Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Yardstick

  1. What about an adaptor? It could be in the form of a small extension piece. It could fit onto your grips and give them TM / Virpil compatibility - electronics / shift register board could be housed in the adaptor. I like the look of your grips but I can't justify moving away from my WarBRD or Cougar N2:NXT bases which in my mind can't be bettered for feel and precision.
  2. Fantastic looking gear! Just to repeat an observation I make earlier in the thread. I think you will sell more sticks if you make them compatible with a Thrustmaster / Virpil base or at least make a hot swappable adaptor. I have a TM and Virpil base, 2 TM sticks and a KG13 stick that are all interchangeable and while I am happy to add to that, I don't want or need to invest in another base ecosystem.
  3. One of my long standing gripes has been the duration of smoke from destroyed ground targets and aircraft. If this was originally a decision made on the grounds of performance, is it not time to revisit the issue given the advances in hardware in the intervening period. I can't imagine it would be a big change (smoke duration=30secs to smoke duration=300secs?). However, it would have a massive impact on the player experience. Currently, I find I frequently re-attack a destroyed target because it the smoke / fire has gone out. It also takes away the satisfaction of leaving an area a smoking / burning mess after a successful attack. Having also put 70 or so hours into FS2020, returning to IL2:GB, it's nice to see that the clouds stack up pretty well against the former sim - particularly the layered heavy pre-sets. However, these are comparatively rare in game, so would it be worth considering the addition of more visually 'interesting' cloud pre-sets as well as increasing the depth of the layers we currently have? This sim continues to advance as improvements and tweaks are introduced over time. It strikes me that the above (enhancements to how the current effects are implemented not changes to these effects) could be introduced with comparatively little resource cost but bring a disproportionate benefit to the player experience.
  4. What are your plans for Grip connectivity? I have made considerable investment in Virpil and Thrustmaster gear (3 grips, 2 bases across both manufacturers). So, although the TM connection standard is not perfect, it is a close to a universal standard as we have.
  5. I admit that I had to go away and research this one because I have not some across a USAAF combat pilot with an enlisted man's rank before. However, there seems to be a good reason for this as there don't appear to have been any enlisted men serving as combat pilots in the USSAF after the second half of 1942. This followed the passing of the 'Flight Officer Act' in early July 1942. From Wikipedia: When Public Law 658 (Flight Officer Act) was passed on 8 July 1942 most enlisted pilots were promoted to the new rank of flight officer and newly-graduating enlisted pilots were graded as flight officers or second lieutenants depending on merit. This ended the creation of enlisted pilots in the U.S. Army. There is a good article here if any one is interested in more detail: https://www.airforcemag.com/article/0390third/#:~:text=The fact that hundreds of,aviation historians for many years.&text=Though USAAF was creating no,of them in the field. So if the pilot (either summer or winter versions) is wearing enlisted pants then that is incorrect. Pinks or coveralls (Type B-4 or later 'AN' type) would be more appropriate. That B-10 is very brown, the reason I mistook it for a leather jacket. The later war USAAF pilot's B-10 is the correct colour so not sure if the lighting used for the render is off. BTW: nice to see the pilot wearing 1943 RAF pattern escape boots and an RAF C-type helmet, as RAF kit was used extensively by US flight crew based in England.
  6. The Type B-10 gradually replaced the A-2 from c. early to mid '44. The current late war USAAF pilot (Bodenplatte) wears the B-10. Some pilots preferred the fabric jackets (Gentile, Gabreski spring to mind) but many stuck with their A-2s and original issue jackets were still being worn by pilots well into the '50s, with many seeing service during the Korean War.
  7. A bit of feedback on the USAAF pilot model. If he is meant to be wearing an A-2 flight jacket, then unfortunately that looks nothing like one. Whilst the fit is good, A-2's don't have buttons and the colour should be russet brown or seal brown. The A-2 should also have a wind flap over the zip and has epaulettes. Please look to correct as the A-2 is the iconic flight jacket and synonymous with USAAF airmen. Real A-2s: Also if his trousers / pants are meant to be his service dress pinks, then they are also the wrong colour. On reflection if that flight jacket is meant to have a fur collar then it looks more like a US Navy M-422a (below), which is completely wrong for a USAAF pilot.
  8. This was raised in GB forums a few days ago and the consensus was that the engine setting that the GB P-40E's support the view that they are modelled to use lend lease 100 octane fuel. If 87 octane was modelled the engine settings would be more restrictive. It seems that the CLOD P-40E uses further engine settings that were cleared for use later on. However, I don't think that these are responsible for the huge disparity in relative performance between the Bf109F-4 and P-40E in both games. My suspicion is that there is something awry with the F series as I cannot spiral climb away from even the Hurricane II as I should be able to. It just seems way too slow to accelerate and seems to bleed speed very fast in a zoom climb.
  9. Agree 100%. It makes no sense that if I assign the same dial on my throttle to RPM for the British and US aircraft and for prop pitch on German aircraft that they work in opposite directions.
