Richard Dastardly

Have to agree, even in this early state it's lovely.

The flow restrictor should stop flooding on a little forward push of the stick ( unless you're at idle, I guess ), all you'll get at most is the fuel flow at max throttle - what it won't do would be let you fly inverted for long. Kinda curious if whatever Mossie they looked at behaves like what we have now.

I don't want to post this in a bug report, I want a bit of a discussion on carb flooding & how much the problem was solved at various points in the war. Early on there really was a big problem with negative Gs and merlin carbs ( as anyone who's flown the Mossie for more than 20s will find out ), solved in two stages - firstly was Miss Shilling's Orifice ( I'm really not making that up ) which was a restrictor in the fuel flow that wouldn't allow more than the maximum possible flow - obviously this is still going to run rich at times. Secondly and later there were pressurised carburettors. The restrictor was installed everywhere by mid 1941, what engines are we getting? as for the pressure carbs, I don't know - which is one reason I started this thread!

If the gun gets upset at you sideslipping then it's pretty much one round per dive, I guess, unless you want a grouping in roughly the same spot. I'm not putting the plane down at all - first time I heared about it was in a Mossie documentary so long ago that my dad recorded it on betamax & it's fascinated me since ( like everyone else, I'd think ) - but if you suddenly decide you want to go bomb some docks or something other than poking holes in ships ( I'd imagine they mostly stuck to u-boats? ) then the standard FB is a bit more useful.

The RAF has been in the Baltic for years along with a lot of other folk - the Baltic seems ideal for a map.

I thought it was down to lateral movement while the gun was being fired & a bit inherent, but I'll be the first to admit dodgy memory. It does seem to have worked well regardless, but there's the other matter of having an aircraft with 25 rounds of cannon & two 303s, vs a stock FB with all the armament you can fit to that, plus rockets.

Now that'd be a thing, a teak aircraft. Would fairly quickly be a teak canoe, I'd think, but it'd look marvellous!. The production line industriously carving up tree trunks... -- The TseTse was really rare ( 18? someting like that ), they decided just using rockets was a better idea iirc. The gun had 25 rounds & you had to hold a straight dive for quite some time or it'd jam. I vaguely remember some story about one circling around a destroyer & shooting holes through it's machinery until it was disabled, but I can't find the story anywhere, so I'll put that down as wishful thinking. -- Has anyone got a pic of one in Haitian colours?

I'd buy a NF Mossie, or Beaufighter or something German if it's not a lemon ( 50/50 chance given late-war German development! ) - but like people said, really not sure how much I'd use it. 90% of the difficulty in a WW2 night aircraft is just finding where you're meant to be at the right time... it can be bad enough in the daytime. Playing with WW2 EW gear would be pretty fascinating, though. All that primitive radio nav/radar/jamming/detection gear. Caveat: as I mentioned somewhere else i have a direct connection with ww2 EW, so I'm a bit biased. Even where I am which is almost as far S as you can get in the UK, it's only really dark at sea level for about 3 hours in late June.

Given half the existing maps are at the east end of the Med/the Gulf we're mostly lacking antiquated biplanes.... A lot of german warcraft fandom goes beyond fandom & into fetishism, I've never quite understood it ( especially the tanks, most of them were really not great ). Thankfully for the allies they managed to half-arse so many things - the allies did too, they just had a lot more choice & seemed to get it together as the germans fluffed it more. I guess the Anton & Spit IX ( and indirectly the Mossie ) are meant to be a match, and the later german pair & later US pair are vaguely a match in operational terms even if they're not really similar types of aircraft.

Thinking *again* - we *are* getting the 262, right? so how about finally having that WW2 jet dogfight & getting a Meteor? I or III depends on which mark of 262 we're getting. The 4 Hispano/rocket armament need is met too. Admittedly all you have to do to win against a 262 is wait for it's engines to melt... there's a reason Gloster went for centrifugal flow. Admittedly apparently traded throttle response for reliability...

The VII has a lower model number & was started earlier yes, but pretty sure the IX arrived before the VII did, mostly because it was basically a re-engined V and not a redesign like the VII series. It's certainly not a successor to an 8, that's for sure. I think on reflection I'd take the griffon Spit ( maybe a Seafire for a change ) over a Tempest at this point, everyone who does a late model RAF fighter seems to do Tempests & there's a lot more Spit XIVs around too. If we're not sticking to the western front then a late model Soviet bird would also make a nice change.

The V was a bit of a panic measure to jam more power in, and so was the IX - Spit numbers don't really run sequentially, so the VIII is not the predecessor of the IX, it's a different breed if you like ( and actually I think the IX predates the VII ! ). Cooling changed and so did the armament which tweaks the wings, and there's details like the size of the tail & minor undercarriage changes, but there's a pretty direct line from I-V-IX as far as I'm aware ( not being an owner or a pilot of one! ). The first IX was a Vc originally, likewise the early Vs started out as I or IIs. The Griffon ones on the other hand...if you've ever seen a Griffon Spit next to an earlier one it looks like an overinflated caricature. It's confusing & even as someone who's had his nose in RAF stuff since I was a kid ( parent is ex-RAF ) and who's fascinated by engineering evolution, it's hard to follow. I have absolutley no idea how to follow 109s either...

