DCS vs A2A

[SgtPepper]

Just wondering if there is any one here who has the A2A P51 and the DCS P51?? Aside from the fact that one is designed as a combat simulator, i've been wondering how they compare in relation to cockpit systems, cooling, fuel systems, flight dynamics etc.

[Adamski]

QUOTE (SgtPepper @ Jun 30 2012,12:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just wondering if there is any one here who has the A2A P51 and the DCS P51?? Aside from the fact that one is designed as a combat simulator, i've been wondering how they compare in relation to cockpit systems, cooling, fuel systems, flight dynamics etc.

Hmmm ... I'd be interested to know as well. All I could find was this thread: on Avsim.

[Ian Warren]

Silly question really , A2A simulates the P-51 as a flight simulator were as DCS is a combat simulator , you cant match or place the dynamics of trying to compare the aircraft to Flight of Fancy .

[SgtPepper]

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jun 30 2012,1:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Silly question really , A2A simulates the P-51 as a flight simulator were as DCS is a combat simulator , you cant match or place the dynamics of trying to compare the aircraft to Flight of Fancy .

I disagree, DCS seem to advertise their product as a full P51 simulator that goes one step further with weapons. To be honest a fair comparison can't really be looked at until the DCS is finished I suppose.

A quote from the DCS website...


The DCS: P-51D Mustang offers both highly-detailed simulation and easy-to-play "game" mode options for both hardcore and casual gamers. When in simulation mode, this is the most authentic simulation of the P-51D Mustang that has ever been done for the PC. Enjoy both the thrill of flying this warbird and operating its various weapons against a variety of ground and airborne targets.

[Ian Warren]

DCS aircraft go beyond all other aircraft in detail. The DCS P51 will have a fully modelled aircraft with avionics etc. Even the firing of the cylanders and the sequence is modelled. The sound FX are getting upgraded with a mod that features the Supercharger effect when it kicks in. You can download a real P51 manual and compare it to DCS it is most likely 100% modelled. The FM will be beyond any other sim including il2/FSX as it has an Advanced Flight model like the A-10C, KA50, and SU25T.

QUOTE

DCS: P-51D Mustang Trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IodepBs0w7M

Full resolution video download: http://www.virtual-jabog32.de/index....e=1217&lang=en

Pre-purchase from: http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/

Pre-purchase also provides access to the DCS: P-51D Mustang Beta.

Special thanks to:

Video production by: "Cato "Glowing Amraam" Bye"
http://www.youtube.com/user/GlowingAmraam

Music by: Binary Orchestra
http://www.youtube.com/user/BinaryOrchestra

Please visit their Youtube pages.

About DCS: P-51D Mustang

http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.co...eries/mustang/

The Mustang was among the best and most well-known fighters used by the U.S. Army Air Forces during World War II. Possessing excellent range and maneuverability, the P-51 operated primarily as a long-range escort fighter and also as a ground attack fighter-bomber with bombs, rockets, and machine guns.

The DCS: P-51D Mustang offers both highly-detailed simulation and easy-to-play "game" mode options for both hardcore and casual gamers. When in simulation mode, this is the most authentic simulation of the P-51D Mustang that has ever been done for the PC.

A powerful yet easy-to-use mission editor allows you to create your own missions and campaigns. A one-click Mission Generator also allows you to instantly create battles as small or large as you wish.

Fly online with built-in server browser that supports up to 32 players in both head-to-head and cooperative gameplay. Fly online with other DCS aircraft like the Black Shark and the A-10C Warthog.

Features of the DCS: P-51D Mustang:

• Highly detailed six-degrees-of-freedom cockpit. Interact with cockpit controls with your mouse.
• Interactive training system.
• Unmatched flight physics and that allow you to truly feel what it's like to fly this legend.
• Accurate P-51D Mustang model, squadron markings, and weapons.
• Detailed modeling the P-51D Mustang avionics, weapon, engine, radios, fuel, electrical, and hydraulic systems.
• Take part in a Challenge Campaign to test your flying and combat skills.


DCS: P-51D Mustang is published and developed by The Fighter Collection and Eagle Dynamics as part of the Digital Combat Simulator (DCS) series:[/quote]

As well as that of course its in a combat sim already, FSX will have to wait until Tacpacs SDK is released before weapons can be properly modelled for it. DCS will likely at some stage have other WW2 aircraft added and no doubt get its own WW2 mod so it will be like il2 only better with more realistic weapons and all the other stuff.

