New DCS Mustang WIP Screenshot [Archive]

Phantom88

April 21st, 2012, 05:18

New shot of the DCS Mustang Cockpit,also a nice detailed write up from The Developer concerning Manifold Pressure,2 Stage SuperCharger and WEP[War Emergency Power]
http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=87065

Between The DCS Mustang and The A2A Mustang[both in beta] this looks like it will be The Summer of the P-51!!! Can't wait for "Stang Summer":jump:
63772

**EDIT** This Mustang is NOT for FSX,It's a upcoming add-on for The DCS A-1OC WartHog Simulator.

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 07:30

Mach3DS

April 21st, 2012, 07:36

Yes, but yours, has the correct number of rivets. Details details.... :) I'm not sure what the DCS has, but if you're working off the NA plans....I can see a few details that are missing from the DCS which are included in yours.

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 07:51

I don't know about that - although there are some very minor detail errors, I think they worked from the NAA plans too, as both have very much the exact same (accurate) proportions and contours to all of the parts and assemblies, and all of the correct hardware in all of the correct locations, etc. One of the things that catches my eye, is that the DCS production actually has the cable that runs from the throttle to the gun sight, something that I had at one time, but deleted before it was completed (due to the amount of polygons that had to be used). Without the cable, you can just adjust the range of the gun sight reticle by manually turning the dial on the gun sight itself, and that is how it is on mine, though most of the original setups were like that, with the cable, which allowed you to turn that same dial, but by twisting the barrel of the throttle lever. I'd like to see what happens to that cable on the DCS Mustang when the throttle is pushed forward - right now it looks like it would get caught in the throttle gate, where as it should be well clear of it, and much more 'taut', for the position it's in. It sounds like A2A will be trying to add that particular detail to their Mustang as well.

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 09:35

One of the things I want to additionally point out, to lend credence to both the DCS production and my own, is that despite the gun sight brackets being different from each other, both are accurate. The specific gun sight mounting bracket on the Warbirdsim P-51D's, fitted with a K-14A sight, is the type that was used on the P-51D-15-NA's, P-51D-20-NA's, and on about the first half of P-51D-25-NA's produced. The mounting bracket on the DCS Mustang was introduced during P-51D-25-NA production and used on all P-51D-30-NA production. As a result, with a few exceptions, most of the P-51D's that flew during WWII had the earlier gun sight mount, but post-WWII, the later gun sight mount became the standard.

Here's the early-mid production mounting bracket (Warbirdsim):

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Mount1-1.jpg

And here's the late mounting bracket (DCS):

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/m7-2.jpg

Early-mid production mounting bracket and gun sight shelf:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/Image2.jpg

And the late mounting bracket and gun sight shelf:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/Image1.jpg

And once again, early bracket:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/HPIM0695.jpg

And late bracket:

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/Image3.jpg

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 09:52

Also, one of the things I noticed, is that they now have changed the super charger light from green (which it shouldn't be) to red, which is good. However, it should actually be amber, in order to be completely correct, according to the original manuals and production documents. So if anyone is reading this and is connected to the development, it might be something you'd wish to ammend, though of course isn't strictly important.

Mach3DS

April 21st, 2012, 10:50

I stand corrected, although the devil's in the details...which you've got down pat. I would love to see a joystick manufacturer pick up the Mustang (Throttle quadrant at least)....with details like the ones you've mentioned maybe someone from Thrustmaster is reading this thread! Thanks for enlightening us all! It's good to have a resident Mustang expert. :)

Phantom88

April 21st, 2012, 10:51

Interesting what happens when two separate groups use the same, accurate, research and resource material (I might have to finally get that DCS game)!

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/mustangcockpit-1.jpg

John,Knowing your passion for aircraft and flight in general,You would absolutely L-O-V-E The DCS A-10C.The feeling of being airbourne and airspeed in this aircraft is incredible.90% of the time I just setup take-off and landing in cross-winds which is great fun.And of course the Combat aspect is very intense.

Fantastic shots of the gun sight's aswell,Cheers

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 11:07

Patrick, that's what I've been hearing! Has the Nevada map been released yet? I've been meaning to take a closer interest in the game, once that map is released.

