I think that this is something that could be dependent on airfield or mission type. It shouldn't be much of a problem to insert such a feature into the code, after initial release.

The engine limits in Il-2 are almost non-existent. There are really only a few quirks modeled to give some planes individuality, but nothing beyond that.
You can break your Bf-109 engine by putting it in over-boost if over 80% power, and you can over-speed your Hurricane engine in a dive. If your engine overheats for 9 minutes, reduce power until you see "Engine:normal" and now you can overheat it again for 9 minutes. Things like oil pressure, fuel pressure, etc mean nothing.

Fly a Dornier in manual pitch and it should give you just a little taste of how involved managing an engine can be. You will probably break it your first time taking off. Still, one can easily apply more throttle than pitch and fly happily, and most engine instruments are just decoration.

Naturally.

I absolutely, 100% agree. As long as Mr.Madox and his team can code it in a reasonable time frame let us have it, i think most of us would buy SoW even if it was priced 50% higher than most gaming titles anyway. Then each one can decide for himself what he likes and what he doesn't, gather with people that share his opinions and fly together online in environments that follow their desired difficulty settings.

Games are all about fun and if whatever relevant feature can be coded and be optional it should make it into the game, i don't think anyone of us has the right to tell the next guy what his idea of fun should include ;)

Known planes with this bug are at least FW-190A9 and Spitfire IXc 25lbs. Most dont do it... The boost engage limit in order to not over-rev(3000RPM or more) the engine is 2000RPM or enabling it instantly after setting power near-0(engine RPM has no time to jump high enough).

Imho the best-modelled prop pitch is in the Bf109E. In vast majority the "prop pitch" is actually engine RPM anyways, and the on-screen message is misleading.

But didnt you know my fun is better than your fun? :grin:

For me clickable cockpits do not equate to realism. Although the clickable cockpit may has a visually accurate representation of the cockpit, for me, the use of the mouse to select the switches is anything but realistic or intuative.

I will, in all probability, continue to use my hotas controls, expand my home-brew BL0836 based switch box and use the keyboard for other less used functions.

Even though the switches aren't in the correct locations, for me, I find it more realistic and imersive. Lets face it wether your flying, driving or using a keyboard, once you train your body to know the position of a physical switch, you don't have to look for it to use it.

cheers!

Clickpits would be nice to have but not essential. Oleg has already said that everything is there in the SOW engine to allow every switch in a pit to be clicked (either through a keystoke or the mouse). However, from what he says he'll be leaving that up to third party developers. I believe he does recognise the need to bring on board the FSX crowd.

As for improved modelling of aircraft sub systems and engine tolerances, I'm with Blackdog all the way. I really hope the developers listen to his views. Again, I'm quite happy if this is provided in later paid for add-on packs.

Optional of course.....

No! IMHO it´s inmersion killer!

Voted NO. Getting fed up with people keep going on about clickable cockpits. I agree with what Oleg has said in the past and his reasons for not going down this line. For none combat sims fine, but not for combat flight sims. Do not expect to be competative in a combat sim if you have a clickable cockpit. If you want clickable, go for none combat sims and leave combat sim alone.

Thank you.

Talisman

If they have touch screen support I think it would be very innovative.. if not.. for me anyway a waste of time.. I'd never use it.. I would like to see every function modelled in the sim with a moveable virtual counterpart though..

Other people like me are getting fed up with people like you who are going on about the "you won't flick switches with your mouse during combat" and can't get it into their heads that there are many phases of flight which do not involve combat. I can understand if sombody sais that he would like to see the developement resources spent otherwise but your "go fly a Cessna" attitude is out of place.

+1