OzStriker

You keep editing your posts after I respond - just look at the editing time stamps lol. Please - only say stuff that is correct, otherwise you are just giving us bad information. Here is you saying the P51 has no steerable tail wheel... And now it has magically disappeared!

PeterP you are wrong again, you are trying to tell us that the P51 has no steering for the tail wheel. This is wrong.

I haven't flown the DCS P-51 but IRL the P-51 will definitely have a steerable tail wheel, it is just too much of a brute not to. Tail wheel aircraft are much much trickier to taxi and require differential braking as you mentioned, but, yail wheels can normally be locked in place, have some rudder pedal connection - can be direct with cables or springs - and can be unlocked "fully castering" like a shopping trolley wheel using diff brakes and rudder so you can spin the aeroplane around on the spot.

Correct Flagrum, though using brakes to turn is not correct technique on all aircraft and will be guided by the manual. You are also correct regarding countersteering. To turn a bike you countersteer to lean the bike then the front wheel tracks as required - you don't need to hold the handlebar anymore and can take your hands off. To stop turning though you need to countersteer again - a push on the right handlebar in a left turn for example, to stand the bike up and go straight.

Did you just have a conversation with yourself on a forum? Awesome! :thumbup:

Is it like a big iPhone?

I hope you're able to accept that your comment is misguided. Unlike yourself I don't post on here unless I know what I'm talking about. It's unhelpful. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering

At very low manoeuvring speed yes but go ride your bike at a normal speed and try it :) All of this is just intuitive - aircraft designers are there to make our life easy. Push left to go left and push right to go right.

Actually they are. In both cases to turn left you push on the left side, on a bike it is called counter-steering. Try it next time you ride a bike, you will realise its what you've always done :)

Gasper!

I turned it up a bit for the sake of the photo but you get the idea. HUD will always be visible in clouds, just not when pointed at the sun.

Maybe you need to zoom into your HUD? IRL the HUD is right there "in your face" if that makes sense and should be visibly for everything except pointing directly at the sun. IRL it is common to play with the intensity regularly, the HUD should always be visible but not overpowering to the point where you won't see other aircraft, runway lights and the like.

Ok, given that we don't have to worry about torque effect in a jet aircraft, the main reason for using the ruder inflight, in normal operations, will be for adverse yaw. Adverse yaw is where yaw occurs when you roll the aircraft. As you roll left, the left wing creates less left (to drop)and thus less drag, right wing creates more lift (to rise) and thus more drag, result is yaw opposite to roll direction. There are ways to minimise this effect, the most common being differential aileron movement, where the upward moving aileron moves further than the downward moving aileron - to create more parasitic drag on the downward wing and offset the increased drag due increased lift of the upward wing. Adverse yaw is familiar to anyone with light aeroplane experience and massively apparent to anyone with sailplane experience. You don't need a slip indicator to see it - just look out the window, it is very apparent. Rudder use in jets is completely different. The rudder must be treated with a lot of respect as they are INCREDIBLY powerful and whilst normally restricted in movement at high speeds they still have the potential to really mess things up. Anyone recall the A310 where improper rudder use tore the tail off the aircraft inflight at low speed? I have no real world A10 experience but the DCS version appears to not need rudder inflight. The yaw SAS appears to have some kind of yaw damping like most jets which means no input is required. Small displacements of the skid ball don't bother me - visible skidding when rolling would. As for landing and takeoff, I just use a slider on my HOTAS for rudder. Decrabbing during a crosswind landing should be a smooth controlled movement in one direction with the rudder anyway.

A conventional option to me is having a financially and commercially viable project that would attract investors whom take a financial interest in the project - investors who see the risk of investing as being a worthwhile one because they see promise in the product being advertised. If this hasn't happened it just makes me nervous that kickstarter is what you do next. On the other hand, games like Call of Duty which are built around the above model are just appeal to the masses, almost risk-free projects. I don't know...I can't decide whether to give my money away now or wait. I'll be quiet now :)

This is not correct, most ventures that get financial backing will provide a percentage of profit to those financial backers. For whatever reason this project is not going down the conventional route for obtaining financial backing. Why is a jet fighter sim of a current jet fighter which will be around for 50 years unable to find financial backing from conventional means? This makes me just sit back and watch for a bit rather than coughing up money.