LoL so much delay and so much bugs :grin:

Oh, well ... it seems that it does work on 4.10 DF servers ... after all limited aircraft have been shot down they won't been shown in the list of available aircraft. I'd wish there was an announcement in the chat window about it though ...

Sorry for bothering you, TD! :oops:

Ju 88 model was changed and mapping with it. Old skins do not work 100% anymore.

Late model 109 compasses don't work.

Two potential bugs:

1) Default fuel mixture or supercharger settings set incorrectly for many player controlled aircraft at high altitudes so the plane emits smoke trails. Switching to autopilot/AI control doesn't fix the problem. AI controlled planes don't have the same problem. Example, a flight of 4 Re.2000 over Smolensk (or any QMB) map at 5000+ meters. I've also seen the same problem in the SM79 and Hs129 series. Haven't had a chance to test them all.

2) At the risk of seeming like I'm whining about FM, the G stress limits on the A20 series might not be correctly implemented. As I understand the films and pilot manuals for the A20, the plane was only stressed to withstand 3 Gs, but the G indicator only starts to go red at 4 Gs. Likewise, I'm still able to do the same sort of BFM with an A20C and A20G as I could before the 4.10 patch, repeatedly pulling 5-6 Gs in turns, loops or dive pull outs without breaking the airplane. The only difference is that the plane doesn't seem quite as powerful or maneuverable.

Bugs are bound to crop up with a patch of this size. No need to be a troll about it. :rolleyes:

Thanks for the quick answer!

It has always been this way: 100% mixture and supercharger to 1st gear.Try spawning at 10000 meters with a La-5 in 4.09 and you will see smoke trails and engine running rough.

Seems I`m the only one who flys sometimes singleplayer missions, I have seen this effect in 4.10 more often than in 4.09 Don`t know what causes this, but the AI can`t fly low without crash the plane within minutes. They outmanouver themself with hitting the ground.

:confused:

It could be... you will not get a 'Rodger' from the tower if you ask for the lights before you pass the last beacon. I will try removing the beacons and see what happens.

UPDATE
I removed the blind landing vehicle and every beacon on the map (had to edit mission file as FMB refused to admit AR was gone) it makes no difference. The tower will not 'rodger' your request until you are within 2km and the lights do not come on until you are within 1km.
2nd Update
I have been making a fairly shallow approach so I tried a higher approach (500m at the 4th waypoint) to see if line-of-sight was the problem but the tower still did not acknowledge my request until within 2km (actually 1.6) and the lights turned on at under 1km.

I play mostly single player missions since the original Il-2, probably 1000's, and I can prove that low-flying AI were as bad in 4.09 about manuevering into the ground as any other version. I tried a 1942 Sturmovik DCG campaign when 4.07m first came out and it was unplayable because of this problem and I've been testing this in every new version since and there has been 100% no difference in any version 4.0 or higher.

B25 Blind Landing mission
 

I have done a little research on this issue and posted on the Mission Building forum at UBI about it.

There are two issues with this mission...lights and position of the ILS tx object on the map.

- The glidepath angle appears to be around 3deg which is correct. The acknowledgement "Roger" to turn the lights on will not be heard until about 300ft on final (just under 2km) so the lights are not switched on until very late. However, there is a further issue...
- The object to transmit the signal for the ILS in this mission has been placed too close to the extended cetreline of the runway resulting in you being at least another 1km further out (a total of 3km) when you are on the glideslope at 300ft. If you follow the signal it will fly you into the ground 1km short of the runway.
- It helps to re-position the tx object at least 500m futher out on the extended cetreline to get the glidepath correct to arrive at the runway. I believe this also helps in getting the lights to come on just a little sooner as you are now closer to the runway when at 300ft.

It certainly helps to add approach lights (light4) in a line before the threshold, but an increase in the distance to accept a call for lights "on" in the new patch would certainly help....please?

Nicholaiovitch

set the properties of the lights to same color of the base...

A big problem: the Spitfire is now impossible to trim correctly.

This fact is not realistic at all !

Have you got any solution ??