As hopefully has already been understood, I'm very impressed with what I've seen with the DCS P-51D - although it is a bit weird seeing such a late model (summer of '45-ish), with the rare "Uncle Dog" antenna setup besides, finished in WWII-paint schemes, including a D-5 and an RCAF example, it is clear that a lot of research was done to get what is presented, done accurately. I've probably crossed paths with some of those involved, on another forum, not knowing it at the time.

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 11:16

Speaking of the K-14, these are the photos that I used to model the one on the Warbirdsim Mustangs, and for how similar they are between both of the productions, they could very likely have been the same photos used to model the gun sight by those who developed the DCS P-51. These were shared on that specific forum dedicated to the P-51, I mention in my previous post. The only thing missing from this example, is the glass, and the lettering on the bump guard is all but gone.

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/Sight5.jpg

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/Sight4.jpg

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/Sight1.jpg

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/Sight2.jpg

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/Sight3.jpg

And when modeling from original blueprints, this is where it all begins (note that this is one of the drawings for the early gun sight bracket).

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/109-61619.jpg

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 11:21

Also, there were two slightly different control boxes for the K-14. The early ones had a simple red circuit breaker switch to turn on/off the power to the sight, where as the later ones had a toggle switch. The control box in the Warbirdsim examples is of the early type, where as the example in the DCS Mustang is the later type.

Here's a photo of the early type (with a Swiss placard-decal on it):

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Bomber_12th/Cripes%20A%20Mighty%20WWII/K14ctrlbox.jpg

Phantom88

April 21st, 2012, 11:48

WOW!!! Great shots of the K-14,Fantastic!! I've never seen one outside of the cockpit,I really get a sense of the craftmanship involved,Beautiful:salute:

Sadly,Nevada is still a WIP with a new update coming soon.Word is it will be released this summer.Nevada is the first Map in a new engine being developed so this is likely why it's taking some time.WIP shots
638236382463825

Also,I Believe DCS is modeling the P-51D-25 "Miss Velma" Owned and operated by "The Fighter Collection" in Duxford
63826
63827

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 12:15

It's sometimes amazing when you just focus in on one part, and how much time and energy can be devoted to just getting that one part correct, but once that part is in the aircraft, it isn't so easy to understand any longer, how much actually went into just that one element.

It would be nice if "Miss Velma" was included as a paint scheme for the DCS Mustang, however, the TFC's "Miss Velma" is nothing like the DCS model, as it is a full TF-51D conversion, with the extended cockpit (full dual cockpit) and extended canopy. Being familiar with most of the cockpits within the Mustangs that around today, from certain details that have been reproduced I can confirm that a good chunk of the cockpit work on the DCS Mustang was modeled and textured after the P-51D-30-NA on display at the War Eagles Museum in Texas (which was recently sold to a new owner, though will remain in Texas) - good for many reasons.

Phantom88

April 21st, 2012, 12:46

John,interesting,I know that DCS and TFC are partners and I've read reference to "Miss Velma" in the DCS forum as the model that the DCS Mustang will be based on.Could be that they're using her for sound recordings and performance data? Interesting info,Thank You.

Bomber_12th

April 21st, 2012, 14:09

Yeah, that would all be marketing related, to tie the product to an aircraft in TFC's collection.

Phantom88

April 29th, 2012, 03:47

For those interested,DCS has made their P-51D Flight Manual available for download:jump:
http://files.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/178850/

strykerpsg

April 29th, 2012, 21:40

Pre-order open now for $39.99. Also states beta testing for Pre-order enrollee's.

Link:http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/index.php?end_pos=1322&scr=shop&lang=en

Looking forward to a review by John, as the native Mustang SME. Getting this one payday. Now if only they'd release the Nellis scenery for A-10C as well....coup de grace!

