Maybe for me?
Ok - so I'm going to get this out now: I have never been a P-51 nut. Nothing against the bird - it did its part in WWII, pioneered laminar wing design, oustanding performance, etc. I get that - maybe it's just "Mustang fatigue" - it's been modelled to death in scale models, every second scale RC model seems to be a Mustang - don't know - its just what I feel.
That said, I am in absolute awe of the WBS product quality - the VCs in particular, seem to have a "RealAirSimulations Spitfire" feel to them. But it wasn't until this latest pack, with the coverage given to the navalized concept - that has me wondering. Then there's that DaveQ guy, who
had to do a RN FAA Korean War paint (you bugger, you!!

) knowing full well how much I'm craving a Seafire FR.47 .... my resolve is slipping ...
So, my real question boils down to FPS performance - I've seen a couple of reviews of the earlier packs stating that FPS performance was suprisingly light, for all the detail. I have an antique-aged Dell Optiplex E220 @ 240Ghs machine with 3.00 GB of RAM, running Win XP, and an NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT. With my Bojote tweaks, and most sliders at/near their highest levels (except for AI), I get regular 30 FPS on stock FS aircraft. With other addons, at a default or well-designed addon field (that itself causes no extra FPS hit) , I get around the following reductions in FPS from the following sample addons:
RAS Spitfire = 0
Flying Stations Wyvern = - 2
Flying Stations Sea Fury = -5
Flying Stations Buccaneer S.1 = -8 to -10
Razbam T-2 Buckeye = -10+
Maybe that helps convey what I'm working with - so can anyone comment on the FPS issue?
Many thanks - regardless of how I decide - WBS and John have much for which to be very proud to a subject that is not only modelled with the highest degree of fidelity - but clearly with the passion that can only come from a labour of love -a very well deserved kudos :salute:.
cheers,
DL