The Spit is not alone in this, it seems almost all fighters I have flown since 4.10 now need large ammounts of down trim to fly level.

To fly level it's not a problem.

But it's impossible to trim the direction to fly correctly: if you trim the direction to conter the propeller tork, you fly horizontaly but in fact you turn to the left. In fact, you must fly 20° bank right to fly at the constant heading...

Not realistic !!!

The issue with the lights is not connected to the ILS system as I removed the ILS and all other beacons from the game (and checked the mission file to see akk had gone) and the lights still turn on at 1km.
It is also not related to altitude as I get the same results from a low shallow approach as a very steep high approach. I even tried turning on my landing lights in case it was a visibility problem as I know there is code to allow gunners to see aircraft further out if they have lights on.

Bionde: The lights would not turn on at all if the colour was not set (to be accurate; they would be on constantly)


Please can we have the lights turn on earlier? We know that in real life pilots used to ask for the lights to be flashed briefly so they knew where the base was and I am sure they would have been a lot more than 1km away. Even having the acknowledgement a lot earlier (5km?) would be a great help if you could get it in the bug fix release. When I am under 2km away from a blind landing nearing stall speed the last thing I want to be doing is fiddling with the Tab messages :-)

Maybe in 4.11 they could even flash the lights briefly when they acknowledge?

I must say that, despite any niggles, I am extremely grateful for the work everyone put in. I am not so fussed about the new types of Spit etc but the navigation options and G limits etc. are great!

Hello,

In first, thank you for the job you did with this 4.10

I may inform you that I found a strange thing on the map "Bessarabia":
In sector AS23, few thousand meter south to the monastery Orhei and multi colour band appears. I have checked nothing particular on the 4.09.

Best regards.

Belly.

Question (may be stupid), but this is not normal with PropPitch 100%, to always have the same engine speed (2700 rpm) with 100%, then 90, 80, 70, 60%, I had to reach 50% for 2650tr, then 2500 to 40%.

Dear DT members, next issue concerns playback of ntrk-records created before. As you can see the visualization of bomb's explosions existed earlier in 4.09m and others previous versions is absent during watching the same ntrk-records in 4.10m.
Please compare two attached images: 4.09m (to left) with explosion and 4.10m (to right) without it in the same record. :confused:
Is it possible to solve described issue?
Thank you beforehand.
Sincerely.

I have only found this with the spitfire, it needs too much downward trim to maintain level flight, other planes seem to be okay. Keep in mind that as speed increases so does lift, so all aircraft will have a tendency to climb as speed goes up. Aircraft like biplanes and i-16 etc. without elevator trim will need forward pressure on the stick the faster they go. AFAIK most flight models where untouched from 4.09 (except for spits and new planes).

The spitfire, like the 109, doesn't have aileron trim, so counteracting the torque must be done "manually", i.e with the stick. If rudder trim is used, then yes, the plane will skid to one side, and you will need to counteract with aileron (bank), but rudder trim should not be used much after takeoff. The problem i see with the spitfire FM is that too much downward elevator trim is needed, so much so that the elevator is visibly in a downward position all the time.

edited by myself

Nevermind. Already posted.

Can you pls make a screenshot. Nothing was changed on that map.

The tracks actually play the mission again rather than just play a movie. This means that a skip bombing attack that worked in 4.09 will fail when played back in 4.10 due to the 2 second arming rule introduced in 4.10. Even in 4.09 you will sometimes see a mission played in 4.09 will fail when played back in 4.09M. I can remember playing back a mission played in Stock 4.09 but this time with Mods turned on and the plane missed the runway and crashed when in stock 4.09 it landed OK.

Received this error on the Server when loading a mission:

Mission seemed to work OK, but have not seen this exception before.

WildWillie

Did you flied a real Spitfire? :)

I think you experienced the new bomb fusing feature. Your bomb did not explode! Muahahaha! :twisted: I am lovin' this new patch!

I'm pretty sure the AI aren't allowed to pull enough Gs to black out, and I think it's this that can result in them crashing at low level. You can see how it might happen if you watch them do a BnZ attack. Sometimes they will make their pass and then give up half-way because they know they can't pull enough Gs to get a shot without blacking out. You might be seeing it more often in 4.10 because they're not allowed to exceed their plane's in service G-limits, either.

