PDA

View Full Version : The Evolution of the Focke Wulf 190



XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 04:45 PM
I've read a lot and seen a lot said about the Butcherbird. She's a fine airplane, and I am very glad to see the discussion about her has matured as well as this forum in general.

Recently, the topic in hand for the Wurger is the request for a complex damage model.

I don't know a whole lot about how damage models are made or ways to apply them, how things should be... But I do agree with the fundamental argument that some members of this forum are putting forth. Lets look at the facts.

Germany had two main single-engine fighter aircraft throughout the war. The Me-109 and the Fw-190. Some 20,000-ish FW190's were produced.

Seeing how this plane played such a major part in the Luftwaffe, I find it very reasonable that people are requesting it receive a more complex damage model. Now, lets remember...

Complex doesn't necessarily mean stronger or weaker. Complex means damage is modeled on and affects the aircraft more realistically.

So I find myself in agreement with the people who believe the Fw-190 should receive a more complex damage model. I humbly request that if Oleg and 1C:Maddox are willing to re-design it for the paid add-on, another patch, or anything, I and many others would surely be pleased.

I'm don't fly the Fw-190 very often myself, but have noticed the inconsistencies. I'm all for the workhorses of WWII receiving the most attention and the most modeling, but of course the desicion is up to 1C:Maddox.

IL2: Forgotten Battles is an excellent piece of software that I enjoy almost every day, and worth 10 times what it cost. Oleg and team have done us all a great service, and he deserves the utmost of respect from the community. He and his team have mine.

~S~

Gunner of the 361st vFG

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 04:45 PM
I've read a lot and seen a lot said about the Butcherbird. She's a fine airplane, and I am very glad to see the discussion about her has matured as well as this forum in general.

Recently, the topic in hand for the Wurger is the request for a complex damage model.

I don't know a whole lot about how damage models are made or ways to apply them, how things should be... But I do agree with the fundamental argument that some members of this forum are putting forth. Lets look at the facts.

Germany had two main single-engine fighter aircraft throughout the war. The Me-109 and the Fw-190. Some 20,000-ish FW190's were produced.

Seeing how this plane played such a major part in the Luftwaffe, I find it very reasonable that people are requesting it receive a more complex damage model. Now, lets remember...

Complex doesn't necessarily mean stronger or weaker. Complex means damage is modeled on and affects the aircraft more realistically.

So I find myself in agreement with the people who believe the Fw-190 should receive a more complex damage model. I humbly request that if Oleg and 1C:Maddox are willing to re-design it for the paid add-on, another patch, or anything, I and many others would surely be pleased.

I'm don't fly the Fw-190 very often myself, but have noticed the inconsistencies. I'm all for the workhorses of WWII receiving the most attention and the most modeling, but of course the desicion is up to 1C:Maddox.

IL2: Forgotten Battles is an excellent piece of software that I enjoy almost every day, and worth 10 times what it cost. Oleg and team have done us all a great service, and he deserves the utmost of respect from the community. He and his team have mine.

~S~

Gunner of the 361st vFG

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 04:48 PM
Agreed for sure. It probably should get the development time put into the plane to give it that complicated damage model and put it on the same footing as all other aicraft. And I also interpret that to mean not tougher or weaker...just consistent.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 05:13 PM
Yup - would be good to see it put on the same playing field as the other planes.

I'd love it if 1c would release more pictures of the internal DMs of the planes too.



http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 06:15 PM
Hi all,


How, precisely, is the FW damage model too "simple"? As it stands, like any other plane it can leak fuel, trail smoke of various densities, suffer pitch control failure, control surface failure, and etc.

That "the wings break with a single half inch round from seven kilometres" indicates nothing relevant. This may be so, and it might be wrong (how should I know?), but it implies nothing about the substance of the code defining wing failure.

As we may recall, earlier versions of the FW suffered suspiciously frequent pilot kills and could be obliterated readily with short bursts to the fuel tank - while the engine and structure generally were all but impervious to subtle damage. This being no longer so, how does one know that the damage modelling maintains its "simplicity"?


Cheers,


Greg

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 06:31 PM
Oleg and 1C have my respect as well. Despite the ups and downs of the game it has without doubt clearly matured into an incredibly detailed sim that I doubt will be equalled for a long time by anyone (other than Maddox/1C's next venture ofcourse).

S!


