Jump to content

Field-Ops

Members
  • Content Count

    803
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

356 Excellent

About Field-Ops

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1382 profile views
  1. Apologies, I just made an educated guess since it doesnt fit the Normandy battle historically. Didnt mean to look like I took your words out of context.
  2. Doesnt appear the teardrop canopy will make an appearance as a modification. An excerpt from the RU forums
  3. I always wondered this myself. To me it should see the stick return to neutral and if possible an additional layer of gravity applied to the stick should play a part. So a plane in a left bank might continue rolling left util upside down. Then the gravity on the stick is returned to neutral. If the dead pilot is still in there then that would be tougher to model because a limp arm may or may not interact with the stick and the direction of gravity would play an even bigger part than the above.
  4. Very nice! Was wondering if we get a bubble top or traditional canopy XIV. Traditional canopy fits better into 1944 from what I understand. So does the C wing but I'm glad to see the E wing make an appearance. I know we community members ask for too much sometimes but it would be cool to see the IX get the C wing for added usage into the Normandy scene. We do like our well rounded products and all.
  5. WHOA, I just heard Jason say an infantry element to Tank Crew? I never thought id hear that!
  6. When you bring your petition forward be sure to bring documentation. They dont listen, and rightfully so, to hearsay.
  7. Its just to tell you what kind of crosshair to expect when it comes into view I believe. Printed on the lens of italian gunsights.
  8. if you mean the live ingame GPS map then I dont think there is a way. However if you wanted to do traditional real navigation you have plenty of options available to you. Such as having the image file of the map opned, a web browser interactive map, there is also a phone app for that purpose if you didnt have a second screen. Check out the link below. i used to have the map images on file but can only find my BoBP map for now. Cant attach it here because of the size. https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/62-3rd-party-apps-utilities-tools-and-other-content/
  9. I think he meant the U-2 VS
  10. This part below from the DD looks like you should have more control authority at high speeds, especially since mach tuck actually requires control authority for the phenomenon to the pronounced in a significant manner. The way I interpret quote "elevator load at high speeds" means more control authority at high speeds by being less hard on the pilot to pull the stick back. Might have more roll authority at low speeds with his mention of ailerons, though i dont know what ram air has to do with it. What this means for low speed I cant really put together other than his mention of the stall characteristics showing warning signs earlier. So more buffeting warning and a less snappy wing drop is what I expect with the nose fighting its way back down. Sounds more believable to me in that regard. I do hope that their change to the flaps means the lift characteristics for normal takeoff and landing arent somehow now incorrect though I'm sure they wont oversight that.
  11. Italy 43/44 Berlin 45 Finland 44-45 Bagration 44 Pacific 42-45 Burma 43-45 France 40 Britain 40-41 Korea 50-53 Id buy any of these. Particular interest in Italy, Pacific, Burma and Korea.
  12. Its a pretty long flight over the channel so I imagine pretty long
  13. I personally love the Fw190 as a plane more than the 109 and is what influenced me to vote that way. Of course when the opportunity arose to get a Fw campaign I jumped at it. Nothing against the narrative your 109 campaigns brought to the table, I enjoyed reading the briefings and getting a story out of the campaigns. I would have bought either way.
×
×
  • Create New...