panzerd18

Mig-17 over Vietnam Yeah!

Not sure if this is the same issue. This may be a bug, with afterburner turned off by the switch by the left of the throttle, at military power the afterburner sound effect cuts in and out without afterburner being lit. Also the exhaust gas temperature gauge fluctuates with the sound effect as if the afterburner is turning on and off continuously.

You need to fly the aircraft with landing power all the way onto the runway. Maintain 350-320 km/h on approach, keep the power setting over the threshold and flare and let it sit down. Once gear touch reduce to idle and hit the drag chute. You should touch down under 300km/h using this method as speed will wash off as you round out and flare.

Clean aircraft 11,000m alititude at Mach 0.84 requires around 88% N1 throttle. Loaded aircraft with centerline tank at 10,000m altitude at Mach 0.83 requires around 93-95% throttle.

Second afterburner should not be used for more than 3 minutes at any one time.

From what I recall, the North Vietnamese Air Force used them in hit and run attacks at high speed.

This may be a bug, with afterburner turned off by the switch by the left of the throttle, at military power the afterburner sound effect cuts in and out without afterburner being lit. Also the exhaust gas temperature gauge fluctuates with the sound effect as if the afterburner is turning on and off continuously.

Here is so real data I found. For maximum range. Fully loaded 10,000m altitude and Mach 0.83. I have found this requires around 93-95% N1 throttle setting. Clean 11,000m altitude and Mach 0.84. I have found this requires around 88-90% N1 throttle setting.

Looked fantastic from the video!

Thank you 104th for such a great server with quality missions. I am really enjoying attacking ground targets at the moment and trying to defeat the various air defense systems.

I have heard weird things about BOS flight models. Having 50 real world flight hours in Cessna's and Piper's, flying the DCS P-51 for the first I knew it was the real deal. I have never flown any simulator with such a nice flight model as the P-51 as the first aircraft I used in DCS World. It really is a credit to the people releasing these aircraft and for once I am happy to pay the money for each aircraft because I know they're a game within themselves due to their complexity. BOS on the other hand with simple systems, I can't justify paying $19.99 per DLC aircraft and then having to unlock their options. So for me, DCS World is the future and I hope when Normandy is released, it will all come together to an immersive WW2 flight simulator.

I have a friend who I used to play with in IL-2 1946. I even bought him the DCS Fw-190 D9 module but he can't get into it. I have 50 real flight hours in a light aircraft so I know a little bit about the basics, but for him, I think he is just overwhelmed by it all. I agree though, the greater the realism, the greater the reward and immersion.

You also don't need to use afterburner in the MIG-21 in the climb. 95% throttle is recommended holding 600km/h indicated airspeed. If you look in the manual you will see a table that details the fuel burn at a certain altitude. The higher you go, the less fuel burn. The higher you go the thinner the air, meaning less drag and better efficiency.

I too am not ok with SFM. The flight model and damage model must be advanced. I agree with all your sentiments, I love the detail and realism of the current WW2 birds. Each aircraft really is a game within itself taking many hours to learn the basics. I just see many more casual flyers shying away, which would hurt the online player count. The current SU-27 has an advanced flight model and 6DOF just not the fully clickable cockpit. This is a half way point which could bring other players in, however I prefer the full realism of a fully clickable cockpit.

But don't over boost the engine.

DCS 2 is my last hope for WW2 combat simulation. Being an IL-2 1946 long time player, the engine and game is on its last legs and is slowly fading away into obscurity. I know a lot of IL-2 casual players would be turned off by the realism that is inherent in the current Fw-190, P-51 and Bf109. What are peoples perceptions of a plane set of FC3 quality aircraft that would allow the WW2 theater to expand more quickly?

Amazing a modder can make a dynamic campaign but the developers don't?

Its Dx11 so I hope so.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/raytheon-restarts-production-of-laser-maverick-missiles-05397/

And why would they block something like this?

I don't think you can following the flight plan exactly like it is programmed into the Flaming Cliffs 3 aircraft. You navigate visually from a map, and by the RSBN and ARC channels as support. I have flown the 2nd mission twice and on both occasions, myself and my wingman have been shot down.

The F-5E would be fantastic, a certain buy for me.

In the latest developer interview, they said CA will see the most expansion in 2015. It really has the potential to bring the simulation to another level. Edge and DCS 2.0 with proper infantry should be fantastic. In 5 years time who knows, maybe it will be a complete battlefield sim, Air, Land and Sea.

On my first run, I got to 22,700m!

Dynamic campaign sounds awesome. Don't know why ED don't implement this as it is a major selling point for Falcon BMS.