PDA

View Full Version : Transonic/Supersonic flight regimes in BoB



Klemm.co
10-08-2006, 02:47 AM
Will we see them properly modelled in Bob? In FAP you get the plane-breakup at 800-1000 km/h, and planes that don't break up explode at 1100 km/h.

In BoB we certainly won't go supersonic, but later on maybe we get jets again and then it would be just rediculous, if the categoric "boooom! you're dead! you went too fast!" stays.

The Me-262 for example was reported to go supersonic at least once in WW2. I know that many don't want to believe it, but all the trans- and supersonic effects were there and the plane took serious damage in the process.

Soooo, who knows, maybe we get even Korea or the like later on whith the BoB engine, and these effects would be a major omission, cause the F-86 Sabre for example could go supersonic in a dive.

Oh, and some damage to the airframe in form of deforming a bit or finally breaking up after too much stress in too harsh manouvers would be nice too. Happened for example to P-39s in Russia to some Q-models IIRC.

VW-IceFire
10-08-2006, 07:55 AM
I suspect this may be a reason why we don't have a Korean war addon for this game engine is that they never anticipated going that fast in the engine.

If rumors prove to be true...there will be a Korean war title coming out after Storm of War: Battle of Britain. The teaser on the RRG site seems to point in that direction. So perhaps with the new engine this will be modeled.

BTW: Everything I've read about aircraft in WWII and supposedly breaking the sound barrier are false. The only WWII aircraft to break it also broke themselves.

AKA_TAGERT
10-08-2006, 09:25 AM
Originally posted by Klemm.co:
Will we see them properly modelled in Bob? In FAP you get the plane-breakup at 800-1000 km/h, and planes that don't break up explode at 1100 km/h.
So? Seems fine as is.. What were you expecting to happen when an air frame exceeds it's limit?


Originally posted by Klemm.co:
In BoB we certainly won't go supersonic, but later on maybe we get jets again and then it would be just rediculous, if the categoric "boooom! you're dead! you went too fast!" stays.
Ridiculous? Again, seems fine as is.. What were you expecting to happen when an air frame exceeds it's limit?


Originally posted by Klemm.co:
The Me-262 for example was reported to go supersonic at least once in WW2. I know that many don't want to believe it, but all the trans- and supersonic effects were there and the plane took serious damage in the process.
Nope, sorry, the Me262 never went supersonic! The control reversal and/or disabled controls up to and control regained after (what you call "trans and supersonic effects") does NOT mean the plane as a whole went supersonic, just the air flow in and around the control surfaces did. Many planes, even props experienced these effects.


Originally posted by Klemm.co:
Soooo, who knows, maybe we get even Korea or the like later on whith the BoB engine, and these effects would be a major omission, cause the F-86 Sabre for example could go supersonic in a dive.
The F86 could and did a few days before Yeagers flight.. but.. Breaking of the sound barrier is NOT defined as such.. i.e. in a DIVE it is defined as in LEVEL FLIGHT.


Originally posted by Klemm.co:
Oh, and some damage to the airframe in form of deforming a bit or finally breaking up after too much stress in too harsh manouvers would be nice too.
That is all BoB would need over IL2, as it is now all you get is the boom once you exceed the limits.. but there is damage to the plane prior to the boom. IL2 simulates this by having some of the control surfaces pop off prior to the boom. It would be nice if the body did deform a bit.. but not a requirement IMHO.


Originally posted by Klemm.co:
Happened for example to P-39s in Russia to some Q-models IIRC.
Happened to a lot of planes that exceed the limits of the airframe.

AKA_TAGERT
10-08-2006, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I suspect this may be a reason why we don't have a Korean war addon for this game engine is that they never anticipated going that fast in the engine.

If rumors prove to be true...there will be a Korean war title coming out after Storm of War: Battle of Britain. The teaser on the RRG site seems to point in that direction. So perhaps with the new engine this will be modeled.