TX-Zen
Black 6
TX Squadron CO
http://www.txsquadron.com
clyndes@hotmail.com (IM only)


http://www.txsquadron.com/uploaded/tx-zen/Zensig2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 06:53 PM
Nice post gunner, I agree.

Nic

The first official D12 whiner!

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 06:58 PM
GregSM wrote:
- Hi all,
-
-
- How, precisely, is the FW damage model too "simple"?
- As it stands, like any other plane it can leak fuel,
- trail smoke of various densities, suffer pitch
- control failure, control surface failure, and etc.
-

The damage model is "simple" becuase it has the same damage model as it did in IL2. Forgotten Battles brought with it what Oleg called a "complex damage model" which allowed the plane to be damaged in many more and more realistic ways. Currently the only way to bring down a FW is to break it off at the fuel tank, or break a wing off. Oleg told us it still has the simple damage model, and is one of the only flyable planes without the new damage model.


- That "the wings break with a single half inch round
- from seven kilometres" indicates nothing relevant.
- This may be so, and it might be wrong (how should I
- know?), but it implies nothing about the substance
- of the code defining wing failure.
-

Should one .50 round be able to sever a wing?? I think a wing spar that can survive a 900kph dive and pullout should have no problem with one .50 round.

- As we may recall, earlier versions of the FW
- suffered suspiciously frequent pilot kills and could
- be obliterated readily with short bursts to the fuel
- tank - while the engine and structure generally were
- all but impervious to subtle damage. This being no
- longer so, how does one know that the damage
- modelling maintains its "simplicity"?
-

-
- Greg
-




"Ich bin ein Wuergerwhiner"

"The future battle on the ground will be preceded by battle in the air. This will determine which of the contestants has to suffer operational and tactical disadvantages and be forced throughout the battle into adoption compromise solutions." --Erwin Rommel

http://lbhskier37.freeservers.com/Mesig.jpg
--NJG26_Killa--

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 07:05 PM
GregSM wrote:
- Hi all,
-
-
- How, precisely, is the FW damage model too "simple"?
- As it stands, like any other plane it can leak fuel,
- trail smoke of various densities, suffer pitch
- control failure, control surface failure, and etc.
-
- That "the wings break with a single half inch round
- from seven kilometres" indicates nothing relevant.
- This may be so, and it might be wrong (how should I
- know?), but it implies nothing about the substance
- of the code defining wing failure.
-
- As we may recall, earlier versions of the FW
- suffered suspiciously frequent pilot kills and could
- be obliterated readily with short bursts to the fuel
- tank - while the engine and structure generally were
- all but impervious to subtle damage. This being no
- longer so, how does one know that the damage
- modelling maintains its "simplicity"?
-
-
- Cheers,
-
-
- Greg
-
-
-

If you fly the 190 regularly, the differences are readily apparent, but I understand if you flew it only occasionally, you would get the impression that it's DM is the same as other aircraft. I will not go into particulars as these have been detailed before, but the number of damage "locations" in the Fw-190 is significantly less than in an aircraft like the 109 with a complex internal DM. Just fly the two and you will begin to see the differences.

She's a great bird, but there's not much going on inside.

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 07:11 PM
"suffer pitch control failure, control surface failure, and etc."

to my knowledge it cannot suffer control failure. Yes, the surfaces can become damaged/destroyed, but the control mechanism itself (cables with most planes, but rods in FWs) cannot be damaged.

Sometimes I wonder about things like supercharger damage, prop control damage, oil on windscreen, instrument damage. I have seen all of these in 109s, but supercharger damage only once. So even though I fly the 190 way more than any other plane, and I fly it a ton overall, I suppose it could be that all these things are possible, just very very rare.

For the 190-

-never seen supercharger damage (saw this only once ever, in a 109 online in original IL2).

-never seen control failure.

-never seen prop/engine control damage (seen this 3 times in 109s and once in He111 every time I also lost elevator control, not sure if it is related).

-never seen engine damage other than total failure (I mean directly from enemy fire, not just from overheating or after total loss of oil).

-never seen oil on windscreen/cockpit damage *online* (I have seen it offline in original IL2, but never online and not seen yet in FB).

-never had pilot wounded other than by plane on fire (with 109 e.g. you can get wounded by enemy gunfire).

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 09:06 PM
Hi Ibhskier37,


"Oleg told us it still has the simple damage model, and is one of the only flyable planes without the new damage model."

