UrgentSiesta

FWIW: Normandy instant action free flight. 14C 29.92 FL 130 Everything closed tight Trimmed to nearly straight & level RPM 2700 Man 60 Blower stage 1 IAS 269kn TS 341kn

I haven't checked yet... Is the Brake-only extension assignable on the joystick...?

This is how all non-Fly-by-Wire aircraft are IRL, especially Hi Po props. E.g., Tomcat needs frequent trimming, too. While I agree it needs work (and that's shocking given how long it's been in development), this is the intrinsic nature of Early Access. And I can't think of an EA module that didn't need work on release... VR is still a niche user group, about 20% at most from the figures I've seen. Flight model...? It's reasonable if you fly reasonably, even in combat. Vs other simulated Corsairs, the value, fidelity and performance is, IMHO, very good. BUT, as I and others have said, given how long it's taken to get this bird to release, I'm not gonna hold my breath on quick updates to FM or systems. But all in all, I'm happy it's in game - WW2 carrier ops (and PTO) are loooong overdue.

Could be - I'm definitely flying a bit high and a bit fast - on purpose - as I get settled in to the plane. Only crash I've had so far was because I left the tail wheel unlocked for a shore landing. IME with DCS, any full deflection control movements have usually caused issues. I'll see how I fare, and if I need to dial it back for CV ops, I surely will. But so far, so good.

I'm flying with Pitch at 70% saturation with absolutely no issues in a TM Warthog. IMHo, good landings are way more about power & speed management.

I read the linked article. Seems like 6 months to me, which isnt too bad for a war that lasted 4 years and where aircraft generations were measured in half a year or so. Anyhow, all good info. I read it - thanks for sharing. And yes it's enlightening. Even if after reading it we still have somewhat differing perspectives. And yeah, I'll pop off whenever I like. Thanks, Gramps!!

After some additional reading, yep, you're right. It seems like the Marines needed Wildcat replacements immediately, and since the Corsairs were already available, it went from there... .

The Corsair was in service WELL before the Hellcat.

Corsair should handily outrun the 109K on the deck, at least according to the charts I've found so far...

Nonsense. Would you say the same about the Hellcat or Wildcat just because they, too can carry bombs & rockets....? The reason the Corsair garnered a rep for ground pounding comes from it's service introduction as a land based aircraft. And in those places, the main enemy combatants were ground forces attempting to overrun the airfields from which the Corsairs were operating. And the initial land basing was only because the USN couldn't figure out how to land it on an aircraft carrier. Once the Royal Navy figured that out for us, it was straight to sea as a fighter. Avengers and Helldivers were the dedicated attackers.

Corsair was literally designed for high speed. Close cowled, coolers embedded in wing leading edges rather than protruding, completely enclosed landing gear bays, spot welds/flush riveted, etc. IIRC, it was the first aircraft to exceed 400mph in level flight, when most other front line aircraft were in the 300-350 (and slower) range.

My (limited) understanding is that Corsair isn't a turn fighter. It was designed for extremely high speed & performance, which usually came at the expense of maneuverability. 109 is somewhat similar, so I wouldn't necessarily expect one to be better than the other. Greg's Airplanes and Automobiles did a theoretical analysis of Corsair & Hellcat vs 109 & 190. I'll have to rewatch to see where that netted out

This is really a "you" problem, not a DCSW problem. For e.g., the F-14 doesn't fly anything like the FA-18, and it requires quite a bit of rudder, trim and power adjustments on a very frequent basis. Helicopters are very much the same. MANY WW2 pilots & planes crashed due to the challenging and unforgiving nature of warbirds. You need to do some research. You need to adjust your joystick saturation & curves significantly per the many guides available, and most of all, you need to PRACTICE. Then again. And then some more. Eventually, it'll click for you, and once it does, you'll have a great time The journey is worth it.

Thanks! This looks like a Hellcat pattern. Are the Vspeeds the same as for F4U?

Honest question: why does this matter to you?

@Tom Kazansky Just wanted to say Thank You for this info. Absolutely works for me . I just finished building a new gaming PC and have a fresh, non-modded install of DCSW & Hornet and this was driving me crazy over the weekend. I never had the issue on my old gaming rig, and I thought I had missed some updated procedure for INS align or something... Since I don't see this on any other DCSW module I have, I'm hoping ED can add Tolerance for Hornet AP similar to the other Modules.

I just had this problem on a new build computer with a fresh install of DCS & Hornet (and an old TM Warthog HOTAS). Thanks to advice in the other linked post, I'm able to work around it by just giving a *slight* jiggle to the joystick Pitch just after hitting BALT / RALT. I haven't run into this problem on any of the many other DCSW modules I have. Seems like Hornet AP might be just a touch too sensitive...?

FWIW, I got this error after installing aircraft addons for Prepar3D.

@IronMike many thanks for that update! Looking forward to (trying) to find time to explore them for all those modules Would you please expand a bit on MSFS plans? So far, we have F-14. Are there plans for other modules or updates to MSFS Tomcat?

One thing I always appreciate are creative solutions to difficult challenges. This version of the J-8 is the very essence of that ethos, AND will bring a credible Full Fidelity OpFor aircraft to a game that desperately needs them. After seeing the initial quality and ongoing enhancements to their JF-17, I will definitely be adding this J-8 to my hangar. I guess the hard part is that there can only be a few "loopholes" like this to build modules from... I've said it elsewhere, but I think PLAAF/PRC are missing out on fantastic PR & sales opportunities to promote their weapons systems to the world. They should be supporting Deka rather than blocking them.

You can hardly throw a rock in the UK and not hit some airfield that took part in either or both world wars... Farnborough was bombed by the Germans in 1940. Heathrow was there since 1930 under different names, and seems to have been a test/eval field for Fairey, and had a squadron of Hurricanes based there. What's so historically inaccurate about them?

What later grew into Heathrow was an airfield from 1930 on. 1940: No. 229 Squadron Hurricanes from RAF Northolt were sent to the Great West Aerodrome (future Heathrow) while there was a threat of enemy attack on Northolt. There is interesting intrigue in the history, too - it was fronted as a B-29 base (yes, B-29), but was absolutely a scheme to build a commercial international airport... Anyhow, the more airfields, the better.

I really appreciate the ambitious nature of the map, and already consider it money well spent (as long as it continues to be improved ). It's simply refreshing to have something other than desert to fly over. Sooooo many great potential scenarios here... Biggest ask (for me) is to get the unmarked but existing little airfields marked on the F10 map, and work on adding the other IRL airfields in the region (particularly in Chile, etc.). I realize there aren't all that many IRL, but that just makes it more important to add them in Having more airfields to operate from will make the map far more usable and enjoyable even without other long term improvements. Many thanks to the Razbam team for this passion project - I hope this venture literally pays off for you, AND that you can find time to bring us other playgrounds to enjoy! EtA: I, too, would enjoy a High Definition texture option, a la Orbx TrueEarth products!

same vid (good!) still wondering what the drama was over...

I don't think an exact number went out, but True Grit did mention that it would be in the same ballpark as the other modern modules. I'd be shocked if it's a penny less than Tomcat/Hornet/Viper/Thunder/Warthog(!), so you've got to get at least $80 in your piggy bank And speaking of helicopters, I'm kinda thinkin' that'll be what Apache comes out at, as well. I'm sure you have time, too. Even though it's been in-dev for a year-ish, Typhoon is gonna take "awhile"...