BTW: Everything I've read about aircraft in WWII and supposedly breaking the sound barrier are false. The only WWII aircraft to break it also broke themselves.
That teaser STAR is NOT a KOREAN symbol

Klemm.co
10-08-2006, 11:24 AM
You got some points there, TAGERT. I stand corrected. And for the Sabres ability to go supersonic; i knew of the fact, that it only achieved it in a dive, but it is nonetheless supersonic. I did not mean the ability to go supersonic in level flight. Bob Hoover describes the process in his book "Forever Flying" pretty well, they did some tests with the Sabre going supersonic in a dive and tried creating ever greater shockwaves on the airfield in a kind of unofficial competition between the test pilots (which was not authorised by the company Bob Hoover was employed by btw).

So being not true to live in that respect in SoW with all that tests that tested exactly the subject of the Sabre going supersonic in a dive would be a major flaw IMHO.

And the star is no mix of a red star and the american symbol too. Somebody once mentioned it to be the symbol of some countrys airforce, but don't ask me which one.

AKA_TAGERT
10-08-2006, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by Klemm.co:
You got some points there, TAGERT. I stand corrected.
Roger


Originally posted by Klemm.co:
And for the Sabres ability to go supersonic; i knew of the fact, that it only achieved it in a dive, but it is nonetheless supersonic. I did not mean the ability to go supersonic in level flight.
Roger, as you pointed out, I was just expanding on it that it was just days before Yeagers flight and that the defintion of breaking the sound barrier refers to level flight. On that note, the Me262 could not do it in level or a dive.


Originally posted by Klemm.co:
Bob Hoover describes the process in his book "Forever Flying" pretty well, they did some tests with the Sabre going supersonic in a dive and tried creating ever greater shockwaves on the airfield in a kind of unofficial competition between the test pilots (which was not authorised by the company Bob Hoover was employed by btw).
Roger, every interesting times it was!


Originally posted by Klemm.co:
And the star is no mix of a red star and the american symbol too. Somebody once mentioned it to be the symbol of some countrys airforce, but don't ask me which one.
Roger, I saw that too.. I forget what contry it was.. but it was NOT KOREA, thus not likly to be a KOREAN addon.. I wish it was! This sim has about 80% of what it needs to make a KOREAN sim!

NonWonderDog
10-08-2006, 01:42 PM
...is TAGERT saying that planes should explode like bombs if they hit Mach 1?

I know it's not really the point of the sim, and I know that just about any WWII plane would shear its wings off in a 1000 km/h dive, but don't you think the giant explosion is just a bit excessive? It really would be nice if the SoW engine had at least the capability to model transonic and supersonic effects sometime in the future.

ElAurens
10-08-2006, 05:22 PM
That graphic at the RRG site is a composite of the USA national aircraft markings after January 1947 and the "Kremlin" star, which was used early in WW2 by some VVS units.

Korea, or a fantasy hot war over Nationalist China (Taiwan), really are the candidates in my book.

WWMaxGunz
10-08-2006, 06:02 PM
They did attempts to break mach 1 in dives at very high alts in many different planes.
So far it looks like for props the later Spitfires set the records, in steep dives.

Mostly I expect a plane to start going uncontrollable in the transonic region, about .72 to .78
mach and pitching nose down violently or perhaps up or just the wings or tail rip off so you
get a few moments to contemplate what to do next perhaps... but on film when the plane noses
down it's a snap move and the plane decelerates so fast the pilot must be in redout or black
out from being spun so hard and then the plane just shreds into pieces. Oh well.

AKA_TAGERT
10-08-2006, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
...is TAGERT saying that planes should explode like bombs if they hit Mach 1? Some yes, others no, they might stick togther long enough for a big chuck of them to make there way to the ground BEFORE THEY EXPLODE.. bu comeon.. Can you not think of other things you would rather see you limited PC resouces processing and Oleg coding? I know I can! Also remember, this is a simulation.. They dont model every bolt, rivet and weld. Things get lumpped togther. BoB apears to be taking it one step further than IL2 in that they are modling alot of the frame work. Now I dont know if that is just for looks for when the skin take hits and you can see what is under it all or if it factors into the DM. Im sure that someday, when all the FM issues, AI issues and other things are acounted for and there is enough spare processing power than and only then will they be able to model more eye candy blow up senarios for you and yours. But for now, I think there are more important things to simulate than a verity of ways to explode when you exceed the limits. SAVVY?


Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
I know it's not really the point of the sim,
DING!


Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
and I know that just about any WWII plane would shear its wings off in a 1000 km/h dive,
DING DING!


Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
but don't you think the giant explosion is just a bit excessive?
Nope


Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
t really would be nice if the SoW engine had at least the capability to model transonic and supersonic effects sometime in the future.
Agreed.. but I wouldnt hold my breath on it. Not a whole lot of data on that anyways, per plane that is. Maybe someday when they can actully draw up a 3D body and simulate the air flow over said body then they can get a good idea as to what each plane type would experance. They do that now for new developement of real planes, but it is a slow and expensive process that does not lend itself well to a $40 game, $20,000,000 modern jet yes, $40 dollar game simulating 60 year old planes.. NO! But someday.. someday

Philipscdrw
10-08-2006, 07:12 PM
What happens AFTER going much too fast isn't terribly important, in my opinion. Deforming the shape of the aircraft - did that actually happen? I'd be suprised if it did.

What DID happen, and it would be great to see modelled, was over-stressing the airframe by throwing it around too much at high speed, over-stessing the controls... if you've been pulling high G, taken gun damage, exceeding Vne, you're going to be flying a structurally weaker aeroplane, and when you do that victory roll over the airfield, your tail might snap off and you'll plummet to fiery death in a depressingly historically-accurate way.

AKA_TAGERT
10-08-2006, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by Philipscdrw:
What happens AFTER going much too fast isn't terribly important, in my opinion.[
Same here.. Or should I say at this point in time I can think of a million other things the development money and time would be better spent on. But someday, someday there will be a day that a simulation can simulte what happens in this situation with great detail.. and do all the other things they currently do.


Originally posted by Philipscdrw:
Deforming the shape of the aircraft - did that actually happen? I'd be suprised if it did.
Yes, on several planes.. there are stories of the skin being wrinkled and the frame being bent.


Originally posted by Philipscdrw:
What DID happen, and it would be great to see modelled, was over-stressing the airframe by throwing it around too much at high speed, over-stessing the controls... if you've been pulling high G, taken gun damage, exceeding Vne, you're going to be flying a structurally weaker aeroplane, and when you do that victory roll over the airfield, your tail might snap off and you'll plummet to fiery death in a depressingly historically-accurate way.
All part of the DM.. Basically that could be done now.. and may be being done.

VW-IceFire
10-08-2006, 10:07 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I suspect this may be a reason why we don't have a Korean war addon for this game engine is that they never anticipated going that fast in the engine.

If rumors prove to be true...there will be a Korean war title coming out after Storm of War: Battle of Britain. The teaser on the RRG site seems to point in that direction. So perhaps with the new engine this will be modeled.

BTW: Everything I've read about aircraft in WWII and supposedly breaking the sound barrier are false. The only WWII aircraft to break it also broke themselves.
That teaser STAR is NOT a KOREAN symbol </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So what is it?

Luthier also dropped some hints which makes me think that it does have a Korean influence. Or something right around that time.

darkhorizon11
10-08-2006, 10:32 PM
Yes I do hope this is modeled for future sim eras.

And they were capable of exceeding Mcrit which causes supersonic and transonic flow creating all sorts of fun phenomenons like control lock, fluttering, shockwave appearances, and of course mach tuck!

WWMaxGunz
10-09-2006, 04:17 AM
You could have all the details you can imagine but if the code functions soak up too many
cycles you also get a slideshow at about 2 fps if you're lucky. So keep thinking about
how much PC will be needed for BoB. It staggers me just a bit.

Tagert we do have 3D internal structure, see the spars on broken wings?
I've seen posts where people say they were hit and then later that wing folded.
If the overstress values comes from templates in data then maybe the overhead of applying
damage every time to every part of the airframe might add up to too much cycles overhead.

For sure there are the 3D elements as we've seen all that on the site and they are used
in the FB DM while IL2 original was less detailed. Now the engines might have 20 pieces
in the DM.

