theIRIEone

That is interesting, specially since it directly contradicts the fact that the US Navy initially deployed these aircraft to land based squads only, and that the Hellcat was deemed the "simpler" aircraft to land on the carrier.. Also i read that max wing load for Corsairs at 45.6lb/sq ft rather than the quoted 28lbs/sq ft... Hmmm.. Either way the toque roll you mentioned when dirtied up, and applying too much power too rapidly, was a real danger in the old FM.. right now it's "meh" in comparison, to be honest..

GROSSLY exaggerated? Are there any sources for that claim? Because looking at accident rates and certain other stats, i feel like there is a lot of truth to the "Ensign Eliminator" label given to the F4U-1D... Only the F4U-4 managed to tone things down, the 1D's reputation is apparently quite fitting according to what i'm reading... Plus, wouldn't the relatively high wing loading make for a lot more vicious stall behavior compared to well balanced fighters like the P-51, Spitfire etc?

Reading this makes me think you might've liked the original FM because it represented what you wrote: Throttle up, need to counter torque with right rudder, then also trim rudder again to adjust for new airspeed, same with throttling down - counter with left rudder and adjust lateral trim for new speed.. The new FM still does this to a degree, but not nearly as much as it did before.. It's not quite "on rails" neither though, imho. Bottom line i liked the old one better but can live with the new one if needed (minus that cockpit shake, probably).

In my unqualified opinion the FM changes led to the bird loosing a lot of character. I'm in no position to tell anyone "this and that is realistic" as i'm not a irl pilot (leave alone Corsair pilot), nor do i dive as deep into the technical and physics related details as some others of you thankfully do. But as a simmer, i loved this bird's FM: it was quirky, had tons of character and managed to give me the feeling of "that's how it must feel to fly" like no other bird (across multiple sims) did for a looong while. It surely lost some of that ability, no doubt. It's still an OK / good module imho, but feels more "generic" now, plus the buffeting / cockpit shake effect sometimes feels really artificially tagged on, almost like an afterthought..

As a dark user myself i felt, and kinda still feel, your pain... However, the ghost of Newton or Einstein or somebody genius like that must have touched me because it hit me: Highlight the text and it suddenly becomes white on blue and very well readable. In all seriousness: Not optimal, but a workaround for dark users like us.

It also says nothing about future patches, it simply states "a definitive list of bugs and improvements we have made so far", so i am not sure where you get the "based on what they say everything is correct" part. Specially since they also stated "We’re just getting started. We have been reading the forums and watching YouTube videos. With your feedback and enthusiasm, we’ll keep refining, updating, and flying higher together." in the same posting of theirs. I guess we all perceive these words a little different from one another..

Oh damn, i feel "not smart" now.. Apologies, makes total sense now after looking at it again during day time. Thanks a ton for clarifying.

First off, thanks for your efforts and uploading of this campaign. Judging by the first 90 seconds of mission 1 it's clear you put quite some work into it (the airfield props and fly-bys etc), however there is a problem when i try to play it: After 90seconds, the mission simply is completed while my engine is still warming up. Pretty sure it has something to do with the very first message popping up when spawning in, screenshot attached. Hope this issue can be solved, i'm surely interested in seeing more of this.

Hello, When the red cover for the on/off switch of the rocket control unit is closed with the underlying switch in the ON position, we'd expect the switch to be flipped into the OFF position by the cover pushing it down and to disappear below it. Well, either that or the red cover would be blocked by the switch in ON position, unable to be closed. What happens in the sim right now is that the switch stays in the ON position, sticking through the closed cover. See screenshot for details.