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (SgtPepper @ Jun 30 2012,2:38 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I disagree, DCS seems to advertise their product as a full P51 simulator that goes one step further with weapons. To be honest a fair comparison can't really be looked at until the DCS is in it's alpha stage I suppose.

Best you go and buy yourself an A2A North American P-51 Mustang with the Accusim .. but end of the day .. Its what do you want .. a combat flight simulator or a very true representation and dynamics of a famous WW2 warbird , recent post i did mention peoples do not like the true procedure .. you then go A2A

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE

Our lead flight model programmer has put together a few developer note articles that discuss some of the more interesting features of both the real and the virtual DCS P-51D. We will be releasing these over the course of the the next couple of weeks.

The first and probably most lengthy article overviews some of the principles behind the Manifold Pressure indicator in the cockpit.

Enjoy!


Quote:
Manifold Pressure

Given that the Manifold Pressure (MP) indicator will quickly become one of the primary cockpit instruments used when flying the Mustang, a discussion of some of the principles behind its indication is worthwhile. Before we begin, remember that manifold pressure is measured in inches of Mercury (in.Hg).

First, let’s review the general airflow through the induction system of the P-51D Merlin engine, equipped with a carburetor and a two-stage, two-speed supercharger. Initially air is ingested through the air intake(s) (of a couple of possible types, which we’ll discuss in another note) and flows past a throttle valve that controls airflow volume into the carburetor. Here, fuel is added to create a fuel-air mixture of a specific ratio. The mixture is then passed through the supercharger, where it is highly compressed, becoming significantly hotter in the process. To prevent the compressed and very hot mixture from causing detonation, as well as to allow more of it to be “packedâ€￾ into the cylinders, it is cooled twice – by the intercooler between the first and second supercharger stages and by the aftercooler just prior to entering the manifold. Finally, the mixture is passed into the manifold for induction into the cylinders. The manifold itself is a very strong structure surrounded by about 8 mm of aluminium alloy – a necessity given that pressures attained here may be as high as two atmospheres.

Cooling of the fuel-air mixture is performed by the aftercooling system, which is completely separate from the engine cooling system and circulates as much as 36 gallons of coolant per minute under peak performance conditions. The radiator of the aftercooling system is installed as a single unit with the engine coolant radiator in the aft section of the air scoop underneath the fuselage, although they are functionally independent from each other. To protect the manifold from backfires, it is equipped with flame traps - essentially metal filters designed to prevent flames from expanding throughout the entire manifold.

If we get rid of everything, except the throttle valve, carburetor and the manifold, we are left with a conventional, naturally aspirated engine. Let’s consider what happens with pressure in the manifold as we open and close the throttle valve while maintaining a constant engine speed (RPM). With the throttle completely open, air flows freely and manifold pressure equals ambient atmospheric pressure. As the throttle valve is closed, the cylinder pistons begin to “suckâ€￾ air through a limited opening, creating a partial vacuum in the manifold and a corresponding drop in manifold pressure.

Similarly, when the throttle valve is partly open while engine RPM is increased, manifold pressure drops, because with increased RPM the cylinder pistons must “suckâ€￾ more air into the manifold through the same narrow throttle opening. The same effect can be witnessed when bumping the throttle up from idle power. Initially the RPM are kept down by low engine power output, but as power output increases when the throttle is moved forward, an initial boost in manifold pressure takes a dip as RPM begin to catch up.

Let’s now return everything we removed earlier and take another look at how RPM affect manifold pressure. Pressure increase (boost) levels in the supercharger have a very non-linear relationship with engine RPM. Thus, under relatively low RPM (60-75%) and throttle settings, typically manifold pressure will drop as RPM is increased, similarly to the situation described above. Under high RPM settings, however, supercharger boost levels significantly outweigh the pressure drop immediately past the throttle valve, resulting in increased manifold pressure.

In the Merlin engine, things are even more interesting, thanks to an automatic manifold pressure regulator installed to help ease the pilot’s workload. For any given throttle setting, manifold pressure can change dramatically as flight conditions change (in particular as air density changes with altitude). The automatic regulator tries to maintain the manifold pressure set by the pilot's throttle lever, minimizing any additional throttle “jockeyingâ€￾ required to hold this setting in flight. The automatic regulator does not work throughout the entire performance envelope of the engine. In the V-1650-7 model engine featured in DCS Mustang, it begins to function at 40 in.Hg. Below this value, manifold pressure is controlled exclusively using the throttle handle and all of the effects described above can be witnessed. At 40 inches and up, however, the throttle handle sets the desired pressure value and the automatic regulator attempts to maintain it by adjusting the throttle valve opening as necessary.