I remember Oleg qualifying this statement by assuring us that the "complex" damage modelling for the FW would be a feature of the free add on we've just received. Properly, rather, I think that's what I remember! (By the way, do you see my happy perhaps-remembrance ascending to legendary status? I don't!)



Hi A.K.Davis,


"the number of damage "locations" in the Fw-190 is significantly less than in an aircraft like the 109 with a complex internal DM. Just fly the two and you will begin to see the differences."

I've flown the two plenty, but not rigorously so that I've compiled data confirming my impression that the FW damage model is complex like any other. So, for all I know, you may be right, and I'm left wondering if what's purported about the FW damage modelling has been substantiated to a standard beyond that we often see on these boards.



Hi Fillmore,


"Sometimes I wonder about things like supercharger damage, prop control damage, oil on windscreen, instrument damage. I have seen all of these in 109s, but supercharger damage only once. So even though I fly the 190 way more than any other plane, and I fly it a ton overall, I suppose it could be that all these things are possible, just very very rare."

Maybe you're right too. Hopefully, if you are, it will be enhanced in the future.



Cheers,


Greg

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 09:25 PM
Obviously I wholeheartedly agree that the 190 needs a complex (not tougher) DM. Its good to see all of the posts about the Focke-Wulf's DM, because when I first brought it up I was called a Luftwhiner. The funny thing is that this has been around for a long time, and I am glad to see it finally brought to the fore. Thanks to the original poster for a nice, mature post.

I e-mailed Oleg about this a couple of times in the past, let's just hope that the numerous recent posts on the forum yield some results. This is one of the few "must haves" left to be corrected in FB IMHO.

<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 09:59 PM
I completely agree. The once impervious 190 is now mortal like every other plane in il2fb.

A complex DM will only make it easier to bring down. And check your sources folkes, but I don't think the 190 is 100% control rods. There are some cables in there somewhere.

And while we are in there tinkering, how's about a little attention to the suspect elevator response.


To quote a good friend of mine:


"I used to fly around and just ignore anyone firing at me."



"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 10:21 PM
Fortunately, everybody knows Astro is the ultimate in anti-190 posters. Obviously he didn't get the whole "not tougher, not easier" thing. A complex DM will make it go down more consistently, meaning not from 500 rounds in the fuesalage, or from 2 at 600 meters away.

And many of the planes in the game have super-elevator response, not just the 190. The P-51, P-47, FW-190, and many others can easily pull out of dives at insane speeds and angles with relative ease.

<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 10:21 PM
In the Fw-190, you're either alive or dead.

It'd be nice to find a happy medium. Bring on the complex damage model!

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 10:34 PM
GR142_Astro wrote:
-
- And while we are in there tinkering, how's about a
- little attention to the suspect elevator response.
-
-
- To quote a good friend of mine:
-
-
- "I used to fly around and just ignore anyone firing
- at me."



Good thing your friend is an expert on the 190!


BTW, what does elevator response have to do with complex DM?

S!!



TX-Zen
Black 6
TX Squadron CO
http://www.txsquadron.com
clyndes@hotmail.com (IM only)


http://www.txsquadron.com/uploaded/tx-zen/Zensig2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-09-2003, 10:37 PM
Korolov wrote:
- In the Fw-190, you're either alive or dead.
-
- It'd be nice to find a happy medium. Bring on the
- complex damage model!
-
<img
- src="http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a
- .jpg">
-
-
- Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

thats true actully, u hardly ever get some semi crippling damage


whineingu /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 02:03 AM
kyrule2 wrote:
- Fortunately, everybody knows Astro is the ultimate
- in anti-190 posters. Obviously he didn't get the
- whole "not tougher, not easier" thing. A complex DM
- will make it go down more consistently, meaning not
- from 500 rounds in the fuesalage, or from 2 at 600
- meters away.

And you couldn't be more wrong. I completely see the whole tougher not easier issue. Read again Mcduff. I've seen kills take a few rounds or several hundred. Yes, it will go down more consistently (which means easier, on average).

No need for personal attacks sir.

I see you defended the elevator. Why silent on the control cable / rod issue? Unfortunately I have no in-depth references on this historic bird and I find much net info to be dubious. Anybody have definitive info about which surfaces were controlled by cable and which by rod?



