Richard Dastardly

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 ).

You can do the same thing with vJoy & something like Joystick.Gremlin too, it's just unnecessary faff

Seconded. I haven't tried pre-arming yet, but starting from parking in hot or cold start in SP has given me hung wing bombs if I load them with the mission running. And MP, obviously.

The amount of movement for a quick bump of a trum button. Obviously if we all had rotary controls it'd solve it, but a binary control like a hat feels awkwardly aggressive. My other issue was not that it's very responsive in pitch - I'm fine with that - it's that it feels longditudinally a little bit unstable, which combined with the aggressive trim does not make life very comfortable.

Well, yes - I don't think there really was another Mosquito ( there was a fairly close Soviet bird I forget the name of ), probably the first actually multirole aircraft. I don't think an 88 would really be much more work - the gunner stations aren't any more complicated than a Huey, unlike allied heavies with power turrets. Something like a C-6 has a solid nose too so that drops a station. Maybe down the road somewhere.

Yes! and the Austin K2 ambulance ( the Americans used that too iirc ), and the AEC Matador tankers. I'm a little curious if we can have trailer trains for proper land vehicles, rather than statics. I mean we have trains, but there's many shortcuts to doing the physics there.

I think a flyable 88 might be a good thing, it's almost as multirole as the Mossie. I guess we do also have a B-17 model, but if a US heavy is going to be made the B-24 was more versatile. Are people really going to want to fly Stukas when practically anything including our flyable twin will eat them alive? I seem to remember the 88 had dive brakes as well ( someone else confirm that tho ). So, no Tiffie/Tempest even though the Typhoon was in the original list? ah well. Spit XIVs are readily available to clamber over. Each side needs a CAS aircraft, given how much of DCS is about loitering & picking off ground units - if there's no Typhoon it's going to have to be the P-47, and the LW the 190F. We have a Mossie as a strike aircraft & nothing the other side, meanwhile to counter the 109K & 190D we have an escort fighter ( well two escort fighters ) & a 1942 vintage interceptor. And somewhere in there the Anton is waving it's hands... Slight imbalances are fine in something the size of a WW2 airforce - the Spit IX & 190A found plenty of roles later on & with the size of wings of USAAF escort fighters I'm not sure how many small dogfights really happened, but in DCS where each airforce is more like 20-30 at most? if you're going to put something in then the other side really needs it's equivalent, or it's nemesis. If we can have two 190s we can have two Spits - the XIV might look a bit like the one we have but they were reputedly very different to fight in, hugely powerful & heavy, so more a B&Z plane. How different is a 109G to a 109K?

I believe it's warning you the engines are idling & you're not supposed to idle piston engines for long in case they cool off, but it could be something else. Anyone tried shutting the radiator flaps when it happens?

There are a lot of switches that could do with an On/default Off binding rather than the push to alternate we have at the moment. I have a lot of switches that look like sticky buttons to the game. This is true of many of the others too, mind. There are a couple of planes with those sorts of bindings so it does work without external doohickery.

I'd suggest mapping both toe brakes to the same thing ( you can bind multiple things to the same action ) - that way you don't find yourself pushing the other brake pedal & wondering why nothing's happening... Also I find it easier to use the foot I'm pushing on the pedals with to also apply brake pressure anyway.

It was noted as being very sensitive to tail surface deflection - I agree about the trim though, it could do with a finer adjustment by default. I think it could probably be a tiny bit less sensitive in pitch overall, low flying is continual tiny PIO even with a 15 curve & my virpil base, rather like the entire horizontal stab moves. In general maneuvering 15 feels great with my stick.

I can't find anything definitive but I'm pretty sure this thing should be fitted with the restrictor - again, it's a washer and there is literally zero reason not to fit one - so the engine should not be cutting out in normal maneuvering. I'm a little curious whether the restrictor would mean an engine at idle would manage a burst of full power or if it'd just run rich for a bit if you were violent about it. Anyone familiar with carburettors? that's a bit of a dying art.

That's why I started the thread - I've never flown anything with a Merlin ( to no surprise ), but I've enough engineering & sim work background to be curious about the situation. The release notes do say they'll be tweaking the behaviour in this area but I'm not sure it should be doing it at all, hence asking for more details about what fixes were applied when. The RAE restrictor was basically a washer stuck in the fuel pipe, a ridiculously simple device that wouldn't be a problem fitting to anything. Suddenly getting full fuel flow might be a problem when there's not much air pressure, but when you're already at full throttle low level it's not going to change anything at all. That is if they fitted them to FB VI. I can't think of a reason not to, but I don't know - hence asking.

You also have two engines, so splitting throttles works. It is at least considerably nicer to taxi than the spit!

When you nose over & get negative G, the engines die for a bit because the carburettors aren't working properly - they get flooded with fuel & can't provide a proper mixture to the engine. Was a big issue in BoB era aircraft & a minor fix was found pretty fast.

They're certainly well known in the UK, especially as they took a huge amount of naval resources to defend - it was one of them that baited Scharnhorst out, and keeping Tirpitz tied down also took up a lot of force. GI-UK gap would I guess not be massively resource intensive to produce. The naval assets you'd need to make any decent amount of missions on it is another matter. Whoever said the last war over the UK was 1982... the Falklands are not part of the UK, we don't do things like France does