DCS

[9./JG27golani79]

I really wish server owners would not require mods online. Adds too much complexity.

 

You can also fly on the 9.JG/27 server without the modpack.

 

But if you use JSGME it´s really easy to use the mods.

Here´s a nice guide on how to set it up - it´s really not that hard and surely worth a try: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=98607

[SharpeXB]

You can also fly on the 9.JG/27 server without the modpack.

 

But if you use JSGME it´s really easy to use the mods.

Here´s a nice guide on how to set it up - it´s really not that hard and surely worth a try: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=98607

Well as far as this game is concerned the issue of using mods online is moot. RoF has mods available but they are never used in multiplayer probably due to the reasons cited above. BoS would no doubt be the same way.

[Reflected]

I got my DCS working! The aspect ratio was set to something stupid, and now it runs silky smooth

 

But I have mixed feelings... I love the complex startup procedures, but it's still not in the same ballpark as FSX Accu Sim. DCS feels more like just an extra bunch off buttons you need to press before taking off.

 

The cockpit shadows are beautiful, something I miss in BoS, but the rest of the textures, and especially external graphics are a few generation behind. Only a little better than il2 1946.

 

The FM-s are OK, but it doesn't feel as realistic as BoS, but more "pre-programmed". Even though I'm sure number -wise it's super accurate, and BoS still hasn't caught up in that field.

 

But the content...come on. Taking off in Georgia next to a Su-25? Or the 1 vs 1 dogfight with the FW-190, and that's it? MP is also just plain 190 vs P-51 by far not as immersive as BoS.

 

All in all, it has some features I wish BoS did (complex engine management), I will still fly BoS for air combat, and FSX accu sim if I want to fly a warbird by the book.

[Lusekofte]

 

I have the last couple of month been very fond of DCS choppers , not once have I touched my WW2 modules. But looking at this I change my mind, I think. Detailed , very detailed

 

[Bando]

Wow, that's fotorealistic.

Very nice!!

[Picchio]

Can't wait to be sitting in that cockpit and fly early in the misty morning in the countryside. Here, let's drool together...

[Finkeren]

Looks very nice, superb modelling, though I don't get why the texture on the Spit has to look like it came right from a mud-wrestling match. It'll be interesting to see (and hear) it in flight.

 

Still I just couldn't bear sitting around waiting literally years for a single plane to come out. Just think about it. We only learned that the Yak-1b and the Ju 52 were in the works less than two months ago, and we'll be flying both of them before winter comes. The DCS Spit was announced, what, two-and-a-half years ago, and we still haven't seen it flying or any cockpit WIP shots.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Finkeren

[Lusekofte]

I am a offline player by hart, I have a real blast learning the KA 50, MI 8, Gazelle and Huey. I fly patterns , navigate , make difficult landings and do campaigns. Sometimes I go transporting AA and soldiers out in the fields on multiplayer. 

When I can do all choppers in all procedures , I might do the A-10 C and spend 6 month learning it and the SU 25. DCS make me relax and I can do it when it suit me, I know that every ai are doing as ordered and in a military manner. 

Do not get me wrong I like BOS series, but I do not like multiplayer conduct in any game, and BOS make you go multiplayer. There is no option. And the learning curve is pretty flat if dogfight is of no interest

[II./JG77_Manu*]

Nice screens. Can't wait for the Normandy map and the respective AI units. First modern simulator where you can recreate something comparable to the legendary SeoW missions from old 1946..about time

[Sokol1]

Looks very nice, superb modelling, though I don't get why the texture on the Spit has to look like it came right from a mud-wrestling match.

 

 

Looks more appropriated for front line fighters operating from improvised landing strips than "show car" paints.

[Urra]

There is now another pic of the train on the Normandy thread...

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

That is looking very, very good! It's interesting, both DCS and Il-2 are photorealistic, but in their own different ways.

 

I'm with Finkeren on the weathering though, rough conditions are one thing but crews kept their aircraft nice and clean. You'd find that kind of hardcore wear and tear at rougher environments like Northern Africa. Muddy mud comes off with water. For example, take a look at this T-34. This is a tank, it spends its whole days rolling in muddy roads and getting mud splashed on it by explosions, tracks and you name it, yet it looks way cleaner than an aircraft which sits comfortably at the airfield most of the time, then rolls in the mud for five minutes before disappearing into the horizon.