Bug in flight model RE-2000
 

Dear TD,

First I want to thank you for all the work done for the IL2 community.

Taking off from the runway in the RE-2000 I found that the effect of the flaps seems to be inverted compared to all the other planes.
On retracking the flaps from takingoff position to combat and from combat to no flaps the nose comes up while by other planes to nose comes down.

Spitfire V was tested by NACA to be in neutral level flight with ~4° downward elevator for much of the speed range. How is it in game?

Fusing
 

I don't believe 30-40 meters is accurate for skip bombing on land. I recall watching a documentary regarding the P-51 mustang on either Military or History channel(back when history was about history and not about lorries) where archival footage of skip bombing was displayed. The footage demonstrated a P-51B dropping two GP 500lb bombs from a height of about 15-20 feet at the nadir of a dive. I recall that the bombs did infact explode on the target too.

On another note, I've noticed in the QMB that whenever one changes the map or returns to the QMB menu screen, the markings of all the aircraft have reverted to russian markings on allied aircraft and japanese marking on the axis. Has anyone addressed this issue? If so, sorry for the repeat.

Hi, dear Ernst :)
I really did it, but it was few days ago and result was normal. Ntrk-record with two destroyed ships by P-63 is attached here:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...&postcount=147
If you doubt according my ability for successful skip-bombing in 4.10m just watch it and also the next one attached to current post ("SF_Sparr_17_410_complete).
Exploded, be sure.
Really I have to laugh but not you: if you were alert as each pilot must to be, you should note that the text according destroyed target and compteted mission presents in both images, an altitude, speed, direction, time (1:00) are also the same in both images.
In this case it would be easy for you to believe me that both images concern to the same record made in 4.09 long before 4.10s appearance and the target was really destroyed.
But when I watch this record in 4.09m explosion presents at the picture and when I watch the same record in 4.10m explosion became unvisible, but ship sinking.
So, the issue is not in bomb explosion, but in its wrong visualization in 4.10m
It may lead for example to incorrect playback of ntrk-records created in previous versions or incorrect playback of movies in campaigns.
I hope it's clear now?
Best regards :)

P.S.If you still don't believe me, please watch the record "SF_Sparr_27_3ships_complete_409" in each version which you want (4.09m, 4.10m or both) and became sure. I made images just of this record. And additionally to avoid misunderstanding: SF in records name means SkyFan as a mission builder and test pilot, Sparr is the author of further campaign's idea, 17 & 27 - numbers of missions, 409 & 410 - version of the game etc.

P.P.S, Dear Roblex, thank you for explanation.

UP.;)

Ok, SkyFan. Only a joking. I believe you. Sorry for my bad joke and sarcasm. Salute!

Maybe we should guess, what plane it is? Could be a long night then. :rolleyes:

another little Junkers error

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/f...rp-nosegun.jpg

torp control box missing in nose gun position of both torp versions of ju88

Hmm, well that sounds about right then. It has a large wing and a lower aspect ratio than a 109 say, so it probably creates a lot of lift, perhaps it is correct. I'll have to research this some more, it's flies fine in Il2, just noticed that since 4.09, it requires more downward trim, doesn't affect it adversely though .

Edit: Yes I just read the NACA report (below) it does indicate about a maximum of about 4 degrees nose heavy trim in cruise flight, and sensitive elevators, so I think DT got the FM right. Just need to fix the Vc cockpit bug ;)

Spit V NACA test
http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/...pit_flying.pdf

Sorry,the Yaks planes!!

I don't know, what numbers are suitable for Yak fighters, but the ones you named, do not sound strange to me. And yes, at a fixed power (throttle) setting, a fixed prop pitch mean stable revolutions (RPM). You must understand, 100% propitch doesn't mean a flat propellar. The pitch is set for a wanted RPM.

I still wonder, what seems so strange to you in this?

I saw some notes about troubles in spitfire's FMD, but no answers at all ???

