Jump to content

Art-J

Members
  • Content Count

    368
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

144 Excellent

About Art-J

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Warsaw, Poland
  • Interests
    Vintage aviation, vintage motorsports, history.

Recent Profile Visitors

1052 profile views
  1. Although we're getting waaaay off topic here with DCS talk, are you sure you don't have "Game flight mode" turned on by mistake? When that happens, trims don't work, making some DCS warbirds pitch up by themselves, but if you're in simulation mode, both the A-8 and D-9 can be trimmed for neutral pitch moment at any speed except very low one in landing configuration. DCS 109, when flown without MW-50 mixture in the rear tank, and with reduced fuel load, can also be trimmed for almost hands-off flight up to ~410 kph IAS @ 1.05-1.1 ATA of boost, so you should be seeing that in simulation flight mode. It will indeed require stick forward input at any higher power and speed setting, however.
  2. A sidenote - in my experience (granted, only with a couple of Allied planes I fly) you can, but only if you make the plane stop completely, apply and maintain full rudder with full left/right brake and then throttle up. Might not be 100% realistic method, but it's good workaround for CloD ground handling physics shenanigans.
  3. I'd hazard a guess Arthur commented on Enceladus' assesment of Spit modelling in BoX vs CloD. And If that's the case, I would agree with him. There are only three things that make CloD Spit kind-of more "realistic" than BoX one: - you have to switch the fuel on/off manually, after that it's one-button affair to start the engine in both sims; - you have to set the compass and gyro yourself, but the compass is not even modelled accurately, as Sokol has been pointing out on these forums for years; - you have to turn the gunsight on/off manually - hardly a revolution in gaming. Other than that both sims are pretty much equal as far as systems management "complexity" is concerned (no, I don't think ammo belt customization is a step towards realism, because in most cases ordinary pilots couldn't choose belting for themselves). I'd even say they're equally simplified compared to the likes of DCS or A2A Spitfire offerings. And that's perfectly allright as long as one's aware of both platforms limitations. Because at the same time both are superior to DCS and P3D in some other aspects and both are solid products in their own right. But let's not kid ourselves that CloD offers much more accurate representation of how to operate a warbird. It doesn't.
  4. Art-J

    DCS

    About the Corsair, some people just can't be pleased it seems. Not ED, but a third party studio decided to build an F4U just because they love it, not because it fits anything - just like in DCS I-16 case. Nothing more, nothing less, they're not obliged to add anything else to it (and in fact they'll go for F-8 as their next project). Unlike DCS I-16, though, they decided not to stop here but at least add a period correct AI opponent plane, and an aircraft carrier in single package for free. I'm first and foremost PTO enthusiast myself, but even I understand that DCS is kind of FS/P3D/X-Plane equivalent with guns. A sandbox sim with some various planes to fly around. I don't expect it to be something it's not meant to be, especially when 3rd party studios are concerned.
  5. Minimum altitude for "normal flight" setting in airplane properties in mission builder perhaps? I'm only guessing.
  6. Art-J

    DCS

    Just crank the default idiotic 2.2 gamma value down to something reasonable, like around 1.8-ish and set up your missions to low-sun hours (morning, evening, like on all these fancy trailers :)). That's enough to make the game look much prettier. The same tricks apply to Il-2GB or any videogame when you think about it. About "Charmless and arrogant edge lords who like to insult", I find comparable numbers of them here as well, with BSR leading their ranks, but when tech help tips are needed, both forums provide similar support from good guys in my experience.
  7. Are the improved shoreline textures in the water on Tobruk map part of the latest patch, or were they implemented previously and I just didn't notice them earlier? In either case they look bloody awesome! Not sure where to look for "speedtree rocks", though.
  8. Il-2 veterans know it, an certainly Sokol does, flying the sim and giving the tech advices about it since its beginning. That's not the point of his post. The point is, there must be a better way to make completely new players aware of the window management via as many sources as possible, especially the ones who are too lazy to RTFM before jumping into the plane (it's an excellent manual, mind you, but info about windows is buried near the end of it and I can see how some new folks might overlook it).
  9. He did originally post in Flying Circus section. Moderators moved the post here before you read it.
  10. I'm fairly sure all Tomahawks featured a mixed armament of .50s in the fuselage and .30s in the wings rather than six .50s as the part 3 suggests (that applied to Kittyhawks), unless Brits field-modded theirs? Other than that, a very nice write-up, as usual.
  11. 1) Il-2 1946 is still officially supported by Team Daidalos, although at a small and slow pace. The last version is 4.14.1, links can be found here: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=230316 Most popular custom mod packages for the game are based on lower version numbers, however. Since they're not official, you'll have to check other forums for more info, Like that one for example: https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php 2) Il-2 Cliffs of Dover is a separate franchise, first developed and released in 2011 by the same guys who did 1946 (minus Oleg Maddox, who moved on to other career), abandoned shortly later, modded unofficially later for years, revived officially not long ago - now under active development by Team Fusion studio (you might have noticed their Tobruk payware expansion pack released for the game recently). 3) Il-2 Great Battles (Stalingrad/Moscow/Kuban/Bodenplatte) is also a separate franchise, under long time, active development of 777 Studio, know previously for their Rise of Flight simulator. All three products share "Il-2 Sturmovik" main title (strictly for recognizeable trademark / publicity reasons) and the same publisher - Russian 1C corporation, but are otherwise unrelated. This particular website and forum are mostly aimed at 2) and 3) players, so unless you intend to start playing these two newer games next to (or instead of) old '46, you won't find much info about whereabouts of latter over here. In practical terms: a) '46 is still played but only by relatively small community of dedicated veterans, simply because despite its greatness, it's just outdated product by today's standards. b) Great Battles series has kind of become a new "standard" and successor to '46; c) revived Cliffs of Dover tries to catch up with Great Battles, but is more of a complement rather than competition. Both have their weak and strong points.
  12. It's been ages since I watched Star Wars movies, but isn't it that big metal vehicle that small fellas in hoodies used to drive across the desert? I don't recognize the remaining two structures but I gather these are from the SW movie as well. Would be a second Easter Egg on the map then. Anyone aware of more?
  13. Do AI planes in CloD use the same FM as player-flown ones (like in GB If I'm not mistaken), or do they use simplified, somewhat optimistic FMs (like in DCS)? Answer to that question might help explain some relative-performance-related issues.
  14. ^ You mean overboosted and over-revved I suppose, because actual temps don't seem to be an issue in GB Kitty. It hardly wants to warm up at all, and once in flight just a tad of radiator opening is enough to fly and fight all day without giving it a second thought. Convenient, but hardly realistic - I still remember Jeff Ethell's emphasis in "Roaring Glory" episode about P-40, put on quick warming up and overheating danger during taxiing in the real thing. Tobruk Kitty seems to be more accurate in this aspect - temps need to be monitored with greater caution here. On the other hand Tobruk Kitty is equipped with a MAP regulator, while GB one isn't and that's the biggest advantage in my view. Makes the plane soooo much more pilot-friendly!
  15. ^ Yep, changelog mentions them being tweaked. I like the extra bits added to sand texture. A welcomed and noticeable improvement!
×
×
  • Create New...