Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

62 Excellent

1 Follower

About Quinte

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

399 profile views
  1. But more importantly, the 150 octane discussion is totally irrelevant to the Tempest!
  2. Those are indeed bomb racks. The drop tanks usually didn't use bomb racks: they actually go pretty much where the rack would be, and contain their own attachment and (quite clever) release mechanism. (I say usually, because some drop tanks, of conventional form, were sometimes used. Those used the bomb racks, and could be dropped like bombs)
  3. At the very least the one I posted is in-game footage, so it's not always a track bug. Also has no clouds involved.
  4. Saw some occurences of this one evening on WoL as well. Posted a video of it here. (this happened after the last major update)
  5. Lol what? If you are being bombed, you might want to just not spawn there. As for the "DCS manual engine start", it's just not there. All that's asked of you is setting up two axes before pressing E, and even my grandmother could do that in less than two seconds. And she's been deceased for years.
  6. Agreed. On the other hand, though, let's be honest: for people having mapped RPM and mixture to physical axes, this doesn't change anything. And for the rest, it's still such a minor change I really fail to see what the fuss is all about. I mean, I assume this was added to make the 262's engine management possible. If it was not tied to that, then yeah, it's a weird design decisions, or at least it's a bit out of the blue.
  7. I'll just throw this here, I have a few other recordings but no time to upload them. Sadly I totally forgot to record a track yesterday. Yesterday evening (on WoL), I had two sorties with a lot of randomly appearing/isappearing planes, and I wondered if it had anything to do with patchnote 63. Here's an example:
  8. I used to consider a turn was 147°, but now I'm pretty sure it's definitely 213°. A swerve is definitely somewhere between 14 and 22°, though.
  9. Since I just found this thread and this has been bothering me for quite some time: every piece of information I can find on the internet gives a lethal blast radius between 2 and 6 meters for a 20mm HEI, in an open space. I think it'd be fair to say that for all intents and purposes, in game, 2 meters would be really conservative (you don't actually need to be dead to be useless at flying your aircraft, unconscious or paralyzed or whatever is enough).
  10. They were removed on some mods: A-5/U2, A-5/U-3 and A-5/U8. Those are all ground attack variants though.
  11. It's probably a legacy feature from the 190 A-0 and A-1. On those, all weapons were 7.92mm, so it'd make sense to have the prop-synchronized, non-subject to wing-bend weapons to fire all together in the same group. In any case, since iirc the synchronization system is electrical, ita kinda makes sense that the inboard weapons are on a different group from the outboard ones. Personally I pretty much never ran out of ammo in a 190, so I can't really see a point for uncoupling the MGs, whereas it makes complete sense in a 109.
  12. Yeah obviously I exaggerated that. The do die. You have to hit them right in the face though, an HE 20mm close doesn't seem to do the job.
  13. Since you quoted me I'll assume you understood I thought this was the top gunner hitting him (This is a ridiculous sentence, isn't it?). I knew it was the bottom gunner (hence the about half a second I mentioned), I was merely saying that Sheriff ended up this attack exiting right below the gunner, so aiming at this point wasn't really an issue. Reaction time was still out of this world though, so it's irrelevant, my point was exactly that the "your attack was sloppy" crowd is wrong. Gunners don't die, don't get suppressed, aim instantaneously and extremely precisely, and see through their own plane. I think people who played the last TAW (I didn't) said that even with gunners set to 30% the results were the same. Offline, though, yeah, low skill gunners are ridiculously bad. Like, probably too bad.
  14. Yes, this one particular pass shows pretty much what is wrong with ai gunners. You've got a guy, just had at least 7 20mm shells exploding right next to him, not counting the AP shells if there was any, so a shell-shocked guy, in what is essentially a shaking, smoke-filled fuselage, accurately shoot at and hit a relatively fast-moving target that he couldn't possibly have previously seen. So in those conditions, he visually acquired, aimed, shot at and hit a target in about half a second. One could argue that Sheriff's pass was making it a bit easier for him in that particular case, but most of us know from experience that this happens at 500+ kph differences, and oblique angles. Add to that the gunners doing it under moderate to high Gs, and you've got the whole picture. AI gunners are subpar when compared to most aspect of the game, and I hope, maybe with development of crew mechanics in Tank crew, they manage to rework that, adding more realistic suppression factors, G influence, time to aquire targets and so on.
  15. I mean, Clostermann is probably the the reason why the Tempest is my favourite aircraft, but if you take what he says about it literally, the Tempest MkV was pretty much an F-16, though.
  • Create New...