We can't have wings bending even a small amount at the tips, the graphic engine can't
handle it and I'm sure there's no wing bend state in the data model. Whereas IRL the wings
do have some give, they can bend up and down some and return without breaking, like springs.
Past that you'd better be slowing down and easing up on the G's which may not be possible.
Ouch... Again!
Student Driver: Highspeed Dive Test Crash Course. P-38 and Bf109 approved.

RCAF_Irish_403
10-09-2006, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I suspect this may be a reason why we don't have a Korean war addon for this game engine is that they never anticipated going that fast in the engine.

If rumors prove to be true...there will be a Korean war title coming out after Storm of War: Battle of Britain. The teaser on the RRG site seems to point in that direction. So perhaps with the new engine this will be modeled.

BTW: Everything I've read about aircraft in WWII and supposedly breaking the sound barrier are false. The only WWII aircraft to break it also broke themselves.
That teaser STAR is NOT a KOREAN symbol </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
So what is it?

Luthier also dropped some hints which makes me think that it does have a Korean influence. Or something right around that time. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

my best guess: The 1948 Berlin crisis goes hot

AKA_TAGERT
10-09-2006, 09:39 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
So what is it?

Luthier also dropped some hints which makes me think that it does have a Korean influence. Or something right around that time.
I remember what it is, I only rember what it is not. Last time this came up, it was noted that it is NOT a KOREAN addon. As for influences.. I dont know.

AKA_TAGERT
10-09-2006, 10:16 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
You could have all the details you can imagine but if the code functions soak up too many
cycles you also get a slide show at about 2 FPS if you're lucky. So keep thinking about
how much PC will be needed for BoB. It staggers me just a bit.
Is what I have been saying for years! There is a limited/finite amount of PC resources. That is to say you can only calculate so many things in 16ms (to maintain a ~60Hz frame rate). Faster PCs do more that slower PCs in 16ms. As PCs get faster each year, software can do more. But the more you simulate one thing, the less time you have to simulate anther. It is that simple!


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Tagert we do have 3D internal structure, see the spars on broken wings?
I've seen posts where people say they were hit and then later that wing folded.
If the overstress values comes from templates in data then maybe the overhead of applying
damage every time to every part of the airframe might add up to too much cycles overhead.
Most if not all of the wing spars I have seen in IL2 are BMP images (none 3D drawings like the cockpit or body) that are not part of a frame structure. That is to say they are just for looks and don't factor into some calculation of stress or damage. Most sims to date have hit boxes/zones. In the early days sims only had one hit box/zone. Once the box/zone received X amount of hits it recorded a kill. Todays sims have many hit boxes/zones strung out through out the plane. You have an engine hit box/zone, and fuel tank hit box(es)/zone(s), etc.. There there are the stress calculations, for example the Mustang wing snap off thing. It is kind of like a box/zone, that if you exceed a certain amount of g in a small amount of time (aka impulse) you can "damage" the wing, but it is not based off using a 3D drawn frame and calculating two force member stresses. Trying to do that in real time (i.e. less than 16ms) along with all the other stuff would most likely bring the PC to it's knees.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
For sure there are the 3D elements as we've seen all that on the site and they are used
in the FB DM while IL2 original was less detailed. Now the engines might have 20 pieces
in the DM. 20 boxes/zones, as we have seen, BoB is going to a lot of trouble to draw up an internal frame. Now I don't know if that is just for eye candy, so that we can have more dynamic looking damage. That is to say, with IL2 if you get hit in a box/zone it allways shows the same damage hole. The same bent frame (BMP pictures) when you rip off a wing and such. Where with BoB and the 3D frame they could do a lot more now. Now they could show actual hits instead of some pre-canned hit damage.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
We can't have wings bending even a small amount at the tips, the graphic engine can't
handle it and I'm sure there's no wing bend state in the data model. Whereas IRL the wings
do have some give, they can bend up and down some and return without breaking, like springs.
Agreed, maybe someday, but for now, not likely. Unless your sim was some stand alone sim that did nothing buy show the wings bend. Which goes back to my original statement, the more you simulate one thing the less time you have to simulate another. Sim making is an ART and SCIENCE. The SCIENCE is easy! All the math is out there and has been there for years, the ART is coming up with the right mix so that it still runs decent. Any boob can toss in all the math with all the variables, but it will result in a slide show.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Past that you'd better be slowing down and easing up on the G's which may not be possible.
Ouch... Again!
Student Driver: High speed Dive Test Crash Course. P-38 and Bf109 approved.
LOL

WWMaxGunz
10-09-2006, 02:20 PM
The spar ends we see are 3D model of broken wing parts. Pause and jump outside then pan
around, it's not a bitmap.

