303_Kwiatek

I think most problem with ground loops and expecially during taxi are caused by too weak breakes. As i mentioned i never such problem IRL during taxi with heavy 1000 HP taildrager like i have in BOX. I could stop quite easly ground loop by press brake but in BOX it is impossible - i mean during taxi operations. Also it could be similar affected by ground loop during landing run ( when plane slowiest down the runway). Of course most taildraggers IRL are voulnerable to ground loop expecially during landing with crosswinds condtions or with wrong flare and touchdown ( with some drift) so landing in taildragger need much more attention then forward whell planes.

It is not only sniper gunners which in most cases are ridicules but i it looks that gunners are also very resistant to fighters bullets. Like they wear bulletproof vest. IT was the same situation in old ROF game - gunners in 2 seaters are the same level - snipers and bulletproof cyborgs. IRL gunners expecially tail gunners dint have long life " While the Il-2 had its vulnerabilities, the rear-gunner’s position was much more perilous than the pilot’s. While his crewmate was protected by 12mm of armor on both sides and behind the seat, not to mention 65mm protective glass sections, the gunner was provided with 6mm of armor, which was only effective against small arms fire. The death rate among rear-gunners was understandably exceptionally high, and injuries were even more frequent. Resting their feet on partitions separating the fuselage from the cockpit, gunners’ legs were protected only by the aircraft’s outer plywood. As one rear gunner recalled, “there was a feeling that every time you’d go out you were going to your execution. " " (Lancaster) The Rear-turret Gunners were in the most vulnerable position on the plane. The life expectancy of a WW2 Rear-gunner varied but was never high, mostly about just 5 sorties. " Definitly something should be done with gunners in BOX.

Strange all other planes are faster in winter then in ISA conditions why D-9 should be different here?

Pitch up tendency even with 100% nose down ( 2 degree ) is questionable. D-9 got longer fuselage and nose should be even more stable then Anton. In other sim D-9 need only about 0,5-1 degree nose down to fly level with no pitch up tendency. Other things looks in BOX D-9 superb. I like more prone to spin tendency then in other sim.

D-9 got different engine, longer nose and longer tail - so COG would be different then A-8. Still it looks strangly that at maximum nose down trim plane cant fly level flight. Other D-9 which we could try in sims got different COG settings - need only about 1 deg nose down to fly level. Besided these D-9 in BOX handel very nice. Superb plane.

showing droping tail parts of Yak during 20mm fire from 109

You mean taxi or take off- landing ground loop? IF you mean ground loop durig taxi operations you right but i think it is problem with too weak brakes which IRL could easly stop such drift tendency.

COG and vertcal stab looks strangly - even at 100% nose down plane got pitch up tendency at nominal power.

It looks that everything is ok so why they should work even if it is still beta?

Commone i drive plane near 5 000 kg 1000 HP big 4 blade prop taildrager ( with tailwheel lock/unlock) and never got such problems with taxi like in BOX. IRL i could stop ground circle by brakes but in BOX it is impossible.

Other hand braking in BOX seemed too weak during taxi. Never had such problems with taxi taildrager IRL ( even 1000 HP one) like there is in BOX. IRL is possible to stop drift ( ground loop) during taxi without much problem just by pressing brakes, in BOX these is impossible in any plane - when plane start to make circle on the ground there is not possible to stop it. Thats why i usually taxi in BOX with blocked tailwheel. IT is about slow speed taxi - not take off run or landing run. Thats why taxi on BOX seemed to me not exacly realistic. Maby problem is also with too effective rudder but with decent burst of power IRL there should be possible to turn on the ground only by rudder ( without brakes) but it need add some good burst of power and full rudder kick

It looks that it is need test more settings so. I found now much better with GSync ON, V-Sync OFF, FPS blocked at 80 in game settings ( i got fps in range 60-100 normaly) with 144 Hz monitor. I will try with V-Sync ON in nvidia settings but i doubt it will make a difference if i got FPS blocked. I have no problem with cocpit frame tearing when Gsync ON and V-Sync OFF, only sometimes is noticable not smooth looking around with Track IR even if FPS are high. Other problem is - and these one got all my mates - it is always one stutter when ZOOM IN to min FOV on any place. When You ZOOM in again in the same place is ok - no stutter. But when you look in different side and ZOOM IN to min FOV again one stutter. Also servers seemed have the same problem like before with Eractic Behaviour ( Lags) when there is above about 60 people.

New DM with 3.010 definitly improved. Tested against fighters mostly but it did a job very well. WIth good burst now possible to show down fighter in first pass, also i notice much frequently shot off different parts of planes ( airleons, flaps, stabilizers) and engine fire - these from shoting mostly from 20 mm cannos. Also more freqently critical damages after pull more G with damaged plane. Now is DM is much better then old one.