I think that's a major problem, totally in opposition with reality!: evil:
I can't believe only one or two users found that wrong setting.
Where are you guys? Did you try airplanes in flight or just looked from the cockpit on ground position?

We need to know if will do something to fix that point, if you won’t you will see soon or later a new buttons file coming from the dark side of your world.

May I have an answer, please!

Repost - Spitfire Elevator Trim
 

Noticed a few other have commented on this also and DT has not yet offered a comment on my post several pages ago and the more recent posts by people??

I can fly level with about 12% down elevator trim in 4.09m but require about 32% with 4.10m. This does indeed effect the flight model and response of the aircraft when trimmed for level flight.
Can DT please advise if this was intentional and by design or if it's a potential bug?

cheers

RE: setting confs.ini to CRT=1 and CRT=2 not allowing players to join a server.
(see pages 2, 10, 16, 17, 24 & 26)

Thank you.
Will it be fixed or do we need to take our server back to 4.09, in which CRT=1 and CRT=2 did work?

Thank you for your work on this great game - it is MUCH appreciated by the IL2 Community.

oh come one i did modifications for this game before
we didn't delay such a long time to came up with a pile up
of bugs, plus still keep porked german FM while keep tunnig
US and GB FM for the masses

For those debating Spitfire Elevator trim and the fact that they are seeing the elevator deflected visibly in external views when trimmed out. Well have a look at a few Air to Air shots of Spitfires and check out the position of the elevator. Its pretty characteristic of the type. Here is a couple of images of a MKXVI (Belongs to the Australian Temora collection) taken from an O2 whilst sitting in close formation and all nicely trimmed out speed at the time 130 Knots IAS:

http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/2285/spittrim.jpg

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/5228/spittrim2.jpg

I think he says that RPM do not react to prop pitch change from 100% to 50% like the prop is not constant speed one, but a variable pitch one with discrete positions. However, he should at least see RPM change with speed then. I can't test how it is now, but I think all yaks in 4.09 used to have constant speed props.

Sorry, may be my bad English didn't let me to understand it:oops:
Everything is OK, relax and have a nice New Year :)

Go be a jerk somewhere else will ye.

It's intentional.

Well, I'm no fan of the Spit and so I rarely fly it. However, I am curious about bug reports and this one is easy to test (if you still have a 4.09 version available, like I do).

I tested the 4.09 Spit 25lb vs the same plane in 4.10. It only takes 15 minutes for a simple test like this and you don't need an engineering degree either.

The man has a point. The two planes are totally different. Not only does the 4.10 Spit need a lot more down trim (I will roughly estimate about 2 1/2 times more), but the engine torque is much stronger on the 4.10 Spit...to the point it almost seems unflyable to me.

If you try and counteract the 4.10 torque (for level flight) with rudder or rudder trim, you need so much there's no way you can fly a straight heading. You will constantly loop to your left. In 4.09, a few clicks of the rudder trim left and the plane will fly straight and level.

Now, I have no idea which flight model is 'correct', but there's no way these two Spit FM's were the same. Not even close. (Also, to be fair, I only tested this one Spit model.)

However, has DT officially stated that the 4.09 and 4.10 Spit FM's are the same? (If not, there's not much anyone can do, is there?)

I'm just glad I'm not a Spit fan.


**EDIT - In the 4.10 Readme: 'Revised flight models for all Spitfires.'

Well, that says it all. The only reason I made this post was because I felt sorry for the people who I thought were being ignored by DT. I thought the issue was whether or not the Spit FM's were changed in 4.10.

Since the FM changes are documented in the Readme, I have no more comment. I'm not an expert on FM's so I don't get caught up in those kind of topics.

Aviar

You sure sound like one. ;)

If you're correct, the spit guys finally must learn to fly.

I tested Spit VIII (4.09) and Spit LF VIII (4.10) which should be the same airplane, and I can also confirm the trim and torque problems.

I tested the airplane at 2000m, 80% throttle and 70% pitch, which should be roughly the good settings for a fast cruise (at least in this game), thinking that the airplane should have its ailerons pre-trimmed for this kind of flight. Of course, it rolls very notably to the right, unless I introduce heavy skid to the left.

