Flew the DCS jug up to 33.000 feet yesterday night…
I expected a fun to fly plane up high, but instead it was wobbling all the time…
It was hard keeping the ball centered and needed serious trimming and continuous corrections…
Haven’t been so much high with the other warbirds in DCS but the flight wasn’t pleasant…
we were in a pair 200mph level flight was sill wobbling…
Now i regret i havn’t lost 3000ft and stabilised it at a faster speed…
Also the dive was meah… 500mph indicated airspeed but no compressibility (should try harder next time with all engine in!) Also no feeling of speed at all…
(in box you have stronger wind effects. - don’t know if they are more “real”, but the feeling of speed is better!) I need to hurry up in setting up some transducers!
Around 300mph the jug is a beauty!
I found also t/o and landing easy!
@Chuck_Owl read your guide and it’s great as usual thanks! But i found i have a big kick by using the turbo even below 7000ft… (you suggested to operate it only above 7000ft if i remember right)
The Mustang and Kurfurst both fly reasonably well at high altitudes, or at least they did when I last tried. Not sure what happens there (except that it is quite an altitude for piston engines).
As for the shaking and sense of speed: DCS lacks a lot of it. Both up high and especially in low level flight. Going near the speed of sound below 300ft AGL is quite a shaky ride in real life, in DCS it isn’t.
@EAF51_Jimmi,
Hope im not stating the obvious… At 33k your RPM and Throttle should be to the firewall. Your turbo should be used as a Throttle then. It should be close to maxed. Is this how you fly it?
Hey Chuck, could we get a quick fix on the takeoff procedure section, p96-97? It’s just missing the boost usage on takeoff. Apparently it’s impossible to get 52” on takeoff without boost, but the Guide implies that it is possible.
I’ve dug through a couple old USAAF manuals and the whole boost thing is clear as mud, and even more confusing when you try it out in DCS and find nothing matches
I clarified things a bit (revision date remains the same though).
The official documentation states that you should throttle up smoothly and not exceed 52 in Hg on takeoff. That’s pretty much the only guideline. Base on ED’s documentation, it seems that takeoff with or without the turbosupercharger were both permitted.
Throttling up without using the Turbosupercharger (B) lever gets you about 45 in Hg tops. That’s more than enough for takeoff with a normal weight configuration.
However, there might be cases where you want that extra manifold pressure. You can use the (B) lever. WIth the throttle and the (B) lever fully forward, you can get more than 52 in Hg (and you can get even more if using Water Injection in conjunction with the (B) Lever). Therefore, if using the Turbo, don’t exceed 52. That’s what the guideline implies. If you have to exceed 52 inches, you can only do so if you use Water Injection.
I struggle with the engine sound effects with the IL 2 P 47, the fly by view sounds a wee bit like a lawn mower. For me at least. DCS’s engine sounds seem much more robust
As well the propeller animation for the IL2 aircraft reminds me of the clear circular plastic pieces you’d find in a plastic model kit that were supposed to give the effect of prop blur.
I wish. But no. Not clickable now, nor probably ever. But as for similar flying qualities: oh yes, that’s a good thing I think. It says to me that both engines interpret the data similarly. I love them both but ultimately prefer IL2 for flying and fighting in props.
Strange, I flew the P-47 in Il-2 a few months ago and some things in the FM looked really different with the DCS version. I preferred the DCS handling, sound design and overall cockpit quality. Having never flown the plane IRL I am however unable to say which sim is closer to its real life counterpart.
All that matters is that we’ve got some cool planes to enjoy!
I do too. It’s not just the clickable bit. The DCS props are a bit more challenging to fly. I find I fight a little better on the DCS Storm of War server than I do on IL2’s better servers like “Finnish” or Storm of War. (Still bad but better.) Overall though I prefer the entire IL2 experience.
imo, the best approach is that of IL2 COD = semi-clickable cockpits …despite that I prefer also IL2 for online prop combat
DCS is still so ‘dry’ experience outside the cockpit. hopefully dynamic campaign engine will be used heavily on the online servers in the future.
I really like the interaction with the cockpits in DCS, it make me want to care more about that virtual stead. I used to fly P51D online.
But dont quite feel any need… to buy more.
I have both (il2 and DCS) since their release and follow them.
All have their pros vs cons, and both are excellent combat flight sims, but if you want not only a aircraft sim, but a full and comprehensive ww2 experience with a career, il2 cod/box are the key.
