Chill31

throttle designator controls

same here

Its accurate. We are saying the same thing in different ways. I was just providing an alternate explaination for anyone it might help understand. I think you are referring to torque effect where I am referring to mechanical torque in the engine.

Yo-Yo, it has been my experience that the rotating propeller in an engine out glide situation is more drag than a stationary propeller. In that case, the L/D is higher for the stopped prop. The data posted shows a lower L/D for a stopped prop. Just wondering if its typo or actual data. Thanks Chill

Think of it this way. MP is your torque control. Increase MP, you increase engine torque. HP is Torque X RPM. Increase Torque, even though RPM is the same, you must have increased HP.

Does the AI suffer from engine overheat the same as the player? When I DF against the AI, his radiator door never even opens, yet mine is noticeably open.

It looks like this video shows clearly that the P-51 should move backwards when the guns are fired. If you watch the main tires, they rotate. It is not just "shaking." While that first post of how much V change it should have is quite inaccurate, the undeniable effect from firing the 6 guns is that the plane should move if configured the same as that P-51.

Ive watched a few of my dogfight tracks and the AI radiator scoop cooler door never opens. Yet, they are able to run the same aparent power as I am and not overheat. Does the AI respond to the same engine limitations that the player has?

If math suits your understanding a little better, here is a little more info... piston engines are rated in horse power due to the difficulty in defining the thrust produced by the propeller. Easier comparison is made engine to engine by using HP. Power is a rate of energy transfer. A rate of work being done. Work is force times a distance. In the case of an engine, torque times RPM, which also includes a time element to yield power. This means that the most torque at the highest rpm gets the most power to the propeller for providing thrust at the highest rate (thrust itself is only a force and decreases with increases in airspeed in the case of prop driven planes). So now you can see that the highest torque (manifold pressure) applied over a distance (one rotation of the prop) at the fastest rate (rotations per minute) will transfer the most energy to the air around the propeller disk and subsequently give the highest speed. Thats a basic version that gets the point across perhaps?

What is wrong with the FM up high? When I judge a flight sim, I go on FM, graphics, and then system management (like engine, hydraulics, etc). Cliffs of Dover's FM through 15k ft reacted the way I expected based on 28 years of flying airplanes. Maybe there is an area of innacuracy that I have not uncovered yet though. Graphically, it is on par with DCS and rise of flight. An argument for each brand could be made based on personal preferences. Systems modeling incorporated complex engine management to include controlling coolant temps, damageable hydraulic systems, individual gun convergence. Is it at the level of DCS? I dont think so, but it is still a very good simulation. For me, AI and radio comms are not as big a factor in rating the sim since I typically go with the MP mode of any flight sim I'm into. Though, I personally had no overwhelming problem with the AI. If WW2 is your era, then without a doubt, you should give CloD a try.

Shock cooling on a liquid cooled engine? Shouldn't be a factor.

I'm not sure pulling your money from the game devs will achieve the result you want. The message you would be sending, especially if everyone who shares your sentiment does the same, is that there is not interest in ww2 flight sims, and they will respond in kind by not making any ww2 flight sims. I played COD in the first build and it was so bad I didn't play it until the new patch came out. Now it is an excellent ww2 sim. SP mode is not as much fun as MP. Graphically (I'm running full graphics with gtx570 and intel i5 2570) it is top notch. On par with DCS and rise of flight. The FM is very convincing along with the sounds. I recommend anyone who tried it previously to give it another go. If you haven't tried it, now is a good time. I was very pleased with it.

WWII is a classic era for aviation that needs a modern flight sim like this to tackle it again. I'd love to see eagle dyn have two teams with one modelling WWII and one working modern aircraft. Who knows if there is that kind of money in the flight sim market though...regardless, I'm happy that they produced it and will buy it regardless of price based solely on the outstanding products they have already turned out.

Walking the throttles lets you use half of the thrust for the same amount of movement of the throttle. Good for new guys when they are tense and dont have the finess you get with experience.

Given the kelly mcgillis comment, I figured F-14...given the retired status of the jet and general obsolete technology, should be easy enouugh to model, not to mention carrier born. Nothing like good speculation for the masses

The first 2 pages resolve this question. My new question is whether or not clouds/smoke block the laser from designating the target in DCS A10.

The IR marker allows the pilot to mark a point on the ground and then have the JTACs talk them onto target via "move North, stop. East, stop. Thats your target." in the absence of VDL. It could serve to put another NVG equiped pilot's eyes on target as well. @HellMutt, is your post in reference to DCS A10 only or to real world laser ops? The problem with smoke/debris is that wind can blow it and potentially disturb your laser shot for follow up bombs. When combined with the results of my orginal post, you can see how employing multiple LGBs could become difficult under the right conditions. (again, I'm very eager to get DCS A10, its just a few months down the road for me) the smoke cloud from a 500lb weapon lingers and can obscure the target area for laser designation. I'm wondering if this effect is in DCS A10

Another question here: What effect does cloud obscuration have on DCS TGT Pod? can you lase through clouds? Can you lase through smoke/debris?

Tharos, Does DCS A10 or DCS in general model the effect of background clutter for IR missiles? For example, if my background is clouds, or some hills, or sun, etc do those features make it less likely to be shot at by IR/Optical weapons?

Yes, its not an easy attack, but it goes a long way to show how detailed this sim is.

OB1, you did it in DCS A10?

The laser shoots with a user specified code. The bomb is set to search for that code. If you drop 5 bombs (hypthetically) with the same code, they should all guide to the same laser spot. At any rate, you should be able to slew one bomb off your original designated target by a significant miss distance. If you cant do that, then I'm guessing you cant work the multiple bomb scenario. If you want to see the slew rate for targetting pods, search on youtube.

If you ripple LGBs with enough time in between weapons, you can guide 2 LGBs to different targets as long as they are close enough together. Since it seems DCS A10 will at least guide multiple LGBs to the same spot, I suppose it might be possible to slew them around in the sim as well. Some one should try it with 1 LGB. Get a point track on one spot, release, and then slew to a new spot near by and see where you get an impact.

I dont have DCS: A10 yet...Going to get it eventually though. In the mean time, I was wondering if the ability to drop multiple GBU-12s and guide them to different targets with the ATP is in the game? If not, can you release multiple GBU-12s and have them impact the same laser spot? Couldnt do this in Falcon 4 AF, so just wondering if its possible now in DCS A10...

http://www.darpa.mil/j-ucas/x-45/videos.htm Old, but geek out