Barfly

April 30th, 2012, 05:59

Holy C#$% this thing is impressive... once you get past the elaborate DCS view and control setup, flying this is an amazing experience. First thought was... totally Beta - until I spent a little time deconflicting controls and setting up some standard views on the stick. DCS claims to provide the most realistic P-51 flight experience in a PC environment, and it certainly feels that way. Stick and rudder guys will really appreciate this, and well as systems fanatics - I've only gotten into the systems enought to start the thing on the ramp; the rest was free flight. And not all systems functions are coded yet - things like switching from Auto to Manual radiator and oil cooler settings etc. But guns work, look and sound fantastic, K14 works great.

Don't be too flustered if you download this and hop directly into fast action without taking the time to set up your controllers... it will suck, lol. For some reason my saitek rudder pedals were automatically assigned joystick type functions so I had to delete some conflicting items, remove twisty rudder from Logitech Extreme 3D stick etc. But it is worth it if you take the time..

G

Bone

April 30th, 2012, 06:42

So far what has kept me from getting DCS is:

1. I don't care for the Blackshark helicopter.
2. The operating area limitations, and fictitious nature of it.
2. I like the A-10, but not so much that I needed a whole new game and learning curve for just ONE model.

The P-51, a new scenery area, and Barfly's opinion of it are moving DCS up closer to the 'I'm gonna get it' interest level.

Barfly

April 30th, 2012, 06:53

My experience with DCS so far, is I can't really get into A10C or Blackshark like Bone stated - I can't get past the time required to properly set those up, spend significant time to learn the operation, then be stuck trying to act within the virtual environment in realistically timely manner using a huge number of keyboard strokes and a 2d viewpoint you have to push around if you don't have something like track IR. (not a big fan of track IR either) Whew! It just isn't that enjoyable overall, since IMO there is too much going on that you can't address in a fashion that allows reasonable suspension of disbelief. That's why the Mustang is so nice - less complex, yet more involving, more of a pilot's experience, more fun. Just my opinion :)

Oh, and someone please post some tips on proper takeoff techniques, lol.

Bomber_12th

April 30th, 2012, 07:09

I'm really loving what I'm seeing with all of the recently posted screenshots and videos. They did a tremendous job with accurately producing the cockpit! One of the photos in the manual confirms what I knew about which particular museum example they used for research in the cockpit work. Having seen everything from the armor plate forward, I would love to see what they did with the area behind the armor plate (with the fuel tank, fuel tank liners, radio rack, and radio set). Having seen a complete look-around of the cockpit from the armor plate forward, it looks so incredibly all-familiar - a very good thing. : )

Edit: Speaking of take-off, you should only need 50" to 55" MP. Many guys can get by with using only 44" to 46" MP on take-off, but with very light-loadings (i.e. display type aircraft). The trim should be dialed in at 5-degrees to 6-degrees right rudder. The aileron and elevator trim should be left at 0 (though for a minimum take-off run, you can trim the elevator up to 6-degrees nose-up). Just as in the real aircraft, you should have to keep the stick well in the right side of the cockpit to counter-act the torque/p-factor, which will want to roll the aircraft to the left, especially just as you break-ground.

Barfly

April 30th, 2012, 07:27

Thanks for the tips Bomber; it's getting better :)

Phantom88

April 30th, 2012, 15:22

The .50 cals are incredible!!! This is alot of fun[not my video]I'm still trying to take-off!!:icon_lol:
yastQYz6PMk&feature

h_NKawEIZ2I&feature

Bomber_12th

April 30th, 2012, 15:40

That is really cool!! (I wish FSX/Prepar3D supported working mirrors!)

It sort of reminds me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTYGDVrZQPI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTYGDVrZQPI&feature=related)

(Keep your volume down, if you want to prevent a heart attack)

Edit: Linked to the wrong video, now corrected.

Barfly

April 30th, 2012, 15:59

Takeoff advice: hold full aft stick until just short of flying airspeed - not sure if that's realistic, but it dramatically reduced the amount of rudder needed.

