Jump to content

Denum

Members
  • Content Count

    255
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

253 Excellent

About Denum

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Alberta

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not sure what you mean. That's all in the game. You have full control over those setting in the aircraft that require it. Unless you're flying alot of axis that is but most of theirs have automatic engine management anyway. Unless you're flying on easy engine management I guess. Basically if it's something people want. They're going to have to buy a different product. This cost me 250$ or so, and it's scratched a certain itch just fine.
  2. How much more are you willing to pay for that? Even if it worked out to be a modest additional 10$ per plane, the module costs would double. Still cool with it? They're trying to walk a fine line between product cost and quality. They've done a great job thus far and in the end. It would likely be cheaper for you to buy a button box from Blackhog.
  3. I'd still buy BoN at 100$, The point is clicky cockpits aren't worth it for BoX. There's a reason DCS planes cost 4 to 5 times as much...
  4. There's actually a ticket open as when you pull positive G then go negative it's actually showing to recharge the pilot G stamina. I would agree there should be some fatigue modeled in game, but some argue it's not quite enough now. So I'm sure how to approach that and keep everyone happy. Personally I feel that tackling the low speed handling would be the most effective. If I recall in 1946 if you pitched up at low speed you have very little if any control authority. Sometimes you got lucky and you lined up well, other times you slid off one wing and had
  5. Actually you raise a really good point. When I compress in a dive, my ability to pull out is dictated by pilots strength isn't it? The argument could be made that the same limitations could be placed on a aircraft attempting to do multiple low speed maneuvers from one extreme to the next.
  6. Oh my. Between the cloud mod and this, it is absolutely beautiful.
  7. I think part of the issue is the lack of prop torque in both games, IRL that would be impossibly dangerous to do. I imagine that either it's very hard to model, or it's a layer of difficulty that most devs feel is too much for the average sim player.
  8. Low speed handling is pretty generous as a rule for all planes. But Spitfire MKV/IX will snap into an inverted flat spin if you push to hard at the top of your curve. Non-recoverable below 500 feet. P47/P40 is a free kill if it wobbles on the deck also. Once below a certain speed the handling gets very mushy also. The Tempest is very capable of it but we all kinds knew that was a UFO. La-5 is somewhat capable but you bleed a ton of speed doing so. That video is only the beginning of the witchcraft the 109s can pu
  9. I find very few players have taken it that high. But yeah it seems to handle like a rock at 25K. You can't even pull lead on the 109s because they have so much control up there still where the P47 feels like it's constantly dropping a wing mid turn. The only time I had awesome success is when I had a few thousand feet and they didn't know I was there. Otherwise they'd just turn into you and you can't match it without putting yourself in a super bad situation. I'm likely off on the exact numbers. All I heard was the overhaul cost and my jaw hit the f
  10. The 109 has almost nothing for stall characteristics in game, can be recovered nearly instantly if you do stall. Has low speed handling that would make a Piper cub blush and can basically pull a cobra maneuver at will in a flat turn to pound off a snap shot? And the ability to perform that god awful luftwobble with next to no negative effect? I'm assuming this all accurate to you? I like the 109s and can still step back and say this thing is a little ridiculous. It's painful how far people will go to protect their meta/interests in game. No on
  11. Things are wrong, but I think a FM under performing a little bit isn't as bad a as FM over performing. Easier to adjust down then it is up in my opinion.
  12. Spitfires are limited to 8lbs of boost and that requires a 1 million + dollar overhaul at 500 hours. Running over 8lbs the overhaul time is reduced to 250 hours. You're probably right I think!
  13. @Legioneod In regards to the flight model comparison between the 109 and the p-47, I would be inclined to guess that the p-47 model is probably fine and that the issue lies within the 109. Alot of the US birds have a high skill requirement to do well in. You need to be extremely accurate and disciplined in your attacks. Can't even really compare the two.
  14. Basic competence? You guys are going whine about not being able to find patch notes and suggest the devs are at fault? Frankly if finding the patch notes is too hard, they probably aren't much use to the person seeking them anyway. You can find them in less then 10 seconds from that launcher. Man I knew were an over entitled bunch but holy crap...
×
×
  • Create New...