The story about il2 not having clickable cockpits i followed it on forum and its 100% fault of people with other opinions. Some people request that feature in the il2 even when it was a baby and devs was opened to that possibility. Many people request to have it like dcs, were you have all buttons mapped A N D clickable cockpit, to use non important or rare use switches ( not only to not need to memorize 100 of keystrokes and more realistic interaction).
Infact is much more real the click on cockpit because pilots when want to click the battery switch move their hand and click in the switch in the cockpit (like +/- with the mouse moving hand to the cockpit point and click in switch) than go to a yoga RightCtrl-LShift-B to on, LeftAlt-RightShift-B to off, were after a while your brain is more flooded with crazy keystrokes than the study of that buttons in cockpit like real pilots should have.
But because we have the kind of people that i mentioned above, started to storm armies of “special” guys that not read the “AND” word and starting to defend the only buttons as if clickable was a reality you loose the keys. Whatever you try multiple times to say that you will have both options, they never understand (like the same dumbs that act that because now you have msfs you should uninstall xp/fsx/p3d). Sadly like in reality and many others democracy projects, the mainstream are the most stupid and the ones that flood with garbage and more loud talk. So democracy won and for the devs, why they will do something that requires more dev time when maiority not want, now we in il2 have what community requested…
Some of what you are saying may well be true. But the tone! Turn the dial down to 6 and you’ll make a much stronger case.
Regarding clickables. Earlier this year 777 published a handy guide for manipulating all of the features of Tank Crew. If anyone here remembers “The Onion”, it read a bit like that; like an irreverent inside joke. I saw that and KNEW then and there that key combos were not a sustainable input method for something so complicated. I was wrong—at least in the short term. For every aspect of this hobby that I find patently self-evident, there are tens of thousands of equally passionate users who see the opposite just as clearly.
In that 777 forum war i was spectator so i not participate in nothing there.
I explained what happened in the forum and one of the reasons we not have clickable pits on il2 box. The flood of trolls and misunderstoods there was so big that nowadays is a no end discussion.
I only explain here what happened in 777 forum and why. Was not to have here another flame war like existed in their forum.
The problem in that forum was not how it was requested, was how it was reacted by many members that read in vertical and misunderstood all (common practice nowadays when you request a feature and people treat like if devs do that they will loose the others features).
NO ONE requested to remove mapped keys!!! That is the big problem, every time someone request clickable cockpits, people act and make a fuss as that devs will remove mapped keys!
In fact i like both and in this kind of sims i think sims should have both!
My understanding, and I say this with full admission that logic and intuition often misguide what we believe to be fact, is that IL2 devs held the WW2 combat experience at a higher priority than that of aircraft systems functionality. Further, that to remain within budget, choices had to be made to keep the business viable and allow growth. At least I think that’s what I remember Jason saying during interviews. Anyway, I tend not to dwell on what could have been, but rather how to have the most fun with what we have. Otherwise, I would be in deeper turmoil as to why it’s taken so long to have a DCS Phantom. Oops, there I go again.
An additional comment is the it is interesting how IL2 neatly straddles the divide between War Thunder and DCS.
I agree with dcs phamtom, its a epic aircraft for multicrew coop like we have with f14. And when we already have MiG 21 and 19, the MiG killer (phamtom) will be great there and a must to have!!! Its a great cold war fighter bomber and also be cool to have it in Syria theater with IAF livery.
Also I’m dreaming for a dcs tornado. Finally but impossible to have is a MiG-31, but this one is only in the most deep dreams. The MiG-31 is the only modern strategic fighter/interceptor and being a strategic weapon and not a tactical wepon like other conventional flighters, it is highly classified and to add even more impossibility, russia gov not allow any modern weapon being reproduced in pc simulators. Its why we can’t even have a modern MiG-35 or modern Su-35/37,… on dcs.
Very cool is the works of A6 intruder that devs of f14 are doing now, sadly it will be only external model and no plans for crewable, but lets see if they change their minds and complete it. It is also a great add side by side with F4
Teaser for Reflected’s Wolf Pack Campaign. I’ve purchased it and just went through “mission” 1. No spoilers but I feel certain that this is going to be a good one.
Reflected’s excellent P-47D cockpit orientation, startup, taxi, and landing tutorial. Bring a notepad.