Something else I noticed, and I am quite puzzled by this, so if anyone can explain: in 4.09 Spits VIII, IXc, IXe and HF IXe all show Boost +8 at 500m with throttle set to 80%.

In 4.10 Spits LF VIII, IXc 1942, IXc 1943, LF IXe and HF IX all show Boost of about +10.5 at the same settings and the same altitude.

What is changed? Also, should all of these engines show the same manifold pressure at 500m considering some are optimized for low altitude and some for high? Does this mean that an HF spit is capable of the same speed at 500m as an LF?

@ Swiss - Typical flippant response from a blue-only flyer who clearly hasn't flown anything outside of a 109/190.

IMHO the 4.09 spits were more difficult to takeoff and land, Torque at these points of the flight regime seem reduced in 4.10.

The induced roll in the 4.10 Spits is happening at anywhere above ~200mph and is NOT torque. Torque roll would always be to the left, this is to the right.

Rather, I suspect it is the effect of airframe bias, whereby a little trim is inherently built into the structure of the the airframe, whether it be slightly offset vertical stabilisers, or as in the Macchi series, the asymmetric wing profile. This limits the a/c to being inherently trimmed at only a narrow speed/power setting, with the pilot having to work the a/c trim more above and below these settings.

Whether the TD spits are correct or not I cannot say. I have no proof, documented or otherwise and have not seen their source to comment on the veracity of it.

I will say that in my opinion, the original 4.09s felt more logical as knowing what happens aerodynamically the behaviour could be accounted for. Now I'm not sure why they behave this way - it seems like torque effects are reduced in all flight regimes - incuding climb out and power changes but that has been arrived at by lowering the effective trim speed of the a/c. During all other manouevres above 200mph approx, the Mk Ixs particularly want to drop the right wing.

You my friend, have no idea.
In fact I fly red planes once in while(sometimes you just have to, to even out teams) - however I hate TnB planes.
The spit 25 is my favorite plane whenever I feel the need to correct my k/d ratio - I always get an instant boost of at least 150%, and yes, it works pretty well as a BnZ fighter too.

No idea? Lol!

Hypocrisy is the most heinous of ignorances.

Here's an idea; why not make a constructive post presenting data, documents or relevent experiences regarding 4.10 instead of slagging off an arbitrary number of readers here who fly the Spitfire for no reason than to stroke your own ego.

Cos that's all you accomplish Swiss - no-one else's gonna respect you for those less than subtle digs.

And considering that many pilots I call good friends can take on human controlled Spits in a 109/190/Zero of equivalent year and at least survive if not victor, I suspect you like to boost your ego here to make up for your flying performance - or lack thereof.

So, take your inferiority complex and inflict it on someone else.

I'm also not your friend - people earn that accolade with respect and admiration and you have not proved yourself worthy of either yet.

Oh, and for the record, I'm a P-38 acolyte.

Look fenrir, I don't give a flying f@** about you or your opinion.
May I remind you, you started this argument with quoting me?
And now p.o.
Cheers.

Happy New Year to you too Swiss. X

If you are going to discuss the FM, please do it with documents in hand and read a lot, can not use the old FM parameter of 4.09, because it is a game does not represent reality

I do fly the spit regularly, and noticed this a few pages back, yes the FM was adjusted (its in the readme AND the guide!), but I can just trim it out to fly level, not sure what the huge calamity is. I noticed the trim issue, but I found evidence that indicates this is accurate, and this has since been backed up with photos that roughly match the in game spit in level flight.
The spit doesn't have in-flight adjustable aileron trim, so you'll have to counteract slight roll with aileron somewhat, as you had to do in 4.09, and have to do with many aircraft like this. So YES the spit needs more elevator trim, NO it doesn't affect the FM adversely, I just shot down 2 La-7's. There is no need to exaggerate so much about these FM issues so much, and btw the P-51 wasn't "tuned up", it had an error of some 40cm being missing from the fuselage length, which is now fixed.



http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...fdc44uSAuhtc9A

From the User Guide of the 4.10, first page, section "Main Features" :
"• Revised flight models for all Spitfires"

They maybe tried not to call it ReadMe in order to get people to read it, but apparently it did not work ^^

I think you are right, and then the culprit is probably the default aileron trim value in the FM. Possibly there is a +- sign error there, since this built in trim is too much for the current torque of the engine.

