Squiffy

Had some good flights tonight. Finally finished the gunnery practice completely after losing sight of the target several times. I never saw any flares but hadn't gotten my views keys or padlock keys set up yet. Then I flew some instant action and edited the formations. I wanted to practice air to air. Got to a 2 on one with the MiG-15s at equal altitude, low even, and was able to stay alive until my fuel ran out. I will tool around on invulnerable settings until I get used to how my old Hotas Cougar works. It's not so bad now that I have the Win10 64 bit drivers installed. Blacked out a couple times and got hammered with canon a few times but I am getting the feel for it. The graphics, instrumentation and simulation sure are nice. I just need to get my merge and knife fight head on timing better. I can't get to a stable bead by the time we pass each other again. Probably too slow and wallowing around too much. need more separation. Cuban 8s work pretty well with the roll and dive characteristics.

OK thanks Art. I am obviously late to the party. I had an impression DCS was still cutting edge for flight sims. But then again fligth sims may be falling by the wayside in interest. I have an xbox one and played a lot of Forza. I am a huge car guy racing fan and was taking a break from my cars this month. I bought the memory and the dls so i will try to enjoy it. Do we need the MiG-15 dl for mission building offline? I didn't see it in the menus for instant action and others. As an AI ship I mean.

I'm not sure as I am new to this sim. I did notice a similar issue in the navigation training mission for the F-86. I chalked it up to an "active pause" bug since I was using it a lot. The control popup window and my Cougar viewer both showed centered controls. I think the elevator axis gets thrown out of whack if you are in active pause too long or happen to hit it with the stick deflected. It resets fine back in windows and relaunch but not if you stay in the DCS program. Seemed to happen at any speed going through all of trim up and down.

OK no problem guys, I was just trying to allow a little honest understanding and not making any accusations. This thread is about the damage modelling getting "Fixed" correct? There must have been a problem then. I just needed to get that out of my system ;) Did any of you watch the youtube link? Yes barrel wrap is always an issue...but was it real problem for the Sabre? In the you tube video you will see that one of the Sabers guns jammed. But this could have come from a number of causes. Negative g being a big one. You all know about the gravity carburetor problem on the early Spits no? And I have to agree about the bias, X/Y/Z and copout points. I suspect that bad tactics given the well documented strengths and weaknesses of each aircraft is usually to blame. No the devs are not "Incapable" (quite good in fact) but they are not "Infallible" either. I have seen the kill ratio as high as 14 to 1 but would love to see the low number and references to the lowest. The barrel warp people complain about may be from "spray and pray" types. Good gunnery skills use short bursts. So I'm done with the 'bias' nonsense and just want to know when the fix will be out. Did anyone remember the quote "Put it in a 6g turn and keep it there"? That was a specific aerodynamic and gunnery tactic that was supposed to be developed by Sabre pilots to keep the Sabre speed up, and g loading as well, so the MiG-15 would have to pull a greater amount of g in order to pull lead, which the airframe/foil and cannons were not really capable of at that extreme, and the pilots may not have been able to do because of the lack or limitation of g suits. I am asking here, trying to figure out where that idea came from. It seems like brilliant, studied, air to air tactics and not ham-fisted SH loud-mouth fanboy bragging. The MiG-15 was a great crate, and the Sabre was too. But like many US fighters from WWII, it was a speed and energy fighter, boom and zoom, not a turning climbing monkey like the 109, Zero, and MiG-15. So I'll discard all of that out of my head and focus on asking when the fix will be out? ;)

Don't forget Robbie Reisner, Ralph Parr and "Boots Blesse. The Sabre was a great gun platform and the radar gunsight was a real advantage. At one point, the kill ratio was about 10 to 1 in favor of the Sabres, Honchos and all. Also, I don't remember hearing anything at all about barrel warp in the Sabres 50s. That's a little whacky if you ask me. the Sabre had a tight bullet grouping, just like the P-38 and this gave the aircraft a good punch as well as longer range without even including the cannon. I also remember some comment like "Put it in a 6g turn and keep it there. I'm on my way." This was a guaranteed defeat of the slow canon muzzle velocity. I could have sworn that was Robin Olds but it may have come from his time in F-4s v MiG-21s since I just figured out he did not serve in Korea. Don't know how I got that confused? I wonder if he did but had to "deny" it because it was secret? ;) Just kidding. This forum sight is a .ru site. IL-2, Lock On and the DCS contributors including Eagle Dynamics, 777 (Rise of flight) and the Fighter collection have all been working together in some form for more than 10 years. They have produced wonderful sims and I don't hold it against them if there was a touch of "fanboy" attitude towards the Russian aircraft. And what about the geography? It could also be just an oversight. Still, here's to hoping it gets fixed.