 

 

For more proper evidence, here is a Spitfire on a muddy airfield in Italy, 1944. The weathering you have there is operational wear, namely oil streaks, scratches and various kinds of grime. Compare the colour of the propeller hub with the screenshot for example. There is not much mud to be found except on the wheels themselves.

 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

It looks amazing and level of detail is impressive. I cant wait for Normany even though its price will be scary, just as the Spitfire will.

 

On the other news, it seems that there wont be P-47 unless miracle happens and they find enough documentation on the aircraft. Comment was made that when Republic was acquired its archives were eventually erased and little of original documentation, necessary for DCS level of detail, has prevailed. Some effort is made to look directly into NASA (which holds original NACA documentation) archives and contacting various museums and archives, such as National Air and Space Museum. A pity I'd say, since that puts this aircraft into indefinite WiP until above issue is remedied. And since they still struggle with releasing Spitfire ... 

 

Also, VEAO (in form of Pman) mentioned that they are or will be working on FW-190 A, which adds to the VEAO queue another aircraft. Only shame they still cant get that P-40 F running for like ... 2 years 

[AwesomeSprawvy]

I didn't know that about the P-47. Shame, since that's the bird I was most looking forward to flying.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2909808&postcount=27

 

Yup, there were many waiting for it. 

 

Edit: Here is an article on what happened with Republic records http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/when-republic-aviation-folded-69197851/?no-ist

Edited October 1, 2016 by =LD=Hiromachi

[MiloMorai]

Covered in mud.

 

 

Edited October 1, 2016 by MiloMorai

[AwesomeSprawvy]

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2909808&postcount=27

 

Yup, there were many waiting for it.

 

Edit: Here is an article on what happened with Republic records http://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/when-republic-aviation-folded-69197851/?no-ist

 

Thank you for the additional information and links. While depressing, it does make sense.

[[DBS]El_Marta]

 

I didn't know that about the P-47. Shame, since that's the bird I was most looking forward to flying.

 

+1

[Uufflakke]

 

 

For example, take a look at this T-34. This is a tank, it spends its whole days rolling in muddy roads and getting mud splashed on it by explosions, tracks and you name it, yet it looks way cleaner than an aircraft which sits comfortably at the airfield most of the time, then rolls in the mud for five minutes before disappearing into the horizon.

 

 

The only thing I want to add in the 'mud' discussion is that for my feeling this tank has not driven in the mud all day long with explosions and so forth on the battlefield.

It is a typical kind of Russian WWII propaganda photo. Too well composed with the low angle point of view, well shaved enthusiastic young men and have a look at the guy in the hatch.

It would not surprise me if he had to hold this pose for a long time untill the photographer shot his best picture. Not someone who tries to get out of his tank as quickly as possible.

 

Anyway, the 2 images in the OP look promissing. At first glance I got the impression they were photos.

I hope that before I got old and shortsighted that Normandy map and all its goodies will be released.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Agree with Uuflakke. A staged T-34 photo and colored afterwards giving possibility to "touch it up" as well. Planes lost their "factory fresh" look very fast in operational use. The personnel did not sit and scrub the planes hours and hours. They were kept in fighting condition and in larger maintenance propably cleaned more effectively etc. Forget the modern day flying examples, they are in better shape than even when they left the factory in 1940's. True car show examples so to say. And modern jets are not shiny and dandy either, at least from my 20 year experience with them

 

EDIT: Will get those WW2 modules to DCS, looks very nice.

Edited October 1, 2016 by LLv34_Flanker

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

It reminds me of a plastic models and mantra among modelers to put extensive weathering, even if its unnecessary and doesnt make model more realistic. There are areas more prone to getting dirty (exhausts, landing gear, etc.) and less, but this Spitfire looks like it went though a chimney in mid XIXth century London ... it's just too much.

 

 

 

The personnel did not sit and scrub the planes hours and hours.