Bomber_12th

April 30th, 2012, 16:07

Good point, Barlfy! Usually you want to keep the tail down until you reach about 65+ mph, otherwise the aircraft will be much harder to keep straight. In the old WWII instructionals, they actually advise to take-off in a three-point attitude with the P-51. Some of the 'old guys' still do that today. When the tail is up, the aircraft is also prone to weathervaning, so it is also highly encouraged to land with all three-points at once, as then you'll have better and more immediate control of the aircraft, though if visibility over the nose is important to you, then it just demands more attention on the rudder when the tail is up. They always say it is a sign of a good pilot, when he/she is quick with the rudder pedals.

Bomber_12th

April 30th, 2012, 16:11

Although I guess I could look at the manual they issued, have they reproduced the tail wheel locking mechanism with the control stick? If completely accurate, when you push the stick forward, the tail wheel will be un-controllable from the rudder pedals, but it will be full-castoring, allowing you to turn sharply using brakes and a bit of throttle. With the stick back, the rudder pedals control the tail wheel, but you only get 6-degrees of travel in either direction. Because of that, it is another good reason to keep the stick back and tail wheel on the ground as long as you can.

Barfly

April 30th, 2012, 16:21

Yes they modeled the locked / castoring tailwheel.

JIMJAM

April 30th, 2012, 16:32

Yeah a close second to the time I wasted,I mean spent tweeking Microsoft's sims would be DCS. Probably tied with the IL2 series.
Even at my peak of hardcore simming, configuring the HOTAS,remembering the keystrokes and tweeking the computer to miserably run them took alot out of me. The F-15 laughed at any system I threw at it while the flying the Blackshark, managing the systems,targeting,avoiding the terrain AND not being shot down made quantum physics string theory seem simple.
I feel like Homer Simpson... What was his quote... "Everytime I learn something new it pushes something old out." I think I am at that stage.:icon_lol:

strykerpsg

April 30th, 2012, 17:16

Patrick,

Thanks for sharing the videos! they look absolutely fantastic bro. I see they have airborne AI targets, are there ground targets as well? I watched the second video and am suprised you didn't bring back some foliage with the low level passes. Anyway, payday's tomorrow...woohoo! Can't wait to give her a whirl.

MudMarine

April 30th, 2012, 17:25

Whats the deal with downloading the files?:isadizzy: I can't seem to get anything to download/work?!:isadizzy:

Barfly

April 30th, 2012, 17:30

You can do all sorts of ground targets; HVARs are fun :)

strykerpsg

April 30th, 2012, 17:33

You can do all sorts of ground targets; HVARs are fun :)

Cool, very much looking forward to this one. Also, am I correct to assume this is ETO and not the Pacific?

Bone

April 30th, 2012, 18:21

Thanks for the Videos. I must say, my interest is getting it's schwing on. I'll let you boys work out the Beta bugs before diving in.

Barfly

April 30th, 2012, 18:25

Nah unfortunately it's just in the DCS world - Caucasus perhaps? It is a pretty immersive environment, if not a familiar one.

strykerpsg

April 30th, 2012, 21:40

Nah unfortunately it's just in the DCS world - Caucasus perhaps? It is a pretty immersive environment, if not a familiar one.

Hmm, having just read through the forums and it seems as though this is akin to something along the lines of World of Tanks, where the era's and nations don't matter, but you compete or fly in an open environment. Not sure how much fun it would be flying against AAM armed jet aircraft and helo's. Beautiful plane and did see some other German planes in development but was really hoping this would be a true WWII or even 50's era simulation. I'll await further development on this one.

YoYo

April 30th, 2012, 22:41

I like it! Startup of DCS P-51D public beta:

http://youtu.be/lcmmYPx0Jjo?hd=1

Lenop

May 1st, 2012, 01:43

I like it very much so far! I'm really not that interested to use the sim 'in harms way' but like to operate the airplane in airshow display mode. :)
Although it is nice to be able to fire the guns, I have to say.

Ty89m

May 1st, 2012, 14:39

Very interested to try this, but the sounds on start-up seem off. It sounds as if it's idling far to high, and lacks that tell-tale Merlin sound. It should sputter, burp and fart while idling. This sounds as if it goes straight from start-up to a high RPM. Anyone else notice this?

