention doesnt feel natural at all. slightly off topic, but flaps in dcs are a very nice example on the warbirds in this case. again take a buddy with same aircraft (in this case not the spitfire as it only has no or full flaps) same fuel settings and be surprised that the one without using flaps will never extend from the one using them, as long as they manouver and not fly completely straight. again flaps do cause drag, but as soon as u start to manouver the lift will greatly outweigh the drag as long as the flap setting is not too extreme....

lets wait and see if its really that much of a sitting duck, which i dont believe it will be.

i wish the overall FM for all prop birds got an update in dcs and that they had another look at torque, lift, drag, thrust, energy loss with stalls, spins, drag and lift with flaps, drag with slips...etc. no doubt there is room for improvement. the question is just, how plausible it is that the devs will use this room. i guess unlikely, as as of late they did the opposite and made compromises in fidelity, see spitfire overheating or groundhandling. might be that part of the problem is the community itself. many armchair warriors who never had the chance to experience real flight themselves, at least in depth, complain that planes are to hard to fly, too unstable, too easy to spin etc. they dont want to have to use rudder etc....i think even nowadays trainer aircraft are more dangerous to fly than the current warbirds in dcs. and here we are in 2018 where its still possible to take off in 2000hp piston engines without the absolute need to use any rudder inputs or touch down in a complete sideslip without getting punished....spins? forget it.

i guess that your admins use a different cockpit origin than the players having the issues...

in the 109 specifically...they cant look through the gunsight, and or sit too far left iirc. and dont seem to be able to change it...i think messing with the views is problematic because of such sideeffects, especially for planes like the 109 where you can change seat position between auto,cruise and gunsight in the options menu. and interesting enough, even i had trouble last time when i joined with my rift in the 109...was sitting on the left window pretty much and it recentered there as well, today though it was ok for me.l

the missions are cool...but...messing with the views server side, causes several people i was flying with to have problems so they cant fly on your server...the AI in general is also nice, and the airfields are also populated nicely...having AI fighters though is a pain i think...nevertheless overall its a more immersive server then burning scheiss...

looking at the progress of the asset pack i think its doubtfull we would see a massive decrease in development time with fc3 level ww2 birds.