I realize that the P-51 CoG was moved but,

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Greg Boyington tells a story in his memoirs about how he rigged up a sort of jury-rigged autopilot in his Corsair which allowed the plane to fly straight and level while he dozed and took smoke breaks. He relied on sharper-eyed members of his squadron to call out bogies, and his squad mates always knew that action was imminent when he cracked back the canopy to toss his butt out the window.

It might be a tall tale, but I can believe the cigarette smoking part. Anyhow, it can't be that hard to rig up an improvised ash tray using a beer can and some duct tape. Or, just knock the ash on the floor.

And then one negative G manuvre and all that ash and cigar(ette) rests become airborne and float around in your pit - only to dirty up on your nice tidy uniform or worse.
But for smoking breaks, sounds credible, and ashes out of the "window", why not. Maybe the real reason why the P-39 had wind-down windows...

[horseback]

Originally Posted by majorfailure

And then one negative G manuvre and all that ash and cigar(ette) rests become airborne and float around in your pit - only to dirty up on your nice tidy uniform or worse.
But for smoking breaks, sounds credible, and ashes out of the "window", why not. Maybe the real reason why the P-39 had wind-down windows...

Now we know the real reason pilots wore those goggles, and why ashtrays would probably be designed to have some sort of cover. "Tidy uniforms" could not be a high priority in aircraft equipped with relief tubes, much less anywhere in the South Pacific or CBI theaters.

About making an ashtray out of an old beer can, let's remember that beer cans in the 1940s were not made of thin aluminum; that started in the late 1970s as I recall, and up until that point crushing an empty beer or soda can with one hand (or against your own forehead) would have been a clear display of physical strength (or high pain threshold)...

You would have needed some specialized metalworking tools easily obtainable at most airfields and some idea of what you were doing.

cheers

horseback

[MaxGunz]

You ask about things I was sure of and could provide links to before 2007. I have seen no major changes since then.

IIRC there were online cheats where data from players planes were being read at the host server and used but that may have been speculation including the part where one team got caught.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=29404

Don't output "true" values, only instrument readouts. This makes sure that DeviceLink instruments can't move faster than those displayed in the sim. Currently the variometer(and other gauges) output changes in value faster than the virtual gauge.
Another benefit of this is authentic needle movement for anything using Devicelink.

There is no devicelink TAS or position outputs. They were asked for and turned down. What the above refers to is on-screen instrument updates which I can't say how often the game updates the gauges but if devicelink is getting queried 1000+ times a second then check FPS to see about the load that action puts on the game!

Get yourself a copy of UDPSpeed or UDPGraph and see what you get. I was only able to get instrument readings. Perhaps Pfeil knows something extra or just how often IL2 updates gauges or didn't take into account the load he placed on the game.

Note all the gauges and actions he says are not supported.

You also have a file named devicelink.txt in your game folder. It names all the commands.

This is something that perhaps DT has an expert on. Otherwise you're welcome to read many pages of threads trying to separate signal from noise and hope you interpret loose words to hard reality. You'd do better running UDPSpeed gauges and looking for real differences while remembering that yes you can affect the game through overload. One gauge, 10x a second should be enough to see if the on-screen gauge is only updated at more than 1 second intervals. You can't see 100th of a second so don't bother 1000x per.