I learned long ago that the sim community, beyond most all others, has a knack for nitpicking about absolutely irrelevant details. I understand it's important to have as much accuracy as possible (it is a sim after all) and I want Oleg and Co. to put out the best product they possibly can, but most of the nitpicking concerns graphical limitations and things that don't make a bit of difference in the long run. I'm more concerned about FMs, DMs, and that sort of thing, you know...things that are actually important in a combat flight simulator. Unfortunately, those aspects can't really be conveyed in a screenshot, so I just enjoy the screenshots for what they are: Brief, momentary glimpses of a much larger picture.
________
Website Design

I aggre with you mr necrobaron. About the question of moving control surfaces to be seen, question has been answered before in the forum, yes, we will see them mooving, but only close distance. in the today picture of the JU88 i think (not sure) is seen that elevator is not neutral.
Other aspect not refered yet is, if buttons can be programed to act not only as momentary but also as toggle switch, witch would be very usefull to cockpit builters etc.

Once we know what cameras we have?

I'd love a camera on the gunsight, but looking back at the pilot. This would be fantastic to record the pilot animations as combat ensues. A movie-makers dream camera that would be.

Cheers, MP

Ah,but who started it?
How many updates have we seen that aren't relevant to a flightsim,eh?
I personally don't care about the "physics of a swiveling antenna on the rotating turrent of an armoured car"..........

They do sharpen up quite nicely in Photoshop:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v369/RedToo/x02.jpg

RedToo.

The baron speaks the truth.

I think the development team is doing the right thing in toning down the updates. All they lead to is people nitpicking and asking for silly "additions". Plus, I believe Olegg recently conveyed the reality that other entities steal ideas and such from them. So why publish graphical updates for the competition and the ungrateful?

What update do I want? What do most of us want? A report on how progress is coming concerning a release date. Just let me know if the sim is going to be ready for the Christmas gift season. Is that estimate still on track?

...and you can't call ME a FANBOY as I just purchased 1946 and haven't had the chance to play it yet :).

Splitter

would you please stop saying that in each thread, on multiple web sites... we kinda got the message

Thx

Hallo Luthier and company! Very nice shots, and to my eyes the propellers look great!

The serial on the Hurricane is off though. British WWII military serials was not hyphenated, but simply a 1 letter 4 numbers, like this (photoshopped):

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...ing/Serial.jpg

If the serials are added as an actual code in an appropriate font, I suppose this would be an easy thing to fix.

Actually, it's clearly visible that the Ju88 closer to the camera has its elevators slightly deflected upwards, the one in front also has a slight upward elevator but it's harder to spot...maybe they've already used their ailerons to bank and they are now just pulling on the stick to make the turn.

Now, as for why they have the exact same control inputs, i think this is to save CPU power in AI calculations. Just like IL2, it seems that AI in formation tend to move in almost perfect unison (although AI planes still do wiggle back and forth a bit in formation, you can check this out if you engage autopilot and up the time compression a bit). It sure would be nice to have some variation to make it feel more "human", but it won't bother me much if it saves processing power for other equally important things.

A question about RAF finflashes
 

To Oleg and Luthier.

In all the screenshots so far, the RAF planes have had the 24 inches wide by 27 inches tall finflash. This was first introduced in August 1940, but was not universal throughout Fighter Command before December 1940 (the squadrons presumably having more pressing issues than repainting markings).

An order for tail-markings for RAF planes was issued in May. It specified tricolour markings in RAF paint colours, red forward, and stated that they should "cover as much of the fin area as possible". Thus, a number of versions appeared. These are all taken from photos of Hurricanes in 1940:

"Full" tails:
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...ning/Full8.jpg http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...ing/Full10.jpg http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...ing/Full11.jpg http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...ing/Full13.jpg

"Cropped" tails:
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...lcropped65.jpg http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...llcropped8.jpg http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...lcropped10.jpg

Finflash:
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37...ing/Flash8.jpg

RAF flew with the various "full" and "cropped" tail markings all through the Channel clashes in summer 1940, by late September/early October perhaps half of the squadrons had changed, and some stragglers flew with them even into early 1941.

Do you plan to have a look at this rather amazing variety of tail markings? If so, I have started collecting data on what squadron had what tail markings, and when they changed over to the regulation flash.