[ROSOBORONEXPORTCORP]

So, the same religious dogmas apply here at AAA?

yeh, and i hope it will stay this way..

Even when clear mistakes are in the files such as incorrect wingspan and wingarea for Spitfire and Ta-152C? I have seen the EM and FM data that were extracted by other people.

This is what worries me. Oleg may well be entering the data in a specific way for the engine (eg. true wing area vs. a calculation based on approximate airflow patterns over the wing). All that it takes is an uniformed person who thinks that the FW-190 should be able to out turn a spitfire at all points in its envelope or that the La-7 is overmodeled...

The only changes proposed are based on the 1946 manual and would undo some inaccuracies which are admitted to and documented by Luthier's and Oleg Maddox's teams. All that I am suggesting really is to reduce the RTD-1's thrust from 600kg to 500kg.

The exception is, of course, the X-4. The loadout for the Ta-183 is almost certainly unrealistic. The Ar-234 would be a more likely platform. Of course the X-4 was never deployed in combat so perhaps the Arado, which was deployed in combat, should be left alone.

As for the outer wing racks on the Arado: They produce too much drag. In real life almost all Arado sorties took place with only one 250kg or 500kg bomb on the centerline. If possible I will only add these single bomb rack options (leaving the overloaded ones alone).

Daiichidoku, the Ho-229 had the engines buried in the fuselage and would never have received uprated engines. The only related design with this flexibility is the Gotha P.60 series. I agree with your reluctance for obvious reasons.