Any word from TD?

Guys for the record I know the FM was changed I was asking if this level of trim change was intended as part of the flight model changes or if it is now a bug as a result of the changes. I have been flying il2 spits since day dot and this change seems totally out of character for the spit. I also asked if DT could elaborate on exactly what was changed in the Flight Model.

Cheers guys I appreciate all your opinions and input to let the DT guys what we think of the changes, but please keep the flaming out of it. Let's be one big grateful family for the wonderful gift the DT guys have given us and be thankful that Oleg allowed the licensing to go to some dedicated guys.

Guys is this a bug:

If I select "+" in the "Pos" setting in QMB, the plane I chose (any plane) is Ai, and player doesn't have a plane. If I just change this to either "=" or "-" everything loads normally.

On Normandy map? Or any other?

Seems to be only on Normandy and with axis as side selected.

Confirmed.
Thanks.
Fixed.

You can edit the mission (Missions\Quick\Normandy1\Normandy1BlueNoneA00.mis ) in text editor and change to:
playerNum 0
It's near the top in the [MAIN] section. It should work OK then.

First off, thank you for the patch, love it !!!

I noticed some things that I'd call bugs:

1. Canopy of the Hs129 doesn't close again completely every time. Easily to reproduce, just grab a Hs129 (happens with both variants) and open and close the canopy (while standing on the field so entire canopy opens). It might need the one or other try.

2. When in He-111 (any model) and you bail on the field, all crew member jump out the plane but some also leave a died "model" behind in the plane.
When others in the server observe you bailing, no died "model" is left behind, instead the pilot and nose gunner stay in place.
"Works" every time.

3. Once again beeing on the field, you set chocks and give a short burst with you guns. The recoil seems to be "stored" and applied onto the plane once you release chocks. If you fire for too long chocks cannot be released anymore, you cannot bail anymore and the stored recoil (given it is enough) starts building up enough G to tear apart your plane.
"Works" with almost any plane if it gives enough recoil out of its guns.
Related to that, setting chocks for the Lerche, starting and running up the engines gives you a controlable AAA, quite funny though.


Happy new year to everyone.

I built a test mission with two NDBs and a YG. Spit & Tempest can hear the NDBs but not the YG even though it is closest. Is that correct?

What is odd is that with the Spit & Tempest you can only step through the beacons in one direction; The other direction only says 'No Beacon'.

Me-410?
 

Me-410 - is it part of 4.10 or not?

We have 3 Me-410 models in skins folder.
None - in either QMB of FMB.
There is Me-410 campaign (taken from AAA), but I can't launch it - black screen appears.

I have no doubt this was done this way by TD deliberately, but I will point out "just for the heck of it" that the contrail start point was moved to the front of the aircraft, on top of the engine and in front of the windscreen. Killing off Il-2, one defacement at a time -- I understand it, but it is sad, all the same...

1944 BF110 G2 Rear Gunner
 

1944 BF110 G2 Rear Gunner

It seems as though there are two models "overlapping" each other in the gun barrel. As if the external model is conflicting or competing with the "rear cockpit" model.

I'm seeing very low LOD "copy" of barrels in rear-gunner view; moving the barrels quickly up and down will demonstrate. You're seeing like a "ghost" of the lower (external?) LOD model of the rear gun barrels.

i'm not being a jerk, just telling the truth

No, you're just being obnoxious. Give it a rest already.

Potenz, you're involved in producing an effects mod. Tell me how in any way that compares to the scope of the changes brought about by 4.10.

Seeing all the new Spitfire variants I was wondering if TD has any plans to include new types like the XIV? I made one some time ago by fixing the very dodgy ingame VIII model and then converted it into a real XIV. Maybe TD would like to use it as a base for their own work?

