Yo-Yo

Japaneeze system was a hybrid - as Russian system operates with absolute mmHg, Japaneeze used 76 cm as zero and thus had +- boost values like English.

I meant three ways of no waisting. :)

This is absolutely correct referring only to to DB-60X engines with variable speed supercharger. The plain supercharged engine with constant speed (or 2 or 3 speeds) at altitudes lower than critical has useless high pressure and excessive temperature after the blower, and the excessive pressure is throttled. And there is a third way not to waist supercharger work with a throttle: constant speed (or 2-3 speed) supercharger with special vanes to control blower pressure ratio (Soviet AM-35 type engines, Jumo-213).

No, I think it's a matter of forces. I found Mustang's rudder as something absolutely concrete-made even at medium speed - very tiny sideslip and roll movement as a reaction of strong push. It is absolutely uncomparable to any gamer's pedals controller. And concerning the wake turbulence - the velocity field itself is generated truly, but the effect can depend on the FM approaches the certain module has, because you need to work with the field having different vectors within plane/helicopter wing or rotor span. ED models do it truly and naturally. So, the modules using the same or close approach will have no troubles using the wake turbulence field.

"You made so strong wake turbulence and low torque! How dare you! You have stolen my dreams..."

You are absolutely right about the lift, but you forgot to compare wingspan... that affects exactly as the weight.

I think you are deeply wrong in your conclusion...

I am sure that you knows better that is behind the scene in DCS, of course...

It's not a matter of THRUST. It's a matter of static friction coefficient of the surface.

Эммм... в чем-чем?

The essential thing is to land to both wheels without bank. In this case the plane will roll very nice but as the speed bleeds you need to use brakes a bit to preserve steering authority. This plane can be landed easily even using keyboard instead of pedals. And even with bouncing.

Nothing was changed.

практически невозможно. Максимальная мощность двигателя достигается при максимальных оборотах.

Учитываются. Точнее МОГУТ УЧИТЫВАТЬСЯ. Конкретно в Су-25 надо смотреть, можно ли это учесть. И надо ли. Все-таки крыло Су-25 - это далеко не унылое крылышко Ми-24.

Known, fixed and will be merged in the next update.

I think that the tracks, Tacview records and/or video of the players who have no trouble with AI would be the best answer. And these materials would be a good training means.

No. They have just the same drag FM parameters, the same prop and engine. But they never pull too much thinking that they catch the opponent right now. They can wait. And they never forget you any of your mistake.

I think that the legends of incredible AI fave their source in simple misunderstanding of energy management. I heard that F-18 can not kill MiG-15 with guns... Yes, it is not a simple task, especially as you are trying to play at MiG's field - it has the best turn at 350-450 kph where F-18 (and Su-27 and MiG-29, too) is not more than a flying joke. Or a sitting duck staring at MiG "in incredible climbs". But as you fly 800-900 kph you can feel yourself in god mode. But the only way to win is deflection shooting (quite easy) . But forget about sticking to its tail. The same is for WWII AI. Anyone can use Tacview and compare two plots - yours and your AI opponent. As far as I remember, it can plot full energy and g-loads in one plot. I am sure that the graph will show that AI does not use "incredible G's" - usually it uses lower G's than you all the way building its energy where human pilot pull G's trying to shoot as soon as possible. I can not say that AI is intelligent and smart like a dogfight championship winners, but it can do two things as a master - energy management and shooting. The best sign of a master is a Tacview record where he won energy against his opponent without giving him a chance to shoot. And I just recalled a story: as first 109F and G appearred in Russia, Soviet pilots experienced "Messerfear" reporting that 109s climb as rockets after attacks. But actually the problem was that Soviet pilots had no energy management theory and practice that time.

I am very sorry, it could be only a term misunderstanding from my side. Let's consider it as my discussion with a imaginary opponent :).

Earlier I tried to point your attention to the trim diagrams of prop planes you want to be truly represented. These diagrams show that only a very small amount of ailerons input is needed to counteract TORQUE even at near stall IAS. I think that the discrepancy you stated would be noticed with a lot of real pilots with hundreds and thousands hours in WWII prop planes that tested DCS P-51. If you want the newest detailed review, I can offer this one:

No, it's incorrect. Very wide-spread mistake. English system of boost is referred to SURFACE STANDARD PRESSURE. Generally the English gauge measures the same ABSOLUTE pressure but the scale shows it minus standard pressure. And, by the way, 1 ata is not equal to 760 mm of Hg (101325 Pa) because it is 1 kG/cm2.

Generally, if no throttle valve or aftercooler with its pressure drop are placed between the supercharger outlet and the manifold itself these two pressures are equal. As the air passage has big area the sensor can be placed in any convenient place.

No, it's normal rate - Start- und Notleistung. If MW-50 is not used it is the highest rate.

3250 is the same for TO and MW-50 WEP. Jumo-213 has scheduled rpm/ata (not exactly pressure, as I explained earlier, but for simplification only). MW-50 mode increases only ata.