Barfly

May 1st, 2012, 17:26

There are some minor issues, including the sound, but they do acknowledge that this is still a beta. It is a complete and very enjoyable flight experience as is - it flys exactly as you would imagine a real mustang does. Coolant and oil radiator / heat management is not included yet, nor is WEP. I'm sure there's a few other things.

DennyA

May 1st, 2012, 19:24

Awesome! I didn't realize it was available in beta -- gotta pick it up! (And I for one am super-excited that there are guns and things to use them on... That's what P-51s were designed for! <g>)

I hope you can mix the realism settings. I have zero interest in realistic engine startup procedures (unless they're fairly simple; the startup realism ruined the Falcon mods for me), but I do want a realistic flight model.

strykerpsg

May 1st, 2012, 19:40

Well, couldn't resist it anymore. I bought it and now just have to download it, though I think if you already have A-10C, it's just an additional add on, therefore a smaller download....I hope. can't wait to try her out. Checking their forum, there does appear to be various add ons in the works, so I'll stay hopeful of some period specific releases later on.

strykerpsg

May 1st, 2012, 23:39

LMAO! I suck at this pilot stuff in DCS....Looks absolutely fantastic! I suck because for the life of me, can't even get her off the runway without cartwheeling and destroying her on the ground or some other object that jumps into my takeoff path. I gotta read the manual on this one, plus figure out how to lock out the swivel on the tail wheel.

Anyone else's tires orange? Mine are. Not sure if it means my video card is going bonkers or what.....but everything else looks great.

Anyway, thanks for the snapshot reviews and shared videos/pics. Definitely swayed my decision.

Phantom88

May 2nd, 2012, 03:16

Phantom88

May 2nd, 2012, 13:53

THIS JUST IN.....................MIG21B FISHBED NEXT FOR DCS WORLD!!:jump:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=87621

64569645706457164572
64573

strykerpsg

May 2nd, 2012, 18:45

Hello Matt,The P-51 can be a real handful until you get used to the prop torque.That Big Merlin is a Beast!!! There are a few thing you can tune until you get used to her.

Under **Options** Menu go to **Special** Tab.There you will find **Auto Rudder** enable that.Go to the **Take off assistance** slider and adjust that to your liking.Other than this you can go into your DCS controls and edit the Axis for your Joystick/Rudder Pedals.

And Yes the Orange wheels are a known issue and already corrected for the next beta:applause:

Thanks for the heads up Patrick. It's truly a humbling aircraft, which to me smacks of fidelity, though is it really that torquey in real life?

I too saw the MiG 21 and hope its a sign of things to come, ie F4 and potentially some Centery series, along with other MiGs and Mirages. Of course, WWII era stuff would be cool too.

Glad I purchased this now.

Bomber_12th

May 2nd, 2012, 18:59

I wonder what would happen if they modeled a Griffon Spitfire or Sea Fury? Those require far more attention on take-off than a Mustang.

strykerpsg

May 2nd, 2012, 23:00

I wonder what would happen if they modeled a Griffon Spitfire or Sea Fury? Those require far more attention on take-off than a Mustang.

LOL, I would always have to start in the air. I did get some stick time tonight and successfully got into the air, thankfully without a wingman next to me, rolling at the same time.

John, is your model as equally torquey? I have truly enjoyed the current string of pics you've posted and see your model as a must have future purchase as well.

Bomber_12th

May 3rd, 2012, 07:24

LOL, I would always have to start in the air. I did get some stick time tonight and successfully got into the air, thankfully without a wingman next to me, rolling at the same time.

John, is your model as equally torquey? I have truly enjoyed the current string of pics you've posted and see your model as a must have future purchase as well.

Thank you Matt, though to answer your question completely, I'm not really in the position to say - hopefully someone who has experience with both can compare them. I can say that it does require some good amount of right foot, to keep the nose straight down the runway, and a bit of right stick to keep the aircraft from rolling to the left after breaking ground (the slower you are when you break ground, the more pronounced it is). I've heard people tell me it is impossible to take-off with the Warbirdsim Mustangs, but then they become very accustom to it and it is no problem - and I have had people tell me it was a breeze all along. The flight dynamics for the WBS Mustangs were designed be Albert Patrick, and one of the things I like most about the take-off dynamics is having to hold some right stick in - when you watch Mustang take-offs, if the pilot isn't right on it, you'll see it start to roll to the left immediately after takeoff, and then the pilot quickly corrects it - you'll also see at times, when the pilot has too much right stick in, and the aircraft will suddenly roll a bit to the right after takeoff, requiring the pilot to quickly react to level it out again.