Operation of the automatic regulator consists of the following primary elements. An aneroid sensor coupled to a piston valve moves vertically in reaction to pressure changes, closing and opening vent lines leading to a relay piston. The relay piston moves horizontally in response to pressure differentials created by the aneroid piston valve to maintain equal pressure to either side inside a cylinder. As the relay piston moves forward or back, it opens or closes the throttle valve until pressure equilibrium is re-established, returning the aneroid piston valve to a neutral position and stabilizing the relay piston in place, which may be forward or back from its original position. The relay piston is connected to the throttle valve via a differential linkage system with the throttle handle in the cockpit. Within the operating range of the automatic regulator, the sum movements of the throttle handle and the relay piston determine the actual position of the throttle valve at any given time.

Let’s consider an example. We’ll assume the engine is driven to 3,000 RPM on the ground and the throttle is advanced fully forward. Under these conditions, the supercharger is capable of producing much higher pressure in the manifold than the maximum permissible pressure of 61 in.Hg. The regulator’s purpose is to limit pressure to 61 inches and maintain it there as long as the throttle handle is in the full forward position. As soon as engine RPM reaches levels at which pressure climbs above 61 inches, the aneroid becomes unbalanced, shifting the relay piston to close the throttle valve. The regulator operates in the same fashion throughout the manifold pressure range of 40 – 61 in.Hg.

In practical terms, what this means is that the pilot uses the throttle handle to set his desired manifold pressure and the regulator operates the relay piston to open or close the throttle valve to maintain this setting. As altitude increases and air density decreases, resulting in lower pressure, the regulator opens the throttle valve to maintain manifold pressure. Conversely, as altitude decreases and air density increases, the regulator closes the throttle to maintain manifold pressure.

In the above example of 61 inches of MP, when critical altitude for maintaining this pressure is reached, the relay piston and the throttle handle are both fully advanced, and the throttle valve is fully open. When manifold pressure is set substantially lower than maximum, for example the Maximum Continuous setting of 46 inches at 2,700 RPM, the regulator will attempt to maintain pressure as altitude increases, but will eventually hit the fully open position of the relay piston, even though the throttle valve is only partly open, because the throttle handle in the cockpit is not fully advanced. In this case, it will become necessary to move the throttle handle up to further open the throttle valve in order to maintain manifold pressure, because the automatic regulator will have no further authority due to having reached the relay piston’s limit of range of motion. As critical altitude for this pressure setting is reached, the throttle handle will have to be all the way forward to maintain it. Here, we have to remember that the supercharger is a two-speed system and switches into high blower mode somewhere around 19,000 feet. When this happens, manifold pressure increases dramatically and the throttle handle has to be moved back, otherwise resulting in a climb at 61 in.Hg at 2,700 RPM. Not deadly, especially using quality gasoline, but not recommended, either.

As you may have deduced, 61 inches at 3,000 RPM is full Military, or Takeoff power, nominally limited to 15 minutes. Let’s take a brief look at War Emergency Power (WEP) mode, nominally limited to 5 minutes of operation. WEP can be mechanically implemented in a number of ways. The first option is to artificially lower the pressure acting on the aneroid by opening an escape line, resulting in an opening of the throttle valve by the regulator so as to “maintainâ€￾ pressure - while in fact boosting it beyond the value set by the throttle handle. This method was used on early Mustangs, which featured a special control handle in the cockpit to engage WEP. Another option is to design the throttle linkage assembly such that the relay piston is in the fully closed position when the throttle handle is set to full military power. The pilot would then push the throttle handle past this setting into the WEP position, further opening the throttle valve and the relay piston would be unable to act upon it to close it. And the final option is to design the linkage system such that the throttle handle position past full military power would produce manifold pressure up to 67 or even 75 in.Hg.

Given the limitations of most HOTAS controllers used by virtual pilots, DCS Mustang will model the first method. This allows us to avoid having to rely on throttle detents or limit their range of movement in the pre-WEP range. As such, we will have a dedicated input command to engage WEP as a simulation of a cockpit control handle.

