Callsign112

The last two planes released by ED are Allied, so I am really hoping we see an Axis plane, or two next. Does anyone know if ED has ever talked about doing a Ju 87? Like why isn't this a thing yet?

I am not really sure what you mean by "mesh together", but nothing is saying you can't use the Mosquito/P-47 on the Normandy map. I bought both maps because it really helps expand my options in terms of mission building, not to mention any on-line servers I might want to join, but if you own Normandy then go ahead and enjoy using it. So I don't agree with your statement regarding the benefit of the Mosquito/P-47 being confined to the Channel map. When the WWII version of the Marianas is released, you will be able to use them there as well if that is what you want to do.

If we compare the Yak 52 to the CEII, a purpose built Biplane, the Yak has about .16HP/lb while the CEII has about .19HP/lb. The Yak has a wing area of 15 mSquared with a stall speed of 56 mph, while the CEII has a wing area of 11.6 mSquared and a stall speed of 58 mph. While the CEII is purpose built to perform aerobatics and has better performance specs, the Yak is well recognized as a very decent aerobatics platform where it is used by pilots the world over for that very purpose. But the questions I asked were related to your assertion that the Yak is going to teach bad techniques. IMO, learning to fly any plane requires the pilot to acquaint him/herself with the plane being used. You have to learn how the plane responds in-flight and go from there. There are no bad techniques, just the technique that fits the plane being used. I am assuming that you wouldn't go from a CEII to a Yak 52 and expect the plane to handle the same, would you?

... which will be fixed.

Couldn't agree more. The list of what is missing seems almost endless at this point. But in a way, the Mustang trainer breaks from tradition at ED in that I think it might be the only module not to be correctly modeled. The WWII scene deserves a trainer, and the Mustang trainer is just sitting there waiting patiently. Still one of the most beautiful planes to fly though.

I understand you mean the ED version of the TF-51D, because the real aircraft had controls in the back seat. Wish they would model that even if they added the AT-6.

The thing I don't get is if I buy a plane, or two, or three, and a map, or two, and a flight stick/head tracker, along with a computer rig to run it all, why would I want to pay a monthly fee for something I can buy for $15.00? And if my mission is any good at all, why wouldn't the people in my group just pick up the assets pack to run the mission knowing how much I labor over making them? But we do need more assets just to make things more interesting.

Reading your post, it seems like you are confusing/mixing up a number of points/ideas/issues. First of all the comment you are quoting was in response to someone suggesting I use the Mustang trainer in place of the Yak. So the comment was in reference to the differences between the Yak and a tail-dragger. The Yak has a lot more in common with most Jets in terms of how it takes off and lands then it has with the Mustang. The Yak generates a lot of lift, and while it is not the most powerful plane, it is also very light. But can you explain what you mean by being easier in a faster more powerful aircraft? Like how would an F14 Tomcat do in an aerobatics competition? Its certainly faster, and I think safe to say more powerful! And what bad techniques will the Yak teach you? Can you explain the basic maneuvers and how the flight model is going to contribute to learning the wrong techniques? Because I am interested to know.

I will second the A8 as an easier fly. It is much easier to keep level. But if your looking for the Ferrari in the pack to jump in where most of the business is down low, go with the Messerschmitt. But to be honest, IMO you are really going to want at least one plane on each team, and I can't recommend the P51 more. The ED version is simply pure pleasure. The beautiful thing is you can use the free trainer to get a taste before committing. But to be honest, I really don't think you will be disappointed in any of the available modules. Do a little research first to get an idea of what each of the modules is about in terms of the type of flying to expect as a preface to what your looking for, and I think you will pretty much get what your expecting as advertised. Good luck with your decision.

I don't have the plane yet, but if you are wondering what things you can expect to be improved with your Yak 52 module, have a look at the bugs and problems sub forum to see what has been reported. I think the main issues seem to bee with the turn/slip indicator, oil temp/engine, knee board functionality, multi-crew sync, smoke toggle switch, and rudder control. I have spent the last several weeks learning about ED's version of the Yak 52, and am looking forward at picking it up during the next sale because contrary to popular belief and like every other thing bought, sold, traded, the value of DCS World goes up during a sale.

Adding coordinates: LAT N49 31'9" Long E0 44'44"

Adding coordinates: LAT N49 28'43" Long E0 31'13"

Adding coordinates: LAT N49 28'14" Long E0 28'0"

Adding coordinates: LAT N49 19'41" Long E0 39'53"

Judging by the amount of comments left on YouTube, it seems to have generated a fair bit of interest. I will be following to see how well he utilizes the assets pack to make it interesting for the participants.