FB engines have up to 20 parts each with a different effect that uses the 3D engine to
detect ballistic collisions. And we have spar hitboxes shaped oddly enough by the spar
parts of the model, some data.

If you can have per plane stress limits on wings then those values can change when and
as damage happens. That's not a recurring overhead. Lower the strength is all.

Yeah I know a little about metal. Worked my up to production engineer at a job shop
and went on from there into programming. I've cut and bent a good bit of metal.
Best technical anaylsis I have is Machinery's Handbook that I learned to use back in
school before I went into the service and half'a what I knew drained out my ears.

But cantilever wings are by design going to have some flex that really puts off the
break, a kind of bit of padding, you can soak a lot of stress something with a little
give and all it does is give. Try the same with glass or bend a piece of T-6 aluminum.

So the wings rip off and then the plane tumbles and disintegrates somewhere between
.72 and .9 mach and the pilot never survives. Sounds about right. I only wish that
the turbulence was a more major factor. Aileron buzz becomes a factor on corporate
jets IIRC around .78 mach or above. We should have stick side shake by then if not
sooner. It should be _very_ hard to fly a dive to max speed and "well I blew up" should
not be the way you determine VNE just because it should be harder to hold the plane in
flight and you're more likely to lose control and die that way instead. It should be
something that would make one pilot shear off in a diving chase rather than damage or
lose his plane and carcass.

My $.02.

AKA_TAGERT
10-09-2006, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
The spar ends we see are 3D model of broken wing parts. Pause and jump outside then pan
around, it's not a bitmap.
Maybe, maybe not. Note, I said most, in that most of the ones I have seen are simple flat bitmaps. Which is different from a structure (3D object) with a bitmap overlay. The one dimensional bitmaps of which I speak when looking at them on end disappear (no depth) but looking at them straight on you will see the "length" and "width" of them (does that make them 2 dimensional?) Anyway, most of the damage stuff we see is that. Some planes do have some 3D aspects to their damage.. for example I know when you tear one engine off of a Me262 it will show some frame work where the motor use to be that is 3D and not the bitmap type of which I am referring to. But back to the real point of all this, IL2 does NOT have the whole 3D frame drawn underneath the skin like the BoB models appear to have. They only draw framework in the areas where the pre-canned damage stuff will appear. For example, if you hit a hit box in the wing of some planes and hit it enough to register damage the 3D overlay will now show a hole where the skin use to be. Inside that hole you will see framework (spars and such) that is typically just a bitmap handing there, not a 3D model of frame.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
FB engines have up to 20 parts each with a different effect that uses the 3D engine to detect ballistic collisions.
Roger, as I pointed out, early on sims had only a few hit boxes/zones. Modern sims have many many more strung about the aircraft.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
And we have spar hit boxes shaped oddly enough by the spar parts of the model, some data.
Yes, the boxes/zones tend to fit within the shape they are simulating.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
If you can have per plane stress limits on wings then those values can change when and as damage happens. That's not a recurring overhead. Lower the strength is all.
True, and simple really. Stressing it is just like receiving a hit from a bullet. A hit box is nothing more than a zone with an incrementing number. Once that number exceeds a preset value it will count as damaged.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Yeah I know a little about metal. Worked my up to production engineer at a job shop and went on from there into programming. I've cut and bent a good bit of metal. Best technical analysis I have is Machinery's Handbook that I learned to use back in school before I went into the service and half'a what I knew drained out my ears.
Funny, at my new job I am actually running into some equipment that I use to repair when I was in the Army! That and you know your getting old when the stuff you use to work on shows up in a museum! I was taking the tour of the White Sands museum the other day and they had an old phone switch board in their museum that I use to repair when I was in the Army.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
But cantilever wings are by design going to have some flex that really puts off the break, a kind of bit of padding, you can soak a lot of stress something with a little give and all it does is give. Try the same with glass or bend a piece of T-6 aluminum.
On that note, a lot of the flight sim math is based on the assumption of a rigid body. That is to say they assume there is NO movement or bending. It makes the math a lot simpler! They could do it, but they would have to use more complex math. Someday, but considering the fact that you as a user wouldn't even notice it I doubt they ever will implement it, it is more for design work.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
So the wings rip off and then the plane tumbles and disintegrates somewhere between .72 and .9 mach and the pilot never survives. Sounds about right.
Agreed 100%


