Richard Dastardly

Doing a fresh install of the dedi server, it's been a couple of years so I've forgotten just about everything - how do you tell it where your client install is so it can pull data files? it's trying to download 123GB, which I'd rather it didn't... Could I just link my client install as <server install>/_downloads perhaps? ( Edit: no, terrible idea, it'd delete the client install - will try making a copy though ) Edit 2: copying whole client into dedi server location & renaming to _downloads worked perfectly, if you ignore it's complaining about extra files.

You can *see* if dogfighting was now impossible by just trying it. The problem in a dogmatic - and bomber-focused - institution like the inter-war RAF and it's interface with government is making your voice heared. If you've ever had to deal with the government here then you'll likely know it's still exactly the same now. Britain had a whole empire to defend, it wasn't just about Germany. You can't really wash away every opinion as "it's easy now with hindsight" - too many forgotten lessons from WW1 had to be relearned in WW2, and honestly far too much doctrine across all services was based on wishful thinking rather than intelligence gathering & practical tests. The pressure carb just needed someone to see there was a problem first, there were people intelligent enough to devise it, if only someone important enough had asked or if only someone at Rolls had sat down and looked at the problem from a bit further away. And no, I don't believe german-style mechanical fuel injection was necessarily the best solution at the time, it's not the simplest. Too many people assume glibness when someone doesn't want to write an essay, so enough of that thanks.

There was a thread elsewhere about NFs in general - my grandfather was intimately involved with centimetric radar development ( patent level ) so I've always had an interest, but I honestly don't know how attractive any NF would be to use - 99% of the time you're going to end up staring at either blackness or the instruments wondering where you are. In the Mossie NF case a lot of hours were spent patrolling the RAF bomber stream to try & catch LW NFs, which I guess has interest of it's own but walk through a full mission of that & see if the whole thing is something you want to do a lot, and also something possible ( we're talking hundreds of heavy bombers here even if you do part of it to patrol! ). As I said elsewhere I'd buy it because of my connection, but not really sure how much I'd fly it.

For completeness, if you omit the MH you'll still get a MH serial - but you can set XV or ZY or whatever sort of RAF serial you like too. Works exactly the same on the Spitfire, on the RAF liveries for the Mustang & Jug you can set the code letters but not the serial. Or at least I haven't found a way to set the serial.

It sputters a bit rather than cuts totally with a gentle pushover, it's more of a warning now. The Merlin like everything else was the usual British mix of genius & frustrating mediocrity - the Spit & the Mustang don't suffer because the ones we have came after there'd been time to sort the details like carbs out. One might argue there was plenty of time to do that earlier, but well, I live here & I can understand it perfectly...

Compared to a single seater it's dead easy, unsurprisingly - bit of movement at takeoff with the help turned off, nothing you can't easily catch. The tail is really powerful at speed though, makes it really twitchy in pitch & yaw so you'll need to get used to that. Had no trouble handling it with a dead engine either.

That'd more ilkely be the pure bomber rather than the FB ( I think the questioner wanted to know what *our* Mossie was doing ). - The Tiffies & Jugs were more CAS & the Mossies more strike/interdiction if you want more modern roles, but they're obviously overlapping just like now. Nice selection of books! thanks folks.

Very audible from above the Merlin ( they tend to fly past here under the cliffs, so I rarely get to hear one like everyone else does! ). Quite sure there's other helicopters that have a similar sound but off the top of my head can't remember one right now.

I never mentioned design flaws with respect to the 262 engines, they were just too far ahead of their time. Metrovik had an axial flow turbojet as well, Gosters went for the centrifugal flow engine because of the same reliability issues or we'd have had reasonably similar looking Meteors ( see here: https://postimg.cc/94hbfkP4. ) The 262 wing had a lot of advanced features but was still thick, so still had compressibility problems. Etc. I don't think I said the 262 was terrible, I just ( and always have ) don't think it's amazing. Long held opinions honestly, so long that I've probably messed up some details these days. No-one's first real effort is going to be amazing, it's not like the Meteor is particularily good either. I don't want to get into a discussion of Tigers - but the germans were also mass producing Stugs instead of turreted tanks because they were quicker. Initial crewing is one issue, replacement is another ( which obviously applies to complicated aircraft too... ).

Seconded, this doesn't look like a vibrating instrument, it looks like faulty tacho sensors. Which is fine by itself if you want to model faulty sensors!

As we said elsewhere, doesn't work in SP either if you don't preload the plane in the ME.

This pretty much, it's an odd one - but have you found a pic of a FB version with a piloc-centred sight? I've found a FB cockpit with a sight that looks like it's a) inline with the stick and b) higher ( or perhaps a smaller sight ) so it's not in the way of the VSI, but no idea which FB version it's from. The cockpit is actually fairly nice given how small it is - aside from the boost dials being a bit small and the sight getting in the way, there's some stuff hidden away but usually not things you need to use a lot or in a hurry - who really cares if the starter buttons are where they are? does make the sight a bit strange.

Not sure why people really rate the jets either - the 262 ate engines ( service lifetime 9 hours if you babied it, I think? ), needed extremely careful handling & iirc while it had swept wings, the actual wing wasn't great. The Ar-234, I'll give you, albeit as a recce plane which when it appeared wasn't really much use. As a bomber it could barely carry more than a single seater. People seem to love Tiger tanks too. They're awful as tanks, but well, big numbers impress...

Taking the opportunity to fly around low level in the Mossie, the lack of hedgerows ( at least over England - not terribly familiar with that part of France ) really stands out. At altitude you can make out shapes of fields from the treerows, but generally they're bounded by hedges. Hedges might actually be cheaper to place/render too. Some hedges needed around clifftops too to break up the shapes, they look a bit sterile at the moment. There was a lot of low flying in the area, so it does make a difference.

Still does it at 25k feet so yes nothing to do with altitude. Given it doesn't go off if you pull one throttle then yes, can't really be an idle warning ( you'd expect an idle warning to stop sounding with the gear down, or sitting on the ground would be horrendous ).