Art-J

Well, apparently ED itself already went somewhat liberal with realism about F-16 loadouts I believe, or with initially planned BS3 loadouts. Let's not even discuss 3rd party modules with some fantasy loadouts on MiG-21 as an example. But I kind of agree, I don't see the point in making things even worse. On another note, wasn't there a custom mod available which added S-5 support for Mi-8? Or was it strictly visual? I think I saw it long ago in mods section, but my memory is fuzzy.

Fuselage ones could use some love as well with white ring being just too thick (based on modern sloppy restorations I presume, just like in wing roundels case)...

^ Can you even force DCS into taking screenshots all by itself via autoexec.bat? To me it sounds more like a problem caused by some external gaming-related-software running in the background. Something in Geforce Experience, Steam Overlay etc...

Check the episode 17 from the same tutorial playlist, it covers the Doppler operation quite nicely.

Not using Vaicom myself, but just checked and ATC responds when using default PTT command. Did you dial 170 on both transmitter and receiver?

I think some of you guys might be reading too much into it. NineLine is not a 3D gfx expert and designer, someone from the team told him in unspecified way the model requires major rework, he passed the message to the best of his ability and that's it. I doubt every single polygon coordinate has to be adjusted from scratch and nothing can be re-used, unless they really lost the whole source model somehow. In the end, I don't think they'll go that much into tech details in their next newsletter on this particular subject. It'll be ready when its ready and we'll juts have

Now that you recalled the roundels, the ones on the WIP shots of Mossie are wrong as well (and it was noticed years ago when the very first shots were published). I wonder if they're going to fix them now :D.

Got it, let's leave it at that. Back to the Mossie external model - we saw it first like what, 4 years ago? When it was planned as AI-only back then? Maybe the gfx guys have decided it was just not good enough compared to their latest A-8 and P-47 masterpieces? The good thing is, I presume the cockpit model remains as it is, and that's what always takes the most time and effort to finish. Not that it needs more polishing anyway, judging from the latest eye-popping screenshots! End of Q2 for revised external sounds realistic then.

Seems we went badly off topic, but I'd like to give my opinion as well anyway. You are correct of course when we consider flight modelling and systems modelling of the aircraft... However, when one's looking at pretty much all the rest (especially at combat part of the air, ground and naval warfare simulation), the situation is exactly reversed, for the time being at least, and it's ED, that has A LOT of catching up and holes filling to do. That also means that whether BN and the rest of the team wants / admits it or not, the other sim DOES compete with DCS in this part

Tough call. I personally couldn't care less about buying and flying the Schwalbe, didn't even bother to learn how to start it up and fly in the other sim. Being a PTO enthusiast I'm obliged to vote for Hellcat anyway I guess . I know, however, how desperately we need to fill current Normandy & Channel maps with more-or-less relevant flyable and non-flyable content. I agree 262 fits the bill better.

@RaventBoth, but more of the "like real life" factor than the other. Compared to the particular version of Thunderbolt we've got simulated, the Mustang has one less lever on the quadrant to fiddle with, automated cooler doors, and no problems with master bearing failures. Engine instruments on the panel are also bigger, better marked and easier to read. Besides, the Mustang's overal handling in the air is for the most part more pilot-friendly anyway. Not too twitchy and not too sluggish, just well balanced in all three control channels. Don't get me wrong, despite some

It can and it will, unfortunately. What razo+r pointed is - the ATC system in DCS has never been tweaked for warbirds and it works the same way no matter what DCS airplane and map you're using. Vector or inbound command will always take you to some "in the middle of nowhere" point on the line extending more or less from the runway (an even that point might change because of wind speed and direction). From that moment you're supposed to find the airfield and set up the approach yourself - which might be an issue in warbirds, at night or in poor weather.

-30 Mustang was the original variant, released back in 2012 when it was supposed to be a one-off technology demonstrator, without any WWII content following. It's the -25, which was added recently, and rightfully so, to fit Normandy and Channel maps. As for control config folders, it's the same as with clipped and non-clipped Spitfire - initially one folder in /Saved Games for both variants was causing various shenanigans with controls not always loading correctly upon game startup. So it was safer for the user to manually create two separate config folders, with content files just

Cockpit textures in A8 are not really much better given the complete retexturing D9 got not that long ago with 109 and P-51. I would even say the ones in A8 are on the bland/washed out side, not to mention some minor lighting/shading bugs here and there (for example the permanent violet tint rendered under the sun cover even when cockpit lights are turned off). The overall cockpit 3D geometry and pilot's position in Anton is quite different though (more accurate, allegedly), so I don't think anything was copied form the Dora. The biggest difference in quality and detail

I'd start with checking the usual things in the mission editor: a) is the airbase set to the same coalition colour as your aircraft? b) are the aircraft radio frequencies set correctly for the chosen airbase (if they need to be set that is - I don't own either of these planes so dont know how radio works in them)?