Callsign112

I agree, groups of serious people have taken the time to form squadrons, set up training missions, historical missions and so on. Having the rear seat in the TF-51D modeled would only help groups like that get more out of the SIM in their effort to add realism. It could also be used to help recruit new people into both DCS World, and or a squadron. In another recent thread, someone stated that the TF-51D had little purpose in the SIM and that ED would have to throw everyone a free Hellcat to jump start DCS WWII. But I disagree, the Mustang trainer is beautifully modeled and is an excellent introduction to the WWII part of the SIM. I do agree though, in order for the Mustang trainer to fulfill its role more completely as a trainer like the SU-25T does on the jet side of things, ED should really consider modeling rear controls and adding multi-crew to the Mustang. I just opened DCS World for the first time in over 2 months, where I did a low level flight in the Mustang trainer over Normandy just to check out the latest map update. No stutters at tree-top level flying 350+ MPH. Good job Ugra!

I found this to be very useful just starting out. The video is a few years old, but it does an excellent job at explaining things simply, and touches on a lot of the basics from engine management to trimming the aircraft.

?

I think help should be here soon. They have promised to focus more on bugs once the Mosquito is put to bed. I am really hoping that focus includes the Mustang.

+1... I think this is an excellent idea, but since the TF51 is already in the SIM, wouldn't it be easier if ED just had the rear seat modeled? Modeling the rear seat in the trainer could really help draw more people in, or at least try it out with a more experienced pilot as all they would have to do is download DCS for free. I always thought it was a missed opportunity that the rear seat in the Mustang trainer wasn't modeled.

To any of the talented skinners out there, any change we could get a bomber skin for the Yak?

Yak52 3/4 mile call the ball. Roger Yak52 has the ball. Roger ball 113 Yak52 ball 4.2 come left... your high Right for line up... Right for line up... In close... Bolter bolter... Where the fcuk is he going?

My daily driver

Yes that was the thread I was talking about. I don't have time to go over the entire thread again at the moment, but I think the main point has to do with the trim tab not being modeled yet, so just waiting for that to be corrected. I think DCS will put things right when they revisit the module. But I think Yo-yo explained the current situation well, and I don't think ED is making any claims that it can't back up. Lets hope the Yak gets a revisit soon. I am pretty confident your judgment of the situation will fall in favor of ED when all is said and done. I can't wait to take it for a spin.

I don't have a real plane to compare either, but there are a number of other people that have flown the real deal and have given the DCS Yak a reasonable review. Have you, or any one else passed these concerns on to the Dev team? I know there was a fairly lengthy thread here with someone that actually owns a Yak, and I know he seemed to think there were a number of problems with the FM. Seems a little odd to me though that ED has accurately modeled everything form WWII props to modern jets, but they can't get the Yak nailed down, and especially with all the still in use examples flying around? Like how hard can it be? Have you seen this? Anyway, out of the whole description you translated, the only thing that really jumps out at me as being reasonable in terms of what you would expect without having ever tried the module is the comment on gyro vs aerodynamic forces. I would expect it to be easy to correct in the Yak just like he is suggesting the RL plane to be, but I can't say in any of the YouTube videos I've watch the authors struggled to correct for the engine at full power, or even commented on that point. So he is the first person I hear making this comment. In terms of rudder control, I linked a couple of videos from another person that owns a Yak in the shared thread below, and he doesn't seem to express the same opinion. But anyway, its my next prop, so if there are any discrepancies with the FM, I hope ED will get them worked out.

I don't speak Russian. Can you translate? Was he saying the DCS Yak 52 requires less rudder during take-off? Regarding the unfinished state, ED has announced that it will get back to work on the Yak as time allows. Regarding FM's, they can and are updated all the time. If the issue is real, it should be reported in the bugs section where the Devs can review and fix if the issue is confirmed. As demonstrated in all DCS modules, I am fascinated how software is used to model the look and function of mechanical systems, and the Yak 52 is no exception here. Being beautifully modeled, it is the Yak's simplicity that creates part of the charm for me. But I am sure you are not alone, as there is probably a large following that will be happy when the Yak finally gets finished.