__________________[/quote]

QUOTE

Our next subject - the propeller governor:


Quote:
Propeller Governor

First, some fundamentals. A propeller is essentially a set of little wings, which produce lift and are subject to drag much like a normal wing. Also like a normal wing, a propeller moves through the air with a so called angle of attack. The greater the angle of attack, the greater the lift (or thrust in the case of propellers) at the cost of increased drag, making it harder to move through the air. And again like a wing, the angle of attack is affected not only by the structural position of the propeller, but also by the speed and direction of the airflow passing over it. Finally, and once again like a wing, a propeller produces a downwash, or an induced velocity. Because the linear velocity of any propeller blade section is a function of the propeller radius (the outer blade edges of a spinning propeller move through the air faster than the inner edges), the blades are shaped such that the blade angle is progressively reduced toward the outer edges.

Early propellers were constructed with fixed blades, where the blade pitch angles cannot be changed. In a fixed-pitch propeller, as the aircraft’s speed increases, the angle of attack is reduced, which in turn reduces the thrust produced by the propeller. If airspeed continues to increase, the propeller eventually turns into a kind of airbrake, producing reverse thrust, but still demanding power from the engine to turn it. Ultimately the propeller can start to windmill, where it itself begins to turn the engine instead of the other way around.

The problem with fixed-pitch propellers is that they only work well in a narrow range of airspeeds. The pitch can be optimized for low speed, useful for maximum takeoff thrust, but then efficiency begins to drop as airspeed climbs. Conversely, the pitch can be designed for best climbing speed or higher speeds in general, but at the cost of low speed efficiency, which reduces takeoff performance.

Variable-pitch propellers were introduced to remedy this problem. The pilot could now manually control the propeller pitch angle. This was, no doubt, an exciting time for aircraft engineers. For pilots however - fighter pilots in particular - it was another headache in flight. It became much easier to break the aircraft by overstressing or overspeeding the engine as a result of mismanaging propeller pitch control. So in a spur of innovation, designers began to work on mechanisms around the 1930s that would automatically adjust propeller pitch to maintain a constant engine RPM – propeller governors. All the pilot would have to do is set a desired engine RPM and the governor would load or unload the propeller by adjusting the pitch angle to maintain this setting.

Let’s now take a look at the Hamilton Standard propeller governor system used on the P-51. Inside the prop spinner is a propeller dome, which houses a horizontal piston cylinder. The piston is surrounded by oil to either side – low pressure engine oil in the forward side and propeller governor oil, pressure-boosted by a pressure pump, in the rear side. Relative pressure of the oils to either side of the piston determines its position. As the piston moves in reaction to pressure differentials, a special mechanism translates this motion to the propeller blades to adjust their pitch.

Oil flow to and from the cylinder is controlled by a vertical pilot valve in the governor assembly. The pilot valve’s neutral position is maintained by a balance of forces between a tension spring that pushes it down and special flyweights that pull it up under the centrifugal force of spinning action when the engine is running. This balance is maintained and the propeller pitch remains constant as long as the engine RPM is stable. When RPM changes, the flyweights and the tension spring become unbalanced, moving the pilot valve to open oil lines to and from the piston cylinder. Oil moves into one side of the cylinder and out of the other, the piston moves in response to a pressure change, and the propeller pitch is adjusted until equilibrium is restored. Tension of the spring is controlled by the pilot’s RPM lever. As such, moving the RPM lever in the cockpit unbalances the pilot valve and again moves the piston to adjust the propeller pitch until equilibrium between the tension spring and the flyweights is restored at the set RPM value.

For example, if RPM increases, the flyweights move outward under increased centrifugal force, overcoming the tension of the spring and pulling the pilot valve up. The pilot valve opens oil lines to push high pressure governor oil into the rear side of the cylinder and engine oil out of the forward side of the cylinder. The piston moves forward and propeller pitch is increased. As propeller pitch increases, the higher drag increases the load on the engine and RPM is returned to its original value. The flyweights return to a neutral position and equilibrium is restored over the pilot valve, closing the oil lines. Conversely, if RPM is reduced, the tension spring overcomes the flyweights, moving the pilot valve down and pushing engine oil into the forward side of the cylinder and governor oil out of the rear side. The piston moves back, decreasing the propeller pitch and unloading the engine to increase RPM until equilibrium is restored.

There is a third element affecting propeller pitch angle – the centrifugal force of the propeller itself, which moves the blades toward lower pitch. It’s important to point out that in the absence of oil pressure inside the piston cylinder, the propeller will set to low pitch.

So, what does it all mean in practice?

Running at maximum RPM is very stressful for the engine, even if manifold pressure is kept down. It’s generally best to maintain the lowest RPM possible for any desired flight condition. A number of manifold pressure and RPM combinations are recommended for various parts of the flight envelope. These are provided in the manuals and graphs, but can be determined independently given a sufficient understanding of the principles involved.