  10. Have it set up centre mounted with a Monstertech desk mount, 7.5cm extension, Cougar grip modded to have an audible button click with the 2nd stage trigger, Aviasim no centre cams and heavy springs. It's as precise or maybe even better than the Cougar U2:NXT gimbal that it replaced and a lot more comfortable centre mounted.
  11. In IL-2:GB I can take on 8 ace level AI P-40Es and kill them all with ease in the 109F-4. In CLOD I have yet to kill more than 2, 3 is a real handful. Typically I boom and zoom the GB P-40E's to my hearts content. However, if I try to spiral climb out of trouble against the CLOD P-40Es, they just follow me uphill. I even tried dragging them up to 7K where they should struggle but never got more that 500m vertical separation.
  12. Particularly if you are using headtracking. When flying IFR in the TBM 930, I have to turn off headtracking so that I can key in any altitude changes accurately otherwise the ATC starts complaining that I am not responding to instructions quickly enough. There's a DC-3 out. Haven't tried it but I suspect it is a low res port from FSX. I think I will wait until aircraft developed from the ground up in the FS 2020 engine come out before I go down that particular rabbit hole.
  13. I checked out the Kuban peninsular around Anapa. Unfortunately it's just as ugly in FS2020 as it is in DSC - brutalist Soviet era concrete everywhere. GB certainly chose the best period to model it. I also flew SW down the Meuse valley starting in Liege (one of the more interesting areas on the otherwise bland Rhineland map). But it is an area that the auto-gen terrain seems to struggle with. The forests are just flat textures, the GPS height map produces a lot of glitches and the river undulates like a roller coaster. All issues I hope with time Asobo can improve. I also visited Portsmouth one of the 2 cities in the UK that have been re-created using photogrammetry data and it looks fantastic with an amazing level of detail. Flying over terraced house you can even see all the crap people have in their gardens (bikes, kids swings, barbeques etc). However, where it falls over spectacularly is recreating ships. HMS Queen Elizabeth looks like a 5 year old has hand drawn it and HMS Victory is almost unrecognisable with trees where its masts should be, same goes for HMS Warrior.
  14. Has anyone got freeware add-ons working? I bought through Steam and installed it on a dedicated 250gb SSD I had spare. I have placed the add-ons (a couple of small GA airfields) in the 'communities' folder on this drive but can't get them to show up in game. I'm not sure whether the add-ons should appear listed in the 'content manager' or whether the 'communities' folder having been created in a non-standard location is causing problems. From what I have read this folder seems to get installed in all sorts of locations with different pathway / file hierarchies depending on whether you bought direct from MS, through Steam and / or chose a custom location - makes trying to trouble shoot it very difficult. Update: Well, that was odd. I haven't changed anything but when I checked this evening the add-on airfields were now showing up. However, the liveries I've installed (same location) are not showing. Go figure!
  15. Going back to the throttle surges. I just a flew one of the original Blitz channel map quick missions ('dogfight even' E-4s vs Hurris) and was getting the throttle surges. As Sokol1 suggested, these seem to happen if I was close to an enemy aircraft. As I was flying an E-4, which seems to be more resilient at full throttle 1.35 ATA, I did not blow the engine. However, at one point following a Hurricane it got ridiculous as the in-game throttle would surge and I would back off with my physical controller, then the in-game throttle would surge again and I backed off more. This continued for about 30 seconds, until I was flying at 50% throttle with the in-game throttle at 100% on 1.35 ATA.
  16. Well that was odd. I just went back into CLOD and the WarBRD was recognised first try. Because I am just testing everything at the moment, I have the stick temporarily plugged into a front USB port. The only thing I can think, is that I had knocked it loose when I tried yesterday.
  17. OK thanks as always Sokol1. I haven't trouble-shooted the problem properly yet, just wanted to establish that it wasn't anything obvious I was not aware of. Just seemed odd that CLOD was the only sim I have tried so far that wasn't recognising the WarBRD.
  18. My Virpil WarBRD arrived a couple of days ago and I now have it set up in a very similar way to the Cougar U2:NXT it will replace - using my Cougar grip, centre mounted with a 75mm extension and using the heavy springs and no centre Aviasim cams. I may try the very heavy springs at some point as I also bought a set of those. I was concerned that the centring forces would not be sufficiently strong for the F-16 grip with an extension but they are fine. If I closed my eyes I would be seriously pressed to tell the two bases apart, the only difference being the slightly longer throw on the WarBRD. I don't have all my controllers set up in their final configuration yet (still need to convert the Cougar throttle to stand alone USB). But currently have 4 controllers set up which will be my final configuration: TM Cougar, MFG Crosswind, Suncom SFS with RS FUSBA USB conversion and the WarBRD. I have these set up in GB and FS2020 without any issues but CLOD doesn't seem to recognise the WarBRD. Is there an obvious reason why this might be the case - I seem to remember reading somewhere about a controller limit but can't recall if that was CLOD or another sim?
