Jump to content

II./JG77_Kemp

Members
  • Content Count

    912
  • Joined

Everything posted by II./JG77_Kemp

  1. Devs said around the time when G6 was released that it could be possible that it will get MW50 added later on, though it does not seem very likely that they will get back to doing it and some members of the community felt very passionately against having such mods available for G6 in the game.
  2. I think Yak-52 is the only multi crew (two-seat) aircraft that ED has done by themselves.
  3. That is just not correct. DCS: Black Shark (first version) was released back then. When they released DCS World in 2011, they had to do wholly new Black Shark 2, because the "platform" was so different. After that they have released at least two major upgrades to DCS World, where "platform" was changed so radically that the versions were not compatible with each other. But anyway, as I did not have the original Black Shark, could you maybe list some of the "rampant and glaring issues and observations" that "nothing has been done" about during this period?
  4. DCS has it's issues, but DCS World did not even exist a decade ago. The only stand-alone DCS module that is more than a decade old is the old version of DCS: Black Shark. Their second model, Warthog, as well as DCS World's first version was released in 2011, 4/5 of a decade ago, after which it has had at least a couple of major upgrades. It is of course possible that some people were complaining about everything already before anything was released, but that probably tells more about these people than the product. Pilots specifically avoid stalls, too. I wonder why flight sim developers waste time in having stalls simulated.
  5. Happened to me also some time ago, when I was flying a Yak online. After a couple of failed attempts I tried increasing mixture and it worked. I have no idea why they decided to make an unnecessary change like that - or if the change was introduced accidentally - as the start-up is otherwise fully automated, but the pilot always forgets to adjust mixture, so you have to do it for him.
  6. I am pretty sure it is way-way-way lower than 1%. Just as an example, Heathrow has about 650 landings daily. Do you think there are several landing accidents daily? If the accident rate in commercial aviation was anywhere close to 1%, it would be considered a very dangerous way of transportation. I don't know what that graph is showing exactly, but if you have ever read a plane crash report or watched a documentary about it, these accidents are almost always a sum of several factors coinciding in the same flight. In commercial aviation there are procedures, checklists and two pilots. Even when there is a "human error", there is almost always some special condition or something out of the ordinary that made this human error possible. Edit: Just looked up the accident rates from google. 2018 was a bad year, 0.36 fatal accidents per million (not per cent) of commercial flights. In 2017 it was 0.06 fatal accidents per million of flights.
  7. That kind of statistics does not really tell us if landing is easy or hard. It is like saying that if most of the broken shoelaces happen, while tightening shoelaces - so it means tightening shoelaces is really hard. Better indication of difficulty would be the amount of accidents vs successful landings. And the investigation then usually shows that weather was really bad + some instrument was malfunctioning + traffic controller had made a last minute change of runway + it was the first ever "no ILS" landing for the pilot + some other unfortunate coincidence that all together contributed to the accident.
  8. I don't think there are many people here that have flown these planes in real life to be able to comment, which is closer to reality. Anyway, when thinking of Bf-109's at least, CloD planes should be harder to take of and land than BoX planes, as these early versions did not have lockable tail wheels, so you need to "dance on the pedals" and be smooth with your throttle.
  9. I also think that the game will go to Pacific next, but if they are not ready for that, like last time, then what other theater would be better than Europe? Besides, Italy is a good option for Europe and could include Italian planes, so could even keep the familiar format of allies and axis planes. Previously they might have wanted to keep the Italian window open for CloD team (Africa->Mediterranean->Italy), but I don't think they would exclude that option from their main game, if they are not ready for Pacific. Especially considering CloD's current player base and the time it takes for Team Fusion to progress.
  10. Unbelievable, 15 mins gone and no replies.
  11. After online search, in the book "Albert Kesselring" (by Pier Paolo Battistelli) a specific date of this order is also mentioned to be on August 19, indeed in Karinhall, by Göring specifically. Another book, "Axis Victories to the Turn of the Tide: World War II, 1939-1943" (by Alan Levine) also mentions the same date, August 19, for that order. Other major orders from that same date, mentioned by both books, were withdrawing Stukas from Battle of Britain and moving most of the Bf-109 units from Sperrle's Luftflotte 3 to Kesselring's Luftflotte 2. It is the same meeting where "109's escorting 110's" was discussed. In that sense it is interesting that Bergstrom and some other historians could not find documents that some other historians were apparently able to find. Alan Levine does say, though: "This interpretation of his [Göring's] orders may have been overly narrow, but he failed to correct this misconception." Anyway, that is the way that the order was forwarded to actual Luftwaffe units. The meeting in France, that I mentioned in my previous post, was probably where the Luftwaffe unit commanders received that order, as they were not physically present in Karinhall.