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
I only wish that the turbulence was a more major factor. Aileron buzz becomes a factor on corporate jets IIRC around .78 mach or above. We should have stick side shake by then if not sooner.
Actually, I know some sims do that via a force feedback stick.. but if I remember correctly the only shake you feel in IL2 is when you get hit but bullets. But it has been awhile since I enabled shake on my FFB stick, so maybe it does start to buzz/shake as you near the point?


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
It should be _very_ hard to fly a dive to max speed and "well I blew up" should not be the way you determine VNE just because it should be harder to hold the plane in flight and you're more likely to lose control and die that way instead. It should be something that would make one pilot shear off in a diving chase rather than damage or lose his plane and carcass.
There is a lot of feedback missing from flight sims.. FFB stick do a lot to provide some feedback, but that whole seat of the pants being able to tell how fast your going just but the buzz in your arse is missing from sims, but someday.


Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
My $.02.
Mine too

VW-IceFire
10-09-2006, 09:16 PM
Question...whats aileron buzz? Is that why the ailerons don't seem to be used by a high flying high cruise commercial airliner but rather a set of flaps ontop of the wing (flapperons??)?

berg417448
10-09-2006, 09:22 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Question...whats aileron buzz? Is that why the ailerons don't seem to be used by a high flying high cruise commercial airliner but rather a set of flaps ontop of the wing (flapperons??)?

I don't know what aileron buzz is but I think those "flaps" on top of airliner wings are called spoilers.

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/spoil.html

majnos64
10-12-2006, 02:29 PM
I agree with the opinion no ww2 fighter could do supersonic speeds - transonic maybe but no supersonic. And a reason is the speedometer was not calibrated and developed for that speeds in ww2. So it was impossible to say they were supersonic. The problem is that you got a different shockwave pressure speeds and no compensation for this physical phenomenon. There was an interesting thread here in pf forums where was acceleration of P-47 (which was according to some pilots was able to do supersonic speeds as some daily routine). In this thread was acceleration table where acceleration nearly stops in speeds about 800-900kph. Say 0.2 ms^-2 in these speeds so how long would take to reach speed of sound ? 200-300seconds ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Maybe drag force is even rising with speed.

Me-262 didnt have supersonic engines I cant really imagine it goes supersonic even if it wouldnt desintegrate in this speed. But it could reach some transonic for very short period of time.

It would be really nice to have compressibility feature in BoB engine for next gen simulators maybe I would add even frost on leading edges and cockpit http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"He,who has braver heart, more cold and full of foreseeing courage, which is born from believe in success and in righteousness of things, will smite his opponent." - Aleksandr Ivanovich Pokryshkin

majnos64
10-12-2006, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Question...whats aileron buzz? Is that why the ailerons don't seem to be used by a high flying high cruise commercial airliner but rather a set of flaps ontop of the wing (flapperons??)?

ontop flaps are called spoilers and its used only in emergency or on a runway during braking an airplane. If extended it realy shakes plane during cruise. They are also called lift disturbers. Actually plane is just falling down not slowing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Pretty good modeled in FSX imho.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"He,who has braver heart, more cold and full of foreseeing courage, which is born from believe in success and in righteousness of things, will smite his opponent." - Aleksandr Ivanovich Pokryshkin