Server is now Live. The Server name is "Growling Sidewinder World At War Server" There is no Password and is located on DCS Open beta, you will need the Channel Map, 1 World War 2 Module and the World War 2 Assets Pack. In Order to join. "As for the giveaway Sponsored by Syko, Join the Discord Using this Link: https://discord.gg/kA6x5R4 and look in the "ww2 Giveaway" Channel to Enter. You can win 1x world war 2 module and 1x channel map more giveaway details located in the announcements channel of the discord."

Like the title says. Track attached. Normandy 2.7.trk

As the title says. Track attached. Normandy 2.7.trk

Like the title says. Track attached. Normandy 2.7.trk

Like the title says. Track attached. Normandy 2.7.trk

So I was able to have a look at my system performance on Normandy after the latest Stable update. In terms of FPS, I am seeing a modest improvement of maybe 5 FPS at about 50 - 100 feet. Where I was around 32 FPS, I am sitting closer to 40 now. It still drops down to about 30 over heavily populated areas though, but I am not seeing any stutter, and no more white flashes across the sky. Where I am really seeing an improvement though is over water, which is surprising as I thought the update concerned mostly forest areas. Maybe it has to do with DCS 2.7, not sure. But I am now at a solid 55 FPS 50 - 100 feet over water. Also after driving around the map a bit more, I wonder if ED/Ugra (the map makers) ever consider trying to improve performance just by cleaning up the maps a bit. It seems on the Normandy map at least, they could probably delete a lot of trees without having any noticeable effect on map appearance from the air and on the ground. In some areas, there are clumps of trees that actually look out of place and should probably be removed. But I am at least able to get a very smooth low level flight in SP, which suites my needs. Sys specs: Win 10 64bit AMD FX 6300 3.5Ghz RX 580 8GB 16 GB RAM

Here's to hoping your wrong.

I'm not really sure, but one would think it would mostly be duplicating what is already there. But I also think it would add more to the SIM then it would add in terms of the work needed to make it happen. It is all of the little things added together that make DCS World so great IMO. Take the recent news about the new SAM system coming soon, was the lack of a working SA-5 preventing people from getting into DCS, likely not, but its addition brings a lot to the SIM and adds another reason that will likely attract more people in as the simulation gets completed.

In terms of the resources, it probably wouldn't be that much to tackle considering the FM is all there. In terms of bringing in more new players, it is currently the tool being used to introduce people to DCS WWII, so modeling the rear seat would simply add to that ability. I agree, new players would be less interested in system failures, but groups of virtual pilots/squadrons might be. That is a little like saying the MP experience in a video games isn't that exciting.... because its not like actually flying in a real war. Its not just about getting a ride in a video game, its about introducing people, connecting with people, practicing with people, or just simply using DCS World to simulate something that was actually a thing.... which is kinda the point to DCS World.

No one said the current lack of rear controls in the Mustang trainer is THE obstacle stopping new players from joining. It is simply a relevant feature that has not been implemented, and like the other available trainers it would be nice to have this feature added to a tail dragger. This thread is about having a multi-crew war bird for training. The OP made a great suggestion to have the AT-6 added. While it would be great to see a full fidelity version come to DCS, a quicker route to a WWII trainer would be the TF-51D already in the game. And what makes the Mustang trainer relevant to this discussion is that it is the free module that comes with the game, so it is in a unique position to help make DCS World more accessible to people not already in. Unlike the Mustang, if a full fidelity version of the AT-6 was added, you would likely have to purchase the module first to get access to the training features. And if we look at the two free planes, the one module lets new and old players alike experience some of the most interesting capabilities of DCS World from a jet aircraft perspective. The other gives the new player a taste of what DCS WWII has to offer. The free jet offers a pretty complete experience, while the free war bird is only half there in a way. Adding this feature would only be completing the actual plane being modeled, but more than that, the feature would actually be useful especially for groups/squadrons interested, and who may also be in the best position to attract new players. Not sure where this is coming from, but @Tippis wasn't trying to suggest anything negative toward the OP's request. While you could say that every comment ever made on this entire forum is based on personal opinion/preference, @SharpeXB is using his opinion to suggest the discussion started in this thread is irrelevant, unimportant, or not needed. Its one thing to object to a suggestion/comment with valid reason, but what valid point is SharpeXB adding to this discussion when other training aircraft already exist in the game. Training aircraft don't sell well? The Mustang trainer is free, and is used as a tool to introduce new people to DCS World. Adding to that capability could only be a good thing, and I understood that Tippis was simply pointing that out. Imagine your running an active squadron, and you want to organize a "welcome to DCS World" event. Having the rear seat in the free Mustang modeled would give you the opportunity to take anyone joining your Discord for a spin. You could use it to practice system failures as part of your squadrons pilot training. Or you could use @LithiumR suggestion to let close family and friends experience DCS. Regardless of why someone might see value in it, I think the OP's suggestion is excellent and I would love to see the AT-6 added. The Mustang trainer was a real plane and asking to have it modeled correctly isn't asking anything more than what is being asked of every other module in the SIM.