antagonist

I have to admit, I would not mind the D. That said, a lot of the differences between the B and D are down to digitalization, not installation of new components outright, right?

Considering that's a Swiss bird, the 4x2 AMRAAM armament underwing was indeed certified for flight.

That would be my guess as well. E: Did some more digging, and according to posts on another forum, the Hornet has a LAU-7 launcher on the wingtip that only accomodates AIM-9 derivatives. The Rhino does have a LAU-127 rail on its wingtips which is capable of holding the AIM-120, but there doesn't exist a flight clearance for that configuration. https://combatace.com/forums/topic/48322-aim-120-on-hornet-wingtips/

I did a quick search for photos regarding this and came up with exactly nothing. You have a link to a picture corroborating that?

They will never add the ̶F̶a̶l̶c̶o̶n̶ Viper because they know if they did, there would be people on here spamming Dos Gringos music videos all day, every day. ;)

The highest approved rating for the V-1650-7 in US service was 75": http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/44-1_Fuel-16March44.pdf The P-51D used the same engine, but the highest boost clearance I can find for it in US service is indeed 72". That said, the British ran their Mustangs at 25 lb/in² - 81": http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/tk589.html http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustang3-clearance-25lbs.jpg I should also note the P-51's radiator was around three times as effective as the Spitfire Mk IX's, which also ran at +25 lb/in² and is a much slower plane by design both in level flight as well as combat tactics used.

Well, considering the plane was meant to fly above central Europe, I think we can assume the engine limitations are meant to be taken as limits for more extreme temperatures at the outset, with your test being smack dab in the middle of the ambient temperature range the engine was designed to run at.

Unfortunately, Malaysia only has F/A-18Ds. I share your sentiment on the skin, though.

Tell me how a plane with lower p/w ratio and CLmax can sustain a turn better. I'm waiting.

This the part where I tell you to have your account renamed to 'Scapegoat'. Don't give them ideas the majority of us won't like. :(

Actually, this is incorrect to my understanding. The plane had finished development, but due to legislature in the US was essentially prevented from being bought by anyone interested in it.

To add to this, the main difference between the B Heatblur are creating and the D you want is the switch to digital systems. By my understanding capability is largely unaffected.

Yes please.

Anyways, I just found this: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/150grade/ppf-20june44.pdf Up to 65" without water, 70" with. Yes please.

Yeah, if you bought the bundle, you're golden. (Also, holy crap that fog eats FPS...)

Alright, apparently, the WW2 asset pack is required for the instant action missions Normandy ships with. Tested with the 109K module. So right now, if you only bought the map, you're boned. (And yes, I bought the bundle, that doesn't mean I agree with this if the choice was deliberate...if it wasn't and this is simply just another issue with the release being an alpha build, still not cool, but somewhat forgivable.)

The torrent file is actually compressed, IIRC.

Nope, from what I've been told by Hiromachi, if you don't have the asset pack installed, you cannot use the Normandy map at this point, not even for test flight. That said, he only tested the P-51, so maybe it works with other planes... I'm installing ATM, I will test it myself sometime today.

So essentially, if one were to buy a newly released module off of Steam and had everything else bought off of the DCS shop, you'd essentially need two installations of the game? There would be no way to combine them into one client?

Never forget, Old 666 got almost completely trashed by 5 20 mm shells.

Around 500 kg, give or take.

Well yeah. :P That's kind of THE prerequisite. Don't want to Spitfire out of control. :P

Hmm...I can only tell you how I TO with the plane: 1. Trim full nose heavy, apply full brakes, elevator, right rudder and aileron. 2. Increase throttle gradually until you reach 1.2-1.3 ATA. 3. Disengage brakes, pick up speed. Put ailerons in neutral the moment you feel the plane is starting to slip right. You may have to apply very slight brake to keep the plane straight before the rudder becomes effective. 4. Ease pressure on the elevator until the stick is neutral or the tail has come up. Continue using rudder to keep the plane straight if needed. 5. Pull back on the elevator to lift off.

Which is going hand in hand with lowered critical altitudes. The P-47 will still hold the high ground and it will significantly outspeed any German plane starting at ~5-6 km. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-47/p47d-44-1-level.jpg

That was kind of my point. It was the same basic airframe and the same engine. The G-10 was mostly built with the large rudder just as the K-4l, and the other differences (armament and undercarriage) I did mention. :P