The reason I bring up the Sea Fury and Griffon Spitfires, is because I have heard a pilot mention, who has flown all three, that you can bring the power right up on the Mustang, and still be able to keep the nose easily pointed straight down the runway. With the other two, if you do that, the aircraft will be off the runway and into the grass in no time at all. Those really require fine etiquette when it comes to bleeding in the power, as the torque and p-factor they exude are far more greater felt.

Phantom88

May 3rd, 2012, 17:12

Interesting post by one of The Chief Developers at DCS who I believe is responsible for the flight model of The P-51.

YoYo, [Quote]
Ok, I see this is a time to clear things up.
First of all - the elevator movement is the same real Mustang has. You surely can use curvature for the joystick axes but I must say that you spoil the stick feeling of the real plane.
Of course real stick has more travel than joystick... but I think that artificial nonlinearity is worse than a scaling.
I think nobody uses 100% fuel loading in ME. Having 100% of fuel you almost have no ability to maneouver the plane because of aft balance and extremely low stick travel per 1 g.
So I never use non-linear stick curves for AFM since Su-25 arrival.
I use CH rudder pedals that is not significantly better than Saitek. The main problem at TO is not the pedals itself. Using rudder you have to anticipate plane movement and not to fix its attitude only. I mean that you must counteract not only attitude but yaw angular speed firstly acting like a damper. Never hold rudder deflected waiting for the nose position reaction - be ready to apply opposite rudder to stop its movement.
When you are raising the tail apply right rudder simultaneously - it's better to release it if you overshoot a little - and then be ready to apply opposite rudder as you are stable in two-point attitude because of reduced P-factor.

And do not raise the tail too fast - the faster you do it the more right rudder you have to apply.
Anyway, you can use 100% of TO ASSISTANT to see how it controls the rudder.[/unquote]

Aso a nice post on tuning your Axis settings///

Some hints for those who want to use absolute axes for trim.

Input settings.
It's very individual but I think these values can be taken as initial.
Rudder - Curvature 22 to have smooth control near zero and full authority for take off.
Rudder trim - Saturation Y 20...25 (6-7.5 degrees of rudder max), Curvature 0...10
Elevator trim - Saturation 20, Curvature 15
These setting are good to have precise control.

If your devices allow to have more resolution for elevator trim you can extend Y saturation range.

IanHenry

May 4th, 2012, 01:28

The inclusion of the "free" Su-25 is a nice and unexpected suprise!

Ian.

jim

May 4th, 2012, 03:57

Anybody got a profile for this plane for the X52Pro?

JIMJAM

May 4th, 2012, 16:03

Wow.. Just WOW.

Owned all the DCS all and finally just got burnt out with A-10. Just to much complexity for my brain and my computers. Spent more time thumbing through stacks of info, setting up my HOTAS and tweeking graphics.

But now with a simplified aircraft and probably more streamlined and optimized coding, I think DCS has a winner. After a hour of setting up my X-52 and a few graphics settings changes I am running smooooooth and stutter free. Impossbile for me on A-10 to achieve that. I just tamed my elev,ail and rudder a little, way to twitchy at first, and the last few hours have been sweet.
This is like the Dodosim of P-51s. And that comes from someone who owns ALL the P51s for FSX. With TrackIr and what seems to be a totally clickable cockpit, I used few keystrokes. Without the 10,000 commands with the Blackshark and A-10 that needed to be committed to memory, alot can be controlled easily through a basic Hotas and within the vr pit.
So after swearing off DCS after A-10 I am glad I dove in and got the Mustang.
The last hurdle however will be to see how the sim performs within a campagn with lots of ai which as you know crippled alot of systems on their last few,Blackshark,A10,F-15.....