Personnel did not have to because they werent exposed to the same level of dust/mud as tanks or trucks.

 

Here is an example of Spitfire VIII and Hurricane from 1944 Burma, it was sometimes very rainy and mud covered airfields. If not than there was always plenty of dust. But as much as possible aircraft were kept clean :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still, weathering is a minor detail. I finally want to see some flight with it, aircraft was supposed to be already released. And its still WiP. 

Edited October 1, 2016 by =LD=Hiromachi

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Hard to say anything from those BW pics, some look more weathered than others but sure overdoing weathering is another issue of course. Just people seem to expect spotless factory fresh, waxed bling blings. The paint was matte or semi matte, it did not reflect the plane on itself nor does the modern paint on jets I work with. They do not shine like a gem or reflect themselves like in BoX for example. I have no idea where this mirrorlike surface fetish comes from. There are accounts of some planes being waxed and polished yes, but I dare to say that those were only a very small minority. 

[Solty]

Well you are making an assumption that nobody cared wheather or not the plane is clean. That is BS and would probably offend most of the ground crews. Many times from all sides, pilots said that crew chief cared about the airplane a lot and that they did everything to make it come home and especially with victories. It was their way of fighting the war, repairing and cleaning weapons.

 

A great story by Bud Anderson:

Edited October 1, 2016 by =LD=Solty

[DD_Arthur]

Nice pictures - followed by a bizarre and wholly irrelevent absurd discussion over.....weathering

Edited October 1, 2016 by DD_Arthur

[Finkeren]

On 9/30/2016 at 5:16 PM, =LD=Hiromachi said:

It looks amazing and level of detail is impressive. I cant wait for Normany even though its price will be scary, just as the Spitfire will.

 

On the other news, it seems that there wont be P-47 unless miracle happens and they find enough documentation on the aircraft. Comment was made that when Republic was acquired its archives were eventually erased and little of original documentation, necessary for DCS level of detail, has prevailed. Some effort is made to look directly into NASA (which holds original NACA documentation) archives and contacting various museums and archives, such as National Air and Space Museum. A pity I'd say, since that puts this aircraft into indefinite WiP until above issue is remedied. And since they still struggle with releasing Spitfire ...

 

Also, VEAO (in form of Pman) mentioned that they are or will be working on FW-190 A, which adds to the VEAO queue another aircraft. Only shame they still cant get that P-40 F running for like ... 2 years

What!?!? The P-47 is scrapped as well? If I were one of the original "1944" backers I'd be livid.

 

On 10/1/2016 at 4:36 AM, DD_Arthur said:

Nice pictures - followed by a bizarre and wholly irrelevent discussion over.....weathering

Why is that irrelevant? The model and the textures are all we havd to go by. No info on how it performs, no cockpit shots, no video of any kind.

 

We might as well discuss what's there.

Edited October 1, 2016 by Finkeren

[Feathered_IV]

I'd wondered what happened to the Spitfire.  One of the kickstarter videos has Luthier quoting the creator of the aircraft, saying it will "be pretty much guaranteed it will take up to five months to create". 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Nice pictures - followed by a bizarre and wholly irrelevent discussion over.....weathering

I think you've never been to any plastic model forum, weathering can be a thing that triggers wars out there. The best model can be ruined by overuse of weathering, but at the same time best model can receive no positive comments when some consider lack or only small weathering present. You will never please "critics"  

Thankfully thats never been my problems since I cant seem to be able to finish any model.

 

What!?!? The P-47 is scrapped as well? If I were one of the original "1944" backers I'd be livid.

When I mentioned kickstarter and why 109 K-4 was still picked I was punished by Sithspawn and a comment was made (supported by Matt Wagner lmao) that they cannot be blamed for faults of those before them and their choices (namely Luthier). When 109 K-4 was released all the praise went towards ED. Original 1944 backers already made up their mind.

 

Also, its not scrapped. Its put on hold in work in progress. That's somewhere between eternity and soon A step closer are Leathernecks since they put on hold their F4U (and Iwo Jima map) until ED releases some technology/software.

