SMH

Not every function is realistically on the HOTAS. And how do you map, say, the OSBs to a HOTAS without running out of buttons and modifiers? (As well as creating a nightmare to remember.) Sorry, but VR just feels half baked to me. When I can reach out with my real hand, see a virtual hand (including arm) in its place, and naturally flip switches and turn dials, I'll consider it. Foveal rendering with vari-focus lenses are a must too. Maybe we'll be there in another 10 years. For now, I'll stay on a screen and not knock my drink off my desk.

THAT is why I'm completely uninterested in VR! LOL!

Yeah, it does. If it was a Windows feature it would work on any app, which obviously it doesn't. It's a DirectX feature.

(DirectX is a Windows-only technology.) (And one we'll be abandoning if we ever go to Vulcan. Hence my question.)

It's been fine for me. In fact, I have to give it about one full notch of right aileron trim for it to want to stay level. (That seems wrong. And yes my rudder is trimmed and I've verified my stick is centering correctly. This doesn't happen with any other DCS aircraft.) Haven't noticed any interaction with the pitch axis either. (Though the pitch axis is incredibly touchy as we appear to have our C of G too far aft.)

I thought I already said that.

Just discovered this while trying to read an old message in the text radio-chat. When it's open for text entry, you can use the mouse wheel to scroll the text back. (Very slowly -- seems an unintentional feature?) However, only scrolling the mousewheel the other way will return it back to real-time. So it's easy to get into a state where you're behind in the text you're seeing, not even seeing your own recent messages until they scroll by later.

I doubt it. They're baked in as well, they're just reflection mapped instead of painted on the glass. (Yes, the bitmap that's reflected is dynamic, but only in its lighting/shadows. Try changing the color of your cockpit and watch them not change along with it.) It's not like we got a frame rate hit when they switched to "actual" moving reflections. We've had them on stuff like building glass forever.

Good catch. Note that for a temporary work-around you can change this yourself in the snapviews.lua file. (You need to save the snapviews first in the Mosquito to create the section in the file (RAlt+Num0). Good idea to disable TrackIR before you do so nothing moves from the default positions before you save them.)

They don't and, are they actually?

Just put the new kind in. Why are new modules are getting built with old technology?

I said I would, not that I did. It concerns me that you have reading comprehension issues. That might explain a lot of this, actually.

I wonder if this is another symptom of the tail-heaviness many of us feel the FM currently has.

I find it very unlikely that they trim out in cruise to anywhere but very close to the center position. Why would you make the center not the center? And, again, this strong nose-heavy trim is an indicator that we're tail heavy, which explains the extreme touchiness in the pitch axis that real Mosquito pilots don't report. Why would they make the aircraft like this when it's just a matter of balancing it correctly to make it far more stable? It's clearly wrong, and so is the Spitfire. (I'd bet you money that they started with the Spitfire model for this one.)

Why is that anyway? I don't see any evidence of tearing either way, so why would we ever want the slower rate? (Which appears to always go to whole number divisors of the display frame rate.) Alt+Enter seems to be built into DirectX itself. It's not re-mappable in the sim. (Will we be losing this when we go to Vulcan? Would be fine by me, as long as we get the higher frame rate rather than the lower one.)

I wouldn't expect them to be. A sim has to scale its physics against real-time, it can't trust that its frame rate is any given value or consistent. Easy to determine. Just race two different setups (or the same setup with different graphics settings) and see if one takes longer to move a trim wheel through the full range of travel than the other. I'd be very surprised if that's the case.

PLEASE reconsider your position on this. I don't know how you can argue against video evidence.

How is the sound stopping you from descending?

Not every update does that but once in a while they seem to make changes that require keybinds to be completely redone. Fortunately it's pretty rare. Anyway, once you've disabled Stickykeys in Windows they'll never bother you again so you can keep the default DCS keybinds. (Oh, sorry, I see you actually use them. Why? They're kind of for the disabled but you're obviously abled enough to fly DCS.)

We need skip bombing too. Bombs shouldn't always stick to the first piece of ground they touch, depending on the angle they hit and ground surface type. They should bounce and slide a bit, losing energy as they go. Structures as well, the goal being to get the bomb to stop inside the structure then explode after your plane is well past it. (Though sometimes they should go right through if they have sufficient horizontal velocity and the building is small or insubstantial enough.)

No mapping for "Jettison Fuselage Stores", at least not that I can find. Searched the Controls setup for "jettison", "fuselage", "store", "drop", "tank", "release"... nothing! Not a big deal for me as I can use the mouse to click it, but obviously should be there.

I'm using keys mapped to prop pitch. Do you have them on an analog axis? If so, maybe it's moving slightly which is undoing their position? I'll try changing the prop pitch on purpose with it feathered and see if I can reproduce. Thanks I'll test that too.

I thought there was an issue too until I realized I didn't have to hold the button down the whole time it's feathering.

The cockpit layout is quite different too as the navigator's side of the front panel is mostly gone to provide access to the bomb aiming station. They'd have to re-do half the cockpit in both internal and external models. Big job! http://www.nmusafvirtualtour.com/cockpits/WWII_tour/WWII-20.html A night fighter is just the fighter-bomber we already have with some extra antennas on the nose and wings, flame dampers over the exhausts, and radar instruments for the navigator on the inside. I know it's a special type of DCS player who would like to operate realistic primitive radar sets, but I'm that type. (I'd even pay a few more bucks for it. Assuming the flight model issue gets worked out first.) As for AI, I don't care. I'd be perfectly happy if you could only do it in multicrew. Would encourage the use of multicrew and forming partnerships with other pilots.