Part of the problem might be your understanding of the business model. You are comparing EA, which has games on console, pc, and mobile to DCS World. The subscription service EA offers is only a part of their total revenue in any given year. It doesn't really fit as a comparison here. Depending on how you define "small cost", you might be surprised what ED would have to charge for a subscription service.

I think it will probably be more like Hellcats and Corsairs vs A8's in disguise.

Did we hit a nerve What does me waiting for the next sale have to do with the value DCS World offers as a SIM? And speaking of value, you forgot to mention that the Su-25T is free after repeating how awesome it is. Which other full featured SIM offers 3 free maps and 2 free planes? The fact that you bought your last plane during a sale Stevan has no connection with the excellent value DCS offers as a SIM. I will be very happy if ED throws everyone another free fully modeled plane, but I'm not holding my breath waiting for it. And the Mustang trainer is an excellent bit of kit. Some people just like flying around Stevan. And anyone just starting out especially if they are not really familiar with flying could easily spend several weeks getting proficient at just the basics. I know, I was one of them. Its a tail dragger man! And I can't disagree more with your opinion that there is nothing as awesome as the Su-25 for WWII. There is in fact in no specific order the Mustang, the K4, the A8, the Spit, the D9, the P47, the I-16, and soon to be the Mosquito. Just to clarify though, the next time you give everyone you insight on what sells, whats on development, and which modules have been abandoned, we can understand that your reference is the amount of posts made on the forum? Good to know. I thought you had some kind of inside track, that is why I asked. So as far as you and I both know, ED could have sold hundreds of WWII modules during the last sale, and the order modules get developed could be a completely different issue. But I'm with you on the assets thing brother. According to a previous posts, ED is planning assets for both the Marianas and Europe, while Magnitude 3 might be including some Pacific assets with its Corsair. @Silver_Dragon also mentioned that the 262 is still on the table and there might be another plane in the works from OctopusG. So if all of that materializes, we could see a good boost in assets and 3 more planes in addition to the Mosquito.

199... is the BC or AD? But yeah I hear you, its just that we have a lot more missile cruisers/Destroyers with almost nothing to do WWII naval battles.

@Silver_Dragon, if it is not too much trouble I was just wondering if it would be possible to have a list of all the units included in Combined Arms over in its sub-forum?

Thanks for the clarifications @Silver_Dragon, this is all a little over my head so I appreciate your insight. I think the main point I was trying to make is that ED has covered a lot of ground in the last 8 years in terms of developing a digital combat simulator, and I didn't even mention the 7 maps. I think its easy to get wrapped up in the scenario that all ED has to do is model a plane without realizing, or considering what goes into making the whole thing work. And thanks for the dateline update, I think that is what the OP was asking for here.

I'm not opposed to having them all, its just that WWII is really lacking in terms of navy. But following on @upyr1, if they did an IOWA class, then you would think having both would not be a major issue. I know there are some really good mods out there, and it is not that I do not appreciate all the hard work the community has put in, its just that I don't like running mods. I run the stable version with no mods. I find that it gives me the best performance/experience. I am not a tech wizard, and hate troubleshooting problems every time a patch comes down the line. What I would really like to see is ED welcome some of the indie Devs work into the DCS fold. They could ensure that everything gets reviewed with a fine-tooth comb and that anything accepted meets with ED's high standard. But this would help give recognition to the indie Dev's, speed development of the DCS World platform, and would also cater to ED's entire customer base as it would include people like me that prefers to run official content only.

Well actually the WWII side of the navy is most in need, so why not a WWII version?