As titled, i'm aware the hook itself is inop with gear up, but i think should still be able to click and interact with the lever inside the cockpit, even if that does not lead to any changes regarding the hook itself. However it only becomes clickable with gear down and goes back to being unclickable with gear up. Attached is a short track file highlighting the issue. F4U hook lever.trk

That's indeed very interesting because ever since the update i only receive the identifier followed by the letter L (Code ". . _ .", 0-30degrees ) over the AAR-2 regardless of my position from the boat. Bought the aircraft an hr or so before the update went live and flown it all night, only downloaded / installed the DCS update a day later - radio homing worked as expected on day 1, but ever since i installed the update only the identifier followed by the letter L is received... Same mission as before, same frequencies etc, regardless of what i do to the AAR-2 (CW/Voice, and even on "wrong" channels same result), with ARC-5 switched on / off, no difference. Chance is i might be doing something wrong still so not opening a bug report, but would love to have more experienced ppl chime in on this for sure.

@Jakes Mission was apparently fixed today, thanks for your assistance.

Thank you, i really thought NTTR range targets should be fine as well because like SRS, kinda everybody used it. I guess my "knowledge" is outdated and therefor lacking heavily.. I don't mind getting rid of that mod tbh, i'd say consider it gone if there wasn't the tacview thing. I will not de-install tacview. Paid for the advanced version and i think it's way too valuable to get rid of. Also, i always was under the impression that Taciview, like SRS, would be properly supported because of the Tacivew tab in-game Options --> Special window (basically same level as Supercarrier, Hornet and other official modules, along with more 3rd party stuff i don't own like CaptoGlove etc).. Thank you for the assistance, i surely learned something very valuable from this: I will not buy campaigns anymore because Tacview is paramount to my experience with combat flight simming, and apparently it breaks campaigns. I'll make sure to let my ppl know. Also, not that it matters much now: i got the yellow shirt picture pop up long before as well, by the time i took that screenshot it disappeared already - i just didn't start taxi-ing directly on the pop up because of previously mentioned Hint #1 and me needing the time.. But i guess the culprits are "range targets" and "Tacview". Thanks again.

I don't know, 2 years ago a F-35 was known as a pretty unreasonable ask (ppl got laughed at pretty heavy for mentioning "F-35 for DCS"), so i guess nothing is (un)reasonable anymore..? But i agree: i might have gotten ahead of myself a little bit and we could at least wait til the Chinese Military announces the aircrafts official designation - imagine it's not gonna be the J-36 but somethign else.. We wanna get things correct, don't we?

Hi @Jakes, Yea, i'm aware of designer's notes point 1, hence i wrote "That's also not the biggest of issues thx to the hint #1 in mission maker's notes." Also yes, of course i waited for the yellow shirt "picture" to appear before saluting the 2nd time. Same procedure as described in my initial post about Olive not being found airborne (minus differences where explicitly mentioned like R/T check), which you confirmed was a bug supposed to be fixed with this current update. Just to clarify: the issues described in my reply after the update rolled out is a completely different one than Olive not getting airborne. I cannot even get to that state anymore. And as initially mentioned as well, i also flew the mission successfully at one point a while before the SC deck crew updates, so i am pretty certain it's not an unsupported mod issue. Besides, i'm not really using any besides some of the "all time favs" like srs and nttr range tgts. However the issue i'm seeing now is something that arrived exactly with the SC deck crew update, which then was said to be fixed. So, respectfully, i think assuming the recent mission fix by BD somehow re-introduced the apparently fixed issue introduced with the SC deck crew update by ED, specially with the deck being as heavily populated as it is now, is kind of fair. To be fully transparent: I coincidentally ran a "dcs_updater repair" (full/deep repair) a day or 2 prior to testing the "fixed" mission because i was indeed testing a mod for once. I thought it was interesting but it turned out to be absolutely not my cup of tea, and after deleting it some residue was left, which appears to be fixed by the repair i ran subsequently. I guess i can still delete fxo and metashaders2 but honestly: i'm pretty sure that never really helped me with anything up to now. I consider it one of those "can't hurt" things, so yea... It's sad, because in theory (when they work) these R1 campaigns are awesome and almost magical at times, but as it stands i cannot recommend any campaigns at all. Feels like for every 1 hr of fun, it takes 2 or 3 hrs of frustration regularly - at least that's what i experienced with campaigns ever since i first started buying them, almost through the board.. I think Red Flags are the only exception and they always worked fine, but they're very simple and boring compared to what BD is cooking, obviously.