"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 02:29 AM
GR142_Astro wrote:
- I completely agree. The once impervious 190 is now
- mortal like every other plane in il2fb.
-
- A complex DM will only make it easier to bring down.

Should make it easier to achieve crippling (RTB or ditch) damage, but harder to cause instant critical damage (total wing/fuselage failure, engine inoperable, PK). If you don't feel you've scored a kill until the enemy aircraft falls to pieces (very typical in the online crowd), then a more complex DM may make the aircraft seem "tougher" (when in fact it will be easier to "knock out of action").

- And check your sources folkes, but I don't think the
- 190 is 100% control rods. There are some cables in
- there somewhere.
-

Just by looking at a cut-away drawing, the aelirons appear to be controlled by rods, while the rudder and elevator are both controlled by a rod and cable mix, with the rudder using more rod than cable and the elevator using more cable than rod.

- And while we are in there tinkering, how's about a
- little attention to the suspect elevator response.
-

Fw-190 had excellent elevator response.

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 03:31 AM
Seems the 190 is a easier to shoot down plane than the 109 now (this is about dm not flying it). As it was before(that never changed) 1 single scratch brings it out of service(top speed reduced to a high degree and more tendecies to flip over) is this correct ? When we compare the laminar flow design on p51 it should start to complain after some small rounds that should reduce topspeed like it does now in the fw190. Comparing to il2 which has a very tough damagemodel it flys even with major parts of the wings damaged and is still controllable. Compare to other planes read some pilot accounts that put all there 50s ammo in it and it still did fly only with little oil flow. Compare it now to the toughness of yak3 and other planes that were not considered a tough plane while the fw was considered as "can take some rounds". This 2d trigger Point model is still in the 190 and on the 109 it just got a rework as 2d. As you may have noticed rounds shooting in the fuselage back disappear on the surface same for the wings. This means from this point the bullet is calculated as you never see a bullet pass a plane once it got in. I dont know if then a radomize event calcs if you hit something internal as the internal structure is only partly there if at all. There are Places where you can do damage on others not. The trigger zones for that are 2d . So when you dont hit em no damage occures = wrong when you hit only the trigger zones = almost instant kill . And la7 can shoot fw wing off in 1 short burst on 870 m very good aim well done would you say.I can hit targets with fw on the same range but they only get little damage from that. You can compare Real Gun Data here http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm.
As we saw it in the last patch not the guns were weak or something the dm was . Seems lot of 2d damagemodels got more triggerzones special on p39 for example that should be a tough plane to down too but lost most of this reputation same for fw. So its very easy to down a fw when you aim for triggerzones also you might not take it out completely but when it is damaged it isnt much of a opponent anymore except
you dont know how to take down a damaged plane. Thats not the case for the BF that can still fly a little with little dm on the wings. And the FW should at least take some small hits before it is at this point. You can test it easily fly into a b17 formation get some small wings hits and try to do combat manouevers sharp turns high speed dives. And that is why most would like a new 3D damagemodel this would result
in a easier to down fw cause the non effect bullets are counted in and more detailed damage calculations overall.

Regards,
Hyperion

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 05:44 AM
Astro, actually I am correct.

"- I've seen kills take a few rounds or several
- hundred. Yes, it will go down more consistently
- (which means easier, on average)."


How will it go down easier on average when 90% of the time you get shot down in a 190 it is the super-fragile wing that goes? It will go down more accurately, easier in some situations, much harder in others (at 600 meters for example). So think again "McDuff."

"- No need for personal attacks sir."

It wasn't a personal attack, just stating the obvious. I'm not even close to being the first one to say this so why take offense now?


"- I see you defended the elevator. Why silent on the
- control cable / rod issue?"

I didn't defend the elevator, I agreed with you (sort of). I called it a "super-elevator" and said that many planes (not just the 190) "can pull out of dives at insane speeds and angles." That sounds like I'm defending it to you? Why are you bringing up this issue here anyway (see "my personal attack" for answer).

And I am silent on the control cable issue because, like you, I don't have enough info to comment.


<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 08:54 AM
All of the surface controls for the Fw-190 are 2cm Dura-Aluminum rods (much like the Feischler Storch). The elevator is boosted on all models after the A-4 by an electric motor in the horizontal stablizer. Positive and Negative trim are applied in cockpit via a round handle and trim angle is indicated by a small angle gauge on the left side console near the throttle control and Mag switch. Throttle controls and various other linkage is 10mm/7mm diameter IIRC.