  12. I recall reading Bergstrom's mythbusting somewhere online, but as far as I recall, his claim there was that Göring did not give that order, but did not dispute that the order existed. The order could have come from Kesselring or Sperrle or someone else, even though I also recall other sources specifically mentioning Göring related to that. Another thing, if an actual document about it was found from Karinhall, it would of course prove that the order existed, but not finding the document does not prove that the order did not exist. From my recollection of Lützow's or Mölders' biographies (both written by Kurt Braatz), this order was given somewhere in France, where Luftwaffe commanders had been summoned to a meeting, not in Karinhall. If there are several "eye witness" accounts of this order existing - from Luftwaffe commanders that actually received that order - then even if some historians, that were not there at the time, could not locate a document about that specific order, it does not prove that the order did not exist and these "eye witnesses" have conspired to lie about it in their memoirs, for no apparent reason.
  13. What makes you think it is a myth? At least Galland's, Lützow's and Mölders' biographies all mention this order of close escort and the heated debate about it. It has come up from so many sources that I don't think it could be a myth.
  14. It is interesting to see this as "favorable" comparison. Basically he said that P-40 "could" outturn P-38, when P-38 was never intended to be a turn-fighter and turning was not the way to beat agile Japanese fighters anyway. He does not bring up any other "favorable" qualities of P-40 over P-38 and even that better turning is questionable, as "some pilots" did not realize it
  15. That is quite a new perspective of things for me. Are there any links or references to it? I have always had the perception that P40 was no match against agile Japanese fighters and wikipedia just states that "USAAF P-40 squadrons suffered crippling losses on the ground and in the air to Japanese fighters such as the A6M Zero and Ki-43 Oscar", so would be quite interesting to see references to this new perception that it actually fared incredibly well.
  16. Not really. First of all, I have not seen an announcement of a Bodenplatte campaign that includes bomber escort mission for Bf-109 K4. Second, if there was such an announcement, there are several German bombers in the game that Bf-109 could theoretically escort.
  17. Well, there is one developer that has announced interest in doing WWII combat and has recently released two additional WWII planes. Their sim can apparently handle at least 40 AI B-17's in formation. So far they have not put out a logical WWII package, though, but they are working on WWII content. And then there is a dev team working on a WWII scenario in Africa, though their following does not seem to be very large nowodays.
  18. I suppose the "defaults" were identical, but not the files in /snapviews folder.
  19. I see nothing in this description to indicate that stab trim and joystick pitch were on the same axis, but his ability to shoot accurately is indicating strongly against it. You realize that if these controls are on separate axis, you could choose to move them simultaneously or separately, as you choose, but if they are on the same axis, the slower trim wheel would still keep turning and moving the plane's attitude, even after you had stopped moving your joystick, thus making you less accurate? Another thing, whatever pitch+trim setting you could get with the controls on the same axis, you could get from the controls on two separate axis. On the other hand, having these two axis mapped together would take away some possibilities compared to having them on separate axis. So as a summary, there is no benefit of mapping these things on the same axis, it just takes away some of your options and makes you less accurate.
  20. Indeed, there is no advantage. The game has just that kind of feature about key bindings that you could use an axis as if it was a button. For any plane and any function. You could trim a Yak or Lagg that way - or start your engine or fire your guns, if you want to. It has nothing to do with Fw190 trim specifically.
  21. I don't think he is right. There is no axis for Fw190 stab trim. It has separate key buttons for stab trim up and down. You could map an axis to be that button, just like for any other trim on any other plane, but it still acts like a button and not an axis. At least on Fw190 A3.
  22. I asked for the names of these pilots, who co-bind stabilizer trim to their joystick pitch, to ask them why on earth would they do such an absurd thing. So far I have only heard of rumors of such pilots, like bigfoot rumors, but unlike these bigfoot cases, have not heard or seen of any "documented sightings" of such pilots.
  23. Yes, I understood what you meant. I just said that for me there would be no point of making these basic controls clickable. Different people can have different preferences of course, I personally just don't see any benefit of these controls being controllable with a mouse instead of pushing a button, if the rest is behind buttons only anyway. Speaking of which, I recall that in CloD I thought at first that because "Eject" was different from 1946 (you first had to blow off canopy and then eject, compared to just ejecting in 1946), I would use mouse for that instead. It turned out that it was not that practical, because it was not that easy to use the buttons with your mouse, when your plane was shaking wildly and you wanted to eject. What I found more practical, was using a Bf-110's fuel system by clicking, for example. So you could turn the knob of which main fuel tank you wanted to fill from reserve tank and then another knob to turn the fuel pump on, instead of remembering which button would move which knob to what position, but for the controls that were universal for all the planes, there was no specific benefit of using a mouse instead of pressing a button.
  24. I, on the other hand, don't understand the point of 5 clickable objects, when probably everyone is capable of memorizing 5 keystrokes to operate these 5 objects. For fully simulated planes, like DCS, on the other hand, clickable cockpits make sense, because few people are capable of memorizing hundreds of key combinations, that vary from plane to plane. So you would memorize the frequently used buttons and have these on you HOTAS or keyboard, but can operate the secondary systems with your mouse.
×
×
  • Create New...