A special case worth considering is an engine failure. In autorotation, the prop effectively acts as an airbrake, so assuming the governor remains functional, the RPM should be immediately set to full decrease. In this case, the aircraft might attain a glide ratio of 9-10:1. If RPM is left high, this ratio will drop by as much as a third. Worst of all is a situation where the propeller stops altogether due to a jammed or poorly turning engine. In this case, the prop’s surface area of nearly 1 square meter will reduce the glide ratio approximately by half. Luckily, getting the propeller to stop mid-flight, even with the engine turned off, is practically impossible. Although, if the oil is frozen and airspeed is low, it does become likely. As long as the engine is warm – this could only happen in a spin or maybe a complete loss of airspeed, such as at the top of a stalling vertical maneuver. Once stopped, spinning up the engine is impossible, regardless of airspeed.

Here are a couple of new screenshots where you can see the visual difference between a low and high pitch setting of the propeller:[/quote]

You can see the screenshots here:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1441...mp;postcount=92

Prop wash effect(can you do this on any other sim)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=playe...p;v=pUgDqhPnekw

Not everyone is happy with this news though:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=playe...p;v=iAoZP6EuaDk

Last edited by SUBS17 on Sat Jun 30, 2012 2:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

SUBS17

Senior Member

 

Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:16 am

Posts: 1745

Top

[Ian Warren]

Maybe when the Combat Sim is released ill let ya all no

[Ian Warren]

A2A P51 looks to be on a similar level of detail as the DCS P51 in this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUOmJzxoaCA...layer_embedded#!

QUOTE

The Wings of POWER 3: P-51 FEATURES:
•
The world’s most iconic WWII fighter aircraft

•
As with every A2A aircraft, it is gorgeously constructed, inside and out, down to the last rivet.

•
Designed and built to be flown "By The Book".

•
Custom Cockpit Systems and Gauges.

•
Visual Real-Time Load Manager, with the ability to load fuel and stores in real-time.

•
Naturally animated pilot.

•
3D Lights 'M' (built directly into the model) with under-wing landing light than can be turned on, deployed, and retracted and fully functional recognition lights.

•
Pure3D Instrumentation now with natural 3D appearance with exceptional performance.

•
Sound engineered by A2A sound professionals.

•
Oil pressure system models oil viscosity (oil thickness).

•
Authentically modeled pneumatic system.

•
In cockpit pilot's map for handy in-flight navigation.

•
Auto-Mixture that actually performs as intended. Now you can set for “RUN" and the aircraft fuel-to-air ratio will be automatically determined and set by the carburetor based upon various factors, such as altitude.

•
Dual speed, dual stage Supercharger modeled with accurate behavior.

•
Fuel delivery system simulated.

•
All models include A2A specialized materials with authentic metal.

•
Pilot's Notes pop-up 2D panel keeps important information easily available.[/quote]

It probably lacks the crash/damage model that DCS has though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIL8385ERy0

This looks like earlier beta DCS(they will probably add more so the pilot climbs out on the ground etc, with DCS the parts fly off when it gets damaged :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9fh0nKfUJY

Last edited by SUBS17 on Sat Jun 30, 2012 2:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Adamski]

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jun 30 2012,2:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe when the Combat Sim is released ill let ya all no

Ian - have you actually got any of the DCS products? Their systems modelling for all aircraft (even prior to the P-51) has been *way better* than anything in FSX ... except maybe the latest Accusim offerings.

I have Black Shark, the A-10, Su-25 plus the LOMAC series.

[Ian Warren]

You have to add extra dynamic features as wings blowing off , gun jamming , drop tanks , simple battle damage in cockpit and further features that create a combat sim , to have that even to compare or glued to a what an A2A model model will do would be pushing the limits , I had many combat sims , shite ..gave em away ... did like the shooting side .. just a hype you won't get the same immersive flight in a 51 without loosing the combat and that's what the program gives .

[Adamski]

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jun 30 2012,3:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I had many combat sims , shite ..gave em away

Falcon4 sh***?
LOMAC also sh***?
IL-2 sh***?
Rise of Flight also sh***?

I don't think so.

[Ian Warren]

Exactly ... simply just gave em away ... good 15/20 years ago but today's standards

[SgtPepper]

FSX and DCS are of course two completely different game engines, so anything is possible, and it sounds to me that DCS are really going for a high level simulator, which will be great. I think we have a fair comparison, once of course DCS get their product to a finished level.