@greco.bernardi, you raise a lot of good points and sharing our opinions is what the forum is for. I couldn't agree with you more, 8 years is a long time to wait for something to finish. But like you, I am not on the inside so all I can do is guess really as to the direction of things to come. The only thing I think we can all be certain of though is that circumstances cause even the best laid plans to change. I certainly don't have the history you have with DCS, but looking back, I wonder if a lot of the delays/changed plans weren't caused in a way by the evolution of computer technology itself and the demands we put on it. In other words, the constant demand for more graphics, more effects, more realism is constantly moving the bar for what is acceptable, which affects everything in the loop including the SIM's core engine. So if we dissect the last 8 years into what was done, in addition to things like core updates, damage models, clouds, propellers, DCS World now has 24 jets, 10 piston planes, 6 helicopters, 3 tech packs, and 6 navigation modules. My hope is that once ED finalizes the new graphics API that is supposed to happen by the end of this year, most of the big ticket house keeping items will be dealt with at least for a while, and we will see the development of things like assets speed up a little.

Regarding the war birds, yes it would be nice to get something for free, but DCS already represents the best value SIM on the market IMO, not to mention the most realistic. Download DCS World for free and you get 3 maps (Marianas WWII arriving soon), a fully functional SEAD attack plane, and a fully functional WWII trainer. As a highly detailed learning SIM, the TF51 serves its purpose very well IMO. The TF51 is meant to introduce new players to real world startup, engine management, taxi, take-off, radio communications, navigation, and landing. Anyone not familiar with flight in a real plane could spend weeks, or even months learning just those basics. And the advanced flight model of the TF51 makes it the prefect lead-in to flying the Mustang in a combat role, at which point the player can decide whether he/she wants to stay with the Mustang, or venture out in another direction. But the TF51 itself is a beautiful plane to get your feet wet with in DCS World. The Su-25T rounds the initiation phase out IMO, because it gives the new player a taste for the look and feel of aerial combat. This includes the ability to join MP servers. So you can actually download DCS World and enjoy if for an untold amount of time without spending a penny. I don't know of another SIM that has the same level of detail as DCS where you can do the same. Add as your first purchase Combined Arms, and you have the capability to control your simulated battles in ways other SIMs could only dream of. But I am always left wondering after reading your posts where you get your information from. Do you have actual sales data? This is just a question, so please don't take it as a challenge. But you often include in your discussion comments about sales, and how that affects which module get developed, and so on. So I was just wondering if you actually have data on how many people downloaded which module, and how many people ED has working on each module/project? Or are you just going by your gut feeling when you say things like "WW2, is a niche.. A HUGE niche. And it only accounts for a sliver of the DCS players", or "sales are the foreteller of development".

I couldn't agree with the highlighted text more. The planes in DCS WWII are amazing, but what makes those planes really shine for me is the environment I fly them in. The maps/assets are as important to me as the planes themselves. Have a look at the recent promotional video for the Mosquito and try and convince me the rich environment it is flying through isn't a major part of what makes it a great promotional video. Regarding the DCS WWII future, my guess is that because of all the major projects/house keeping that ED has done this past year, we will probably see more in the way of assets after the WWII version of the Marianas is released. But I think @Rudel_chw has hit the nail on the head so to speak, because announcing plans too far in advance usually only leads to problems. Just look at the Me-262 for example. I am still hopeful that it will arrive, but because it wont arrive in the order it was expected to, a lot of people are disappointed. That being said, I agree with you in that it would be nice to get a better indication of where things are going.

@Rudel_chw, based on the few photos I have seen from your posts, I really like your flare for mission building and the way you punch up the reality of the setting. I have a couple ideas that could probably really benefit from your talent. I would also really love to see some of the great mods available be added to DCS World. Since Eagle Dynamics is so divided between its various on-going projects, maybe they could consider incorporating some of the mods out there to help speed things up. They could set the bar in terms of level of quality accepted, but let the indi dev worry about the rest.

Couldn't it be fixed by simply displaying a different fixed point of view when the canopy is open?

We are desperately in need of WWII ships. There are some really decent mods out there, but I hate using them because of all the problems they create. Maybe ED could put some of the popular mods through a really rigorous quality control process before incorporating them as part of the official DCS World collection?