I don't know if this is a bug or not. The beacons broadcast Radio Honolulu even after you have bailed out. Certainly not a big deal.

One thing is a bug though. I repeatedly get an error window stating 'Data file corrupt' with the QMB if I save a quick mission that uses the Pacific Islands map. The only way to fix the problem is to delete the .last.quick file and the .quick file that was saved using that map.

Email, Zorin. Email. ;)

The cause of the QMB bug Faust has been identified and will be fixed.

Regarding the Spitfire Mk Vb, has the FM changed since 4.09m? When i fly handsoff, the Spit just wants to climb, even with elevator trimmed neutral. That was not the case in 4.09m.

Happy 2011 to all!

Lorenz damage
 

Was Lorenz Blind Landing System damage not enabled? I just tried to destroy it with cannon fire without results.

the Me410 is no part of any official version fo the game.
there are only two Me210Ca versions, and they are only AI

Simply easy!

To use the beacon on the dedicated server you just have to copy the settings code of the difficulty (realistic navigation) in the client version of out
the subdirectory user / doe is the settings.ini. You find them in the middle under the bracket [difficulty], the number row behind net, full real ( but outside view for testing ) would be this: 2147483135

Paste these numbers into Confs of the dedicated server under difficulty.

This will not be touched by using the FBDJ for example.

Whoosh, everything works.

Enjoy your new link ;)

Happy New Year to you all!

And again Thanks for the new patch :!::!:

S!

Frank

The FW190 6 (1943) fires its 20mm with the same button as the mg's. I that accurate behaviour? Makes taking potshots at planes expensive.

(and by removing the outer cannons you get that ugly lump of a bombrack as punishment)

You see, I keep forgetting about that eMail all the time. Will send one your way.

Buster Just tested If you kill the lorenz Transmitter it goes off the air and a Radio station destroyed message is displayed. (In my test I was bombing a friendly Lorenz)

Yes, the inner 20mm should fire with the MG.

Bug reports:

1) If the R-5 gunner is killed (he seems to be as he stops shooting) and the pilot bails, the gunner still changes position depending on planes near. Not important but maybe easy to freeze once killed.

2) MDS: I set AI planes to despawn but they don't. How long after they park should they do this?

3) MDS: Maybe I understand recon wrong, but I set Stuka to be recon plane, I fly over red tanks but they don't show up on map. I have the No Fog of War icons button unlit. Is something wrong here?

OK I've tried recon with player and AI plane and moving and static subjects - no joy.

Yak-9D's NDB gauge not working ?

pretty sure it doesn't have one ...

take a second look, lower right on its panel.
it was the only Yak that showed waypoints in the past............

the 9D is a long range version. Not the 9DD, but nevertheless ;)

You're right, ditto the Yak-9M, broken too.

They have the same gauge (white face) as the TB-3 and that one works fine, so one can only assume TD mean to remove NDB from Yaks. Pity as the 9D is, as you say, long range.

tippo, you mean Yak-9B , this fighterbomber has also NDB in its cockpit.
the 9M not.
and yes, the 9B is not working.

i assume TD never thought about that a Yak could have such an equipment ;)

Yes, 9B, sorry.

anyway, back to MDS and recon planes please .... :)

Ian, I tried to get the MDS Recon Planes feature to work but I couldn't. I tried every possible setting. The recon plane flew over enemy units but never displayed them on the in-game map.

**EDIT: I finally got it to work! The recon planes only 'see' moving vehicles/armor. They can't spot things like artillery, stationary aircraft, etc. Also, they can't spot ships, even if they pass right over them.

Aviar

He111H2 breaks into pieces if i pull more than ~3G!

Its bomber !

How is that a bug?

I've tried this too without luck so far. A few questions please:

1) Was the recon plane AI or player?

2) Did you have a radar somewhere on the map?

3) Was FoW in Advanced mode?


I've flown both AI and human right over moving tanks with no result. Plus, I'm confused - why are only flyable planes suitable as recon planes, esp. as they have an S-328 in their diagram but we can't select it? Nor the Po-2 or R-5.