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (SgtPepper @ Jun 30 2012,5:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

FSX and DCS are of course two completely different game engines,

Exactly , designed for different platforms ... you wont see an equal A2A on a combat sim .. hells , most can't get this it running unless using Accu-feel .

[Adamski]

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Jun 30 2012,6:05 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly , designed for different platforms ... you wont see an equal A2A on a combat sim .. hells , most can't get this it running unless using Accu-feel .

Ian - I wasn't going to bite on your last few posts ... but here goes ...

You've dismissed all *current* combat sims on the basis of your experience of 15-20yr old [combat] versions. Sounds to me that you haven't tried any of the more recent ones - namely the DCS A-10, Black Shark, Su-25 (Burning Cliffs). Though these are all jet sims, they offer way more than A2A+FSX, IMHO - regardless of "platform".

What's more - Falcon4, with all the mods by Freefalcon (and older BMS) is still an *incredible* combat sim. Have you tried "Rise of Flight" - or are you dismissing that as well, without having tried it?

With respect, you really can't say that the 4 or 5 combat sims I mentioned earlier are "shite".

[Splitpin]

Come on Ian, each too their own .... let it go.

[IslandBoy77]

Have you had a bad day today, Ian? Its not like you to stomp so heavily all over people with big, hob-nail boots - you're usually quite accommodating for those who enjoy other sims.

I do understand that there are those who feel strongly about FSX (or FS9), and believe strongly that other sims don't have the accuracy or depth that FS9 / X have for "serious" simulation. I don't fly the heavies or want to have all the intricacious / nuances of a real commercial flight - as you know. Having said that, I've seen the eye-candy detail AND the technical detail that some of these new sims like DCS go to - they are impressive: well beyond the MS Combat Flight Sim stuff that you might be thinking of. And as you know, both FS9 and X are known to not be perfect in the rendering of 100% accurate flight models - and it takes seriously hard work from people like PMDG to bring the correct level of realism to FS9 / X. Also, from what I've read, I'm sure the X-Plane folks would be quick to scoff at just how accurate FSX is, even if THEIR sim still lacks in other areas.

I do think it healthy for us to discuss and even argue about the pluses and minuses of the various sims - that also brings extra insight and understanding to how the whole genre is developing. But to say that other sims are "rubbish" or "shite" is a stretch. Both because it simply isn't true (unless one compares very early 2000-era stuff to today) and it gets people on edge for no good reason.

For me, it will always be about how realistic the whole sim LOOKS - so long as the flight models are reasonably accurate. And having spoken to a broad range of people who enjoy different types of simulation (aircraft, cars, trucks, infantry combat, spaceships), there are 3 broadly defined camps: those, like me who wants fantastic graphics with a fair degree of overall realism; those who just want eye candy and the ability to hoon around the place blowing stuff up; those who want it as technically accurate down to the last nut and bolt, with the graphics being fair to reasonable. I'd be surprised if any one simulator is capable of representing all those interests to each group's satisfaction any time soon. Just sayin...

[Ian Warren]

Boys and Girls .. What year do i start listing my combat sims and so many ... i gave them away during my transition to scenery design , not the simple placement of autogen but building airports , not stomping on people .. just saving people moneys and advise them - all and the 'what' concepts and reality of what you can do in a sim .. you forget most already have enough problem running FSX let alone a combat sim with all the "bell and whistles" of FSX .. get real people .. jeez

[Adamski]

Ian - we're not talking about what will (or will not) run on average/slow systems:

"Just wondering if there is any one here who has the A2A P51 and the DCS P51?? Aside from the fact that one is designed as a combat simulator, i've been wondering how they compare in relation to cockpit systems, cooling, fuel systems, flight dynamics etc."

I'm presuming that SgtPepper has a system capable of running a decent combat sim *and* FSX+A2A ... hence the question - which I think is a good one.

For a long while, there simply weren't any decent cockpits in FSX of the same quality as in some of the combat sims. Flight modelling in FSX was also *shocking*. Most combat sims had better/more realistic flight dynamics than the simplified ones used in FSX. It's only relatively lately, with A2A, Warbirdsim etc. that FSX has "caught up". Also, there's not a single FSX military *jet* sim that matches the complexity of [even] Falcon4 in terms of radar+weapon delivery modes - let alone DSC A-10 etc.

So ... leaving aside the question of scenery, weather, weaponry etc. ... and comparing *aircraft* only, I think it's a fair question.

My guess is that a DCS P-51 will be pretty close to the A2A P-51, so the comparison may be between all the peripheral things FSX can do and the pure "combat" functions of a combat sim.