Delay Simulator it is   

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Solty. Do not get salty Of course they did maintenance to the planes to keep them in a fighting condition. But do not compare a base in England with all the facilities, spare parts and personnel at hand to a front line field somewhere out there. Simply the planes did wear more out in the field as there it was not feasibly possible to scrub and grind the planes like in a large base farther from action. They did not move the RAF Bodney base full of Mustangs to a Normandy dirt strip including the hangars, repair shops, depots full of spares etc. There simply was not enough resources and space to perform anything more than the daily duties within the constraits of that frontline field. Add to that the amount of sorties planes flew and count on how much the ground crew did scrub and polish every seam and panel. They did to an extent, but not as much as in a big base like Bodney, Bigging Hill etc. Nothing about making assumptions, but putting it into a perspective from own service in an air force with modern jets and their requirements. And those far exceed what a prop plane requires in every single way.

 

 As of model kits. I have found the US Navy WW2 planes most interesting to weather as they were operated under harsh conditions with salt, relentless sunshine, storms etc. The exhaust soot is a challenge as the lead filled fuel made the blue soot to be more or less white. And did they not use sealing tape on top of Corsairs to prevent oil spillage on windscreen/canopy etc. P-61 Black Widow also has some nice weathering options, especially the black painted ones. Corsair and Black Widow are 2 of my favorite US planes along with P-47D and N. From RAF inventory I prefer the Typhoon, Tempest and Lancaster

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Pitty to hear about the P-47 (on a bright side this might push the Me-262 somewhat). Still nice screenshots.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Really a shame the P-47D suffered a setback Me262 was in a decent shape already last year along with the Bf109G so wondering when we see more of them.

[Feathered_IV]

I'm curious how the P-47 - despite numerous flying examples still being in existence, can become so difficult to produce.  When extinct types like the 109K or actual Me-262s are all OK.

[Lusekofte]

REALLY??? I was not showing off the skin on the vehicles nor the end product. This is VIP and it looking damn good. You guys are giving critique on the same bases you yourself objected to when BOS was in the heat. I probably will not fly WW2 stuff in DCS for many years to come, And I am not a P 51 ,Bf109 , FW 190  and Spitfire fan in simulation purposes. They simply give me nothing, except for a little ride now and then in offline mode.

I simply credit the 3D work done here, not how they choose to color it, neither the light, a little sweet FX fix the light issue. I did not start this for a DCS vs BOS debate.

And where do you see the mud? I see a non glossy skin myself with no effect for being metal

[Matt]

 

 

If I were one of the original "1944" backers I'd be livid.

 

I am still livid.

 

But the Spitfire looks nice. 

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Considering the level of detail they seek in documentation I'd say that excludes awful lot of warbirds. Wind tunnel testing of aircraft was not a standard and there werent many large scale wind tunnels (I recall that one big enough was in Langley in US, one was in France and Japanese had one in Yokosuka Research Facility [Yokosuka Arsenal]) but that also makes sense why they avoid anything larger than a fighter. Documentation on some bombers is probably even more limited than on fighters ... 

[Urra]

I'm curious how the P-47 - despite numerous flying examples still being in existence, can become so difficult to produce. When extinct types like the 109K or actual Me-262s are all OK.

Why can't they pay for a CFD analysis(cheapest?) or tunnel test on a accurate model plane. Isn't that how many tests where done and then scaled up. I'm slightly confused as to why this has become a 10m thick stonewall all of a sudden.

[Uufflakke]

There is now another pic of the train on the Normandy thread...

 

Where?

Any link to the image?

Haven't found it myself.

[DB605]

 no cockpit shots

 

Here you go.

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=128500&d=1448633669

 

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/iblock/3f8/Spitfire-IX-cockpit-02.jpg

 

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/iblock/b36/Spitfire-IX-cockpit-01.jpg

[Urra]

Where?

Any link to the image?

Haven't found it myself.

Here it is.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2914868&postcount=634

[Bando]

These are all fine looking pictures.

[Finkeren]

Here you go.

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=128500&d=1448633669

 

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/iblock/3f8/Spitfire-IX-cockpit-02.jpg

 

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/upload/iblock/b36/Spitfire-IX-cockpit-01.jpg

Looks nice.