  19. I’m having a blast with the Savage Cub (love the yellow paint job). The graphics are breathtaking but not perfect. The autogen does throw up a few anomalies and the default large house appears to be a Stalinist style concrete housing/ office block. It means that the area of rural England that live in seems to resemble the Exclusion zone around Chernobyl, with manor houses and farms replaced by brutal modernist 5 storey concrete blocks. Traffic also appears to drive far too fast and on many road is too dense (although this can be turned down). Track IR implementation is good although there are no physical limits modelled currently. Not an issue for me as I am currently in the sight seeing phase and welcome the opportunity to get a few bugs in my teeth when sticking my head into the slipstream.
  20. I helped develop some of the first community made aircraft for SDOE, from memory: Bf109E-4, G-6 and K-4, Stuka and A6M2 Zero. Maybe also a Fw190D-9. Used to have a lot of fun flying online inter-squad sessions. In many ways SDOE was years ahead of it time.
  21. My point is that the manual is correct. There procedure is consistent with that set out in IL-2:GB and DCS (extract for the K-4 below). I don't speak German, so can't provide primary sources but I trust the other two sims (both their documentation and how the prop governors are modelled).. The problem is how the prop governor for the F series appears to be modelled in CLOD. As I have said the late E series (E-4 and E-7) behave as they should. However, the Fs are very wrong. When manually set to fine pitch (12 O' clock), with an ATA of 1.3, the U/min should be c. 2,500. In CLOD it's closer to 3,500 resulting in a blown engine. On auto, the above settings result in the governor setting the prop to c. 9 O'clock (much too coarse). Either the min-max values and ranges for the prop pitch indicator need to be adjusted or the prop pitch is calibrated incorrectly which must have a significant effect on acceleration and torque not just on take-off but more generally.
  22. Hi Buzzsaw Thanks for the reply but your info on the 109 goes against everything I understand to be correct and also directly contradicts your own manuals (flashcards) which specify the use of manual prop pitch for both take off and landing. If you follow these instructions (which upwards to 5,000 hours flying 109s in various sims tells me is correct), then the engine blows as a result of a huge overspeed seconds after take off (see following screenshot). For comparison, these are the instrument readings for the F-2 in IL2:GB following the procedure set out in the CLOD Blitz manual (next pic). Actually I used 1.4 ATA in GB and only 1.3 in Blitz. I even left the prop at 12:30 which is the finest setting for the F to K in GB (not sure why they are different from the E in this regard or which sim is correct). Had it been set to 12, then the rpm would not have gone above 2,500. In GB when landing I will rarely need to use manual as the governor will reliably adjust to 12 O' clock. If I fly the same curved approach in Blitz, the governor seems initially to adjust the prop pitch to a coarser setting (which in itself seems odd) but even at approach speed (200kph) will not go below 9 O' clock. For comparison the last pic shows the instruments in the 109F-2 in GB as I start to roll out of my turn on finals with the prop on auto. For comparison the governor as well as manual settings behave as I would expect them to in the E series and consistent with the E-7 in GB. The problem seems to be with the F series.
  23. Update: It seems to specific to one particular mission. I converted the Eagles over Tobruk mission no. 4 to a single mission. Every time I fly it (E-7 Trop is the default aircraft) I get these weird throttle surges. I can't replicate them in any other mission and I even when I swapped the E-7 for an F-4 Trop and I get had the same erratic throttle behaviour. It's just about the oddest thing I've seen in 30 years of flight simming - I can't for the life of me work out why this particular mission would generate this sort of stranger controller behaviour 😕 It worked fine as a campaign mission. On a side note, there appears to be something very wrong with the F series prop governors - certainly compared to the E series. If you try an land using auto prop pitch, at idle the prop struggles to get above 9 0' clock. If you set it to 12 O' clock manually, you red line at 210km with the throttle below 0.6 ATA. It's even worse on take off in manual mode with a huge overspeed (in excess of 3,000 rpm at 1.3 ATA) well before take off speeds are reached if you use the correct 12 O' Clock setting.
  24. There appears to be something odd going on with the E-7 Trop (haven't tested the other E-7s yet) but I am getting really weird throttle surges even even when the throttle input remains unchanged. I couldn't work out why I kept blowing engines in the E-7 as I am very careful about keeping manifold pressure to 1.2 ATA in combat save for short bursts of extra power (1.35 ATA - I rarely if ever use 1.42). My Cougar throttle has AB indents with the highest set at between 87-90% of throttle travel, which corresponds to 1.2 ATA in the later E series - so I am confident that I can keep the ATA out of the red. However, the engine keeps surging to 1.35 ATA, even if the throttle does not move. My first thought was a throttle sensor spike but I have a contactless sensor and cannot replicate the spiking in the TM joystick analyser - the throttle track is perfectly smooth. I don't have any issues with other 109s or any other aircraft for that matter, so it seems to be a E-7 thing. I'll do further testing and keep an eye on the in-cockpit throttle to see if it moves when the engine surges. Anybody else seen anything similar with the E-7?
  • Create New...