With the current set of aircraft, the Baltic Sea. Mix of mountains & plains, sea/land, flashpoint since the end of WW2.

Possibly just what-could-have-been - I don't know what the effect-per-airframe numbers look like ( the 219 I think lacked the engines to do it justice ), but the effect on the war either had is negligible, which is I think where the core team should be looking. Effect-per-airframe ( and cool factor! ) is definitely something for 3rd parties though. Or possibly it's just WT.

A Spit V is a Mk 1 with a better Merlin - and a IX is a V with a better Merlin - there are several types of Spitfire wing though. A Griffon XIV on the other hand is definitely a new aircraft. An Emil and a Hurricane might be a more interesting 1940 pair. Beaufighter please. Did the same fun stuff as the Mossie ( other than being a pure bomber - was a torpedo bomber instead ) and didn't come unglued in the tropics...

If there's a twin NF I'd expect the Mossie sooner ( given we're about to get most of it ), or an 88. The Widow is cool and I understand the enthusiasm,, but can you honestly say it's not a very niche aircraft in context of the others? the Heinkel Uhu is a similarily interesting & niche NF. Perhaps you can ask a 3rd party dev what they'd need to produce one? My grandfather's name is on 1940 patents for cavity magnetrons, I have a reasonably personal interest in NFs...

It's an assault helicopter more than an outright attack helicopter - I'm not sure there's any other equivalents to be honest, and as a concept it obviously didn't really work because we ended up with the Mi-28. It's definitely faster than the Hip, at least, and from some very limited time in it seems to change direction a little easer. I suspect the wings do some very odd things at times. What's the rough stall speed of the wings? given they're sitting in the downwash it's probably not an easy question to answer.

Havenn't flown since pre-Covid, so I'm comnig at it from someone with many hours in the Mi-8 but relatively fresh to both right now. I use 10 on my stick curves because a desktop Virpil base isn't really quite up to linear - it's possible but I very quickly get cramp & it's not exactly fun. The Hind *is* more twitchy than the Mi-8, but I'm not really sure whether it's the helicopter itself or the SAS - certainly the yaw SAS is prone to oscillation, I trimmed it into a hover & let go of everything & it just sat there waggling it's nose back & forward. The Hip is also pretty awkward if you take the pitch/roll channels out - I think it's worse than the 24 having just flown them back to back like that. I've also noticed the odd pitch oscillation with the Hind but what really sticks out is that the trim feels wierd - sometimes banging the trim button makes the helicopter feel like I have to fight it to maneuver after, and sometimes it's nice and fluid. So yes, maybe something in the SAS needs more tuning. I'd not expect it to fly like a Hip though, they might share lineage but the Hind has a long armoured snout & wings, so it's already very different just from mass & lift distribution. Some people have said they find it rock solid, are you guys using long sticks & not using the trim button?

I guess you haven't seen the pictures & discussion about the imminent FB version? :D We have nearly all of this very old thread either in game or confirmed, I think - current "please make this" threads for Western Europe are these two ( the Pacific stuff has it's own forum, not that most of it isn't useable in either place ) If you could have one WW2 fighter module not yet implemented, what would it be? If you could have 1 WW2 attack plane module, what would it be?

That's using more modern engines than the version we have in game? but agreed with above, that's worryingly less than the OP...

Can probably get away with a combined slider & two seperates - most of the time you're going to want both engines to have more or less the same output anyway.

Yep, I've read reports that it can be a real handful on takeoff ( landing too ). I can't wait for this beast :) seems a quintessential WW2 British aircraft, godly in the air & godawful anywhere else...

Apparently in the bomber/PR version stick force was light right across the speed range ( and it was notoriously tail heavy at low speed ). The FB version with all those guns in the nose might be a bit less twitchy I guess.

Unless the "eagerly awaited" aircraft is a single seat modern jet then they're not doing any at all right now.

Development doesn't work like that unless the analysis is done to a very fine-grained level ( IE the coders are told absolutely what they have to write, and there's no room for interpretation ) - there is a point where adding more programmers slows a project down. What adding more coders would do - if they can even get any, this is a bit of a niche job market - would let them develop more projects in parallel, but to speed up a single project needs the project broken down in a suitable way which might not even be possible with the way the underlying game engine is put together. As for the business model - until recently the whole EA model would have been something you'd be roasted over as a games company, but nowadays it's not unusual to put a game out in EA so you can help keep development funded - I'm not sure if that's less or more risky than eating the dev costs & gambling on the release day myself. I generally don't buy games in EA; I think the second Subnautica game is the only one I have right now & I'm not going to play it until it's released anyway, it was just cheaper :p Assetto Corsa Competitzione was the other one recently for me, and that one's release date seemed somewhat arbitrary given ( as I expected ) a year on it's *now* starting to mature into what it set out to be. There are many many other games or addon products that have been thrown out into release at an arbitrary point & development continued, so honestly I don't see a huge problem with the EA model itself. What I do have a problem with is the way our aircraft are released - I want the basics complete before I get my hands on anything, like the flight model. If all I can do on initial release is fire IR missiles & drop dumb bombs, and I have to navigate VFR because none of the nav systems are there yet, then ok, but I want the bits I have to be finished.