I like the 109 in BoS, but I think at the moment she's a tad too docile. I've screwed up a couple of approaches and still got her safely to the ground each time, the DCS:P-51 in comparison is a lot more finicky in such situations. BoS is still WIP though so no biggie, I really like what I'm seing so far.
"...late afternoon the Air Tasking Order came in [and] we found the A-10 part and we said, "We are going where!? We are doing what!?"
Capt. Todd Sheehy, Hog pilot, on receiving orders during Operation Desert Storm
The DCS P-51 is good, but i already have more fun with the two BOS planes. It is this "ROF feeling" of flight. You feel the air. I don't get this with DCS, but it is hard to discribe.
PS: Another strong plus of the ROF engine: you can fly close formation in MP and SP - even in light turbulence. I just made a formation landing with an AI 109 (seperation around 5 meters). I was trying a formation with the P 51, flown by an experienced RL formation pilot, and we couldn't get it stabilized.
I know what you mean and I also like the feeling of flight in RoF. But I have to say I don't have problems flying close formation in DCS in MP, including take-offs and landings. Done that many times.
What is missing for me right now in BoS a bit is the torque when adjusting engine power and the IMO a bit too forgiving physics on touchdown. Mind you, this is really a very subjective assessment and as I said, I very much like what I'm seing so far in BoS.
"...late afternoon the Air Tasking Order came in [and] we found the A-10 part and we said, "We are going where!? We are doing what!?"
Capt. Todd Sheehy, Hog pilot, on receiving orders during Operation Desert Storm
What is missing for me right now in BoS a bit is the torque when adjusting engine power and the IMO a bit too forgiving physics on touchdown. Mind you, this is really a very subjective assessment and as I said, I very much like what I'm seing so far in BoS.
Yes, same here. Think, after playing DCS-P51, BOS as it is now, is "easy" in calm weather even more than IL2 FB.
I think the FM has a lot to be desired with the 109 at this stage (comes across a little too easy to be honest - just MHO), the cockpit needs a lot of love too as it's not really a stand out feature at this point in time of the testing cycle.
I agree, the 109 is easier to fly than the Lagg, maybe a touch too easy on the take off and landings, was expecting a tougher time on the ground too, but like you say, what the feck do we know...lol.
The cockpit model is great, it just needs a touch up here and there, bit of reflection on the gauges, just needs a bit of love to bring out the detail.
Though i know most of us understand this is exactly what the devs want at this stage of development..feedback, its very early days.
There really isn't reflection on cockpit gauges. You won't see yourself in them, or the rear of the fuselage. The other title that everyone loves the cockpit details in took a lot of artistic license in producing them.
You'll see light and stuff, and some undefinable stuff, but not mirror reflections and additionally reflections are based on observation so they won't be static which unnecessarily eats up a significant amount of resources.
Here you see a cockpit that many would probably be called cartoony and not realistic, or whatever the phrase of the day is for a cockpit that doesn't have too much artistic freedom involved in it. You see a little light glare on the gauge, but not mirror image of anything directly in front of it - such as my arms, camera and the rear of the cockpit.
There will be reflection on any glass surface, and would be apparent to a greater or lesser degree depending on it's position in relation to the light source. Unless that is there is measures taken on the glass covering the gauges to minimize reflection, and maybe that's the case.
I have the MS FFB2 Stick and really missing some more weight/feel of the plane on the controls when pooling the stick on flight/takeoff. ED done fantastic job with P51 FFB till rev 1.2.6 that broke some parts of it.
And a couple more cockpits. A little gloss and glare on the gauges, adds depth and makes it look like a glass covered gauge - but absolute reflections, not so much.
And a couple more cockpits. A little gloss and glare on the gauges, adds depth and makes it look like a glass covered gauge - but absolute reflections, not so much.
As much reflection as any other piece of glass - not sure where you're coming up with the "absolute reflection" bit.
The bit where the other title shows a very clean and defined reflection of the rear half of the cockpit/fuselage/canopy. That bit is an absolutely defined reflection, and that bit I have never seen reflected.
And glass itself doesn't reflect, it requires material behind it. So an opaque or drab paint is clearly not going to provide the mirror reflection of a silver or aluminum foil backing.
You're wrong about the cause/nature of the reflectivity of glass. No it's not a 100% reflective "mirror" but it's reflective. Reflection doesn't equal MIRROR. No glass is 100% transparent, and as the angle of the sun or light source get's more oblique you're going to start getting a fresnel effect and start to see it reflected in the glass. It's all about angles, and those change dynamically in the cockpit (as the aircraft moves relative to the sun) As a 3D artist who messes with this stuff and tweaks these settings all the time I know of what I speak.
Seeing yourself or the back of the cockpit reflected? Not so much, but it is there somewhat. It will be subtle, but the effect is present.
Think, after playing DCS-P51, BOS as it is now, is "easy" in calm weather even more than IL2 FB. GP
Sorry, but playing DCS-P51 is no argument. It is no reference for BOS. And what is "easy" ? Say, what you think is physically not right. We can discuss this then, but only if it stays objective.
Originally Posted By: gprr
I have the MS FFB2 Stick and really missing some more weight/feel of the plane on the controls when pulling the stick on flight/takeoff.
Why do you think you need force to pull on take off ? If done correctly you don´t need any force.
PS: when i have time again, i will do a little video to compare the aerodynamics (spins, interaction with ground, gusts etc.)