It would be nice if we could adjust the trim (Fetter?) tabs while on the ground to account for torque roll..

Russian aircraft require skill to fly.
German aircraft require ten times that skill, and one hundred times the patience!

WUAF_CO_CRBNFRZ on HyperLobby

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 08:58 AM
kyrule2 wrote:
- some kind of words


Actually....most all of my kills on 190s since 1.21 have resulted from the removal of the tail section. Only 2 or 3 wings and a few PKs.

At the end of the day, we both agree that a complex damage model is due this aircraft and that is where I will leave you. Since I didn't join the thread and single you out as a 190 whiner, I would appreciate the same treatment in return. Good day to you.


AKD - Thanks for the control info. If there are cables inside, one would think the 190 would be subject to damage in at least one axis of control.



"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 09:22 AM
Astro, then we do agree again on something because in my e-mail to Oleg I stated that the wings could be removed by a few rounds from great distances and that the rear section of the fuesalage is severed too easily. I also stated that The main fuesalage takes way too many rounds to effect and that the simplified DM of the 190 was inconsistent. Becaue I like immersion I like the oil on the windscreen, damaged controls, etc. In the 190 you are either fine, dead, or flying with severe speed reduction and stall (which is about the only effect you can have regardless where you are hit). After flying a 109 with all of its damage effects, its obvious that the 190 is severely lacking in the details.

And we agree that the 190 needs a complex DM

And we agree that certain planes (including 190) elevators are too resonsive/effective.

I didn't mean to single you out, but some of your points are misplaced IMHO and your reputation precedes you.



<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

Message Edited on 12/10/0308:23AM by kyrule2

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 12:22 PM
GR142_Astro wrote:
-
- And while we are in there tinkering, how's about a
- little attention to the suspect elevator response.

The elevator response is, infact... quite accurate. This is because when Kurt Tank designed the FW190 (as the successor to the 109), the hard handling of the 109 at high speeds was taken into account. To compensate, a gearbox (not sure of all the details) was installed that effectively eliminated most of the force needed to raise the elevators at high speeds.

For more info, talk to Carbonfreeze.

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 01:21 PM
A.K.Davis wrote:
- Should make it easier to achieve crippling (RTB or
- ditch) damage, but harder to cause instant critical
- damage (total wing/fuselage failure, engine
- inoperable, PK). If you don't feel you've scored a
- kill until the enemy aircraft falls to pieces (very
- typical in the online crowd), then a more complex DM
- may make the aircraft seem "tougher" (when in fact
- it will be easier to "knock out of action").

Very good point. I don't remember going back to base with a heavily damaged 190. Either I loose the wing or get cut in two or loose the engine, but never have to rtb or ditch due to damage (except I ditch when the engine goes off).

I loved it in the original Il 2 days when I was badly damaged, with engine running badly and doing funny noises and constantly loosing alt trying to come back to friendly territory or even make it to the base.It seems to never be the case with the Dora. It's pretty sad.

Nic

The first official D12 whiner!

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 01:28 PM
GR142_Astro wrote:
- AKD - Thanks for the control info. If there are
- cables inside, one would think the 190 would be
- subject to damage in at least one axis of control.

Then obviously people who fly the 190 and ask for a complex DM want this simulated. So you can see it has nothing to do with making the 190 stronger.

Nic

The first official D12 whiner!

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 02:09 PM
A.K.Davis wrote:

-
- Just by looking at a cut-away drawing, the aelirons
- appear to be controlled by rods, while the rudder
- and elevator are both controlled by a rod and cable
- mix, with the rudder using more rod than cable and
- the elevator using more cable than rod.
-

Further description.

The dual and doubled elevator cables ran from the front of the step to the fuselage/tail joint. The other parts of the control run was rods. There was a differential bellcrank at the fuselage/tail section and a regular bellcrank at the step position.

For the rudder it was rod from the stick to the middle of the last fuselage section. Then single and doubled cable to the rudder.



http://www.f1boat.com/03/images/start.jpg



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
12-10-2003, 03:54 PM
I agree.....the 190 is a great bird and should receive the same complex DM treatment the rest of the famous planes are getting. I don't understand why it hasn't already been fixed. Lets hope in the future that ALL planes have this kind of treatment. Now if we could jsut get the roll rate fixed (LOL) on my Jug.