EmerlistDavjack

This is the plane that makes me really regret that they do not have individual key-bindings in this game. P-38 gonna be worse.

Literally jaw dropping. Wow.

I'm gonna have to make time for this Thursday. I keep reading about these large JG1 flights.

At least IL2 seems to have a better grasp on how Windows IDs units. I haven't had a single issue with IL2. ROF is indeed a mess.

That's the smart way to do it. The idiot's (my) way is to save new profiles each time called something like JOY-1 THROT-0 PED-2 ect etc. It's not ideal. Thanks for the post!

Sweet. I'm going to take a break this week and not attend tomorrow, but I'll see you all on the 11th!

I counter with a bunch of Finns doing...Finn things. A guy plays the spoons, and another guy plays an anvil.

Heatblur commissioned a soundtrack for the DCS F-14 release, it's pretty rad.

People take these games too seriously sometimes. Takes us away from the real reason we are all playing them. Those guys are douchebags, Talbot. I thought your video was funny. Overall, I agree with Luft, except for one point: if you bail from a burning plane in a chute, you have a better chance of living. If you bail from an engine out...that's stupid in DiD. Try to ditch instead. One of the reasons that I joined this squadron was an emphasis on DiD.

Aww, I'll miss your melodious voice and stalwart leadership, Luft.

Beat us rather handily too, but a lotta fun was had. Thanks for joining in, everybody!

Heh, I am definitely overthinking it, I like to. And yes, the whole point of me spending time learning intricacies so that I can feel confident I know what I am doing without Technochat. Any time I've looked, it seems like IAS in the cockpit and from the Bombardier are identical. The other aspect is that one way I learn to do things is to do the extremes. Like, learning how to goose an He-111 off a wet field in summer, as loaded as can be. Not easy, not even ever necessary (6 hour endurance full fuel...yeah), but it was a challenge and forced me to absolutely nail the roll out and draw my flaps in very slowly and methodically. I know that the Nearest Field thing gives *almost* AGL because these maps are mostly so flat, and there isn't really much in the Kuban hills to attack. Within normal operating procedures, that's a good bet, but it also should be somewhat near to the Bombardier's value anyway, since the maps are so flat and low anyway (Moscow is at 250m MSL IRL). However, as your get higher in altitude, it seems to matter more. So from my above example, flying at 5000m over Stalingrad in winter, the Nearest Field value gave me 300m of elevation higher than the corrected MSL value from the Bombardier. However, since Stalingrad is at ~50m MSL, the Bombardiers value is closer to AGL. By observing the Technochat AGL, I was able to determine that this is important at 5000m! So right now, TAW is playing a map with 8 degrees celsius and I would be paying attention to the difference between the Cockpit/Bomb values and deciding which I think is closer to AGL. If the map were at 13-17C, then yes, I would say use the Nearest Airfield all the time. The other aspect of this is that I believe that the Winds Aloft (like a lot of aviation info) is given in MSL. So the Winds Aloft correspond directly to the Bombardier reading, and I've been practicing in strong winds. I'll admit, I don't know how much an altitude setting difference of 300m would matter with a big bomb if I got the Speed/Wind correct, but I am trying to learn precision with the smaller ones. BTW: I found this compendium of Airfields with their Altitudes listed, but only for the original BoS map. If you know the altitude of your target, then the Bombardier Alt - Target Alt = AGL every time as far as I can tell. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3emIgfIMJ_mY2E5WkZrNmhjemc/view

I'm going to keep all my IL2 testing/worrying in one thread so as not to clutter the forum up on my voyage of discovery. If you haven't been able to tell, sometimes something bugs me, and I just must understand how it works. I have been practicing HE-111 5000m bombing, and overall I am starting to understand a bunch of how it works. Not just using the bomb sight, which I do understand, but also how to line up a run for maximum effect on a single pass, how to deal with crosswinds on approach, that sort of thing. All very fun. I was doing a QMB over Stalingrad at 5000m in Winter, and I noticed something that just bothered me: No altitude values matched. Technochat clearly reads AGL at 4870m. Altimeter on STP mode reads 5.43km, ("Friendly Airfield" mode it reads 5.31km, but those should be relatively different values), and the Bomb Sight reads 5km exactly. Kliegmann today told me that the bombsight altimeter just works for accuracy all the time, and that it appears to be MSL. In Autumn (which I've read is STP in QMB), all values match except the Technochat AGL (which should only really match sitting on an airfield). So this has to be due to temperature! The Bombsight is giving absolute MSL, whereas the Altimeter gives the correct pressure altitudes uncorrected for temperature. The reason I needed to understand just how it works is that now I know to ignore the cockpit and just fly to the Altimeter reading for the best winds aloft match, especially in overly cold or hot weather! Aeronautics guys, correct me if I am wrong: I took a rough equation for Density Altitude {Ad=Ap+[120x(OAT-ISA)]} and worked it back to give Outside Air Temp (altitude must be in feet, temp in C). If I use the MSL given by the Bomb sight as a "density altitude," and the STP Altimeter reading as my Pressure Altitude, with a standard ISA temp of -17.5 at 5000m, I get an OAT of -28.75C. I wonder how close that is to what the game thinks. If we then add the standard lapse rate for 16000 ft (2C/1000ft), we get an estimated 4.75C on the ground. Not the coldest day in Russia! Kinda makes me want to learn enough of the editor to peer inside the game's fidelity, but my guess is: pretty great. Now I just need to find a resource for topographic maps or something I can use to gauge AGL. I wonder why TAW doesn't list it with their airfield recon photos.

Oh, I appear to have been promoted from Gfr to Sgt. S!

It's the same key as boost. Really, it's all just terminology. AFAIK WEP is American, Boost is British, and the Germans and Soviets had their own words that we translate into Boost and/or Emergency Power. The Mig-3, for instance, does not use the boost button at all, but full mixture is called Boost none-the-less. Another strange thing I noticed today: Below 3.5km, the Dora is in combat mode at full throttle with no MW-50 Boost enabled. If you climb up over that, the Supercharger kicks to second gear and the technochat calls it "Emergency Power." On the spec sheet, it says "Emergency Power with no MW-50 for 3 mins," but I let her run for 25 min (8x, using in cockpit clock) before I got the technochat message that I had exceeded Emergency time. So who knows. Starting to build confidence in my knowledge of how to use the planes. Now I just need to learn how to identify targets without icons! Yeesh I am terrible at that offline. Maybe I should take up level bombing.