PDA

View Full Version : The link betwean the "uber plane" debate and the so called "toned down" FB FMs



XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 02:17 AM
Simply Oleg over models fine handling caracteristics in all airplanes built before '39 and after '43. In real life an aircraft shakes and drifts in varying amounts as it flys,
This is because various movements of the plane generate stability in different amounts and in different ways during everchanging flight.

Aircraft with natural stability will eventually tend to correct these movements before they go to far but they still exist. Most Veterans quotes tend to ignore this, because it is assumed or the briliant handling caracteristics of the aircraft tend to overwelm the memorys of something common to all aircraft. This seems to be especially true when it comes to aircraft people are fond of.


Choose a Fw-190d9 or La-5FN or I-153 or similar aircraft hit [del] to zoom up to maximum magnification then pull back on the stick and then let go and watch how the aircraft returns at once and then maintanes perfect flight without twisting, snaking, drifting or comensating.

So am I crazy or do I have a point?

Thank you
-Avimimus

__________________________________________________ Il-10

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 02:17 AM
Simply Oleg over models fine handling caracteristics in all airplanes built before '39 and after '43. In real life an aircraft shakes and drifts in varying amounts as it flys,
This is because various movements of the plane generate stability in different amounts and in different ways during everchanging flight.

Aircraft with natural stability will eventually tend to correct these movements before they go to far but they still exist. Most Veterans quotes tend to ignore this, because it is assumed or the briliant handling caracteristics of the aircraft tend to overwelm the memorys of something common to all aircraft. This seems to be especially true when it comes to aircraft people are fond of.


Choose a Fw-190d9 or La-5FN or I-153 or similar aircraft hit [del] to zoom up to maximum magnification then pull back on the stick and then let go and watch how the aircraft returns at once and then maintanes perfect flight without twisting, snaking, drifting or comensating.

So am I crazy or do I have a point?

Thank you
-Avimimus

__________________________________________________ Il-10

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 04:38 AM
What you say doesn't hold hard facts, you can't just take such crude info and build something out of it without adding random parameters that engineers hate. Oleg isn't a man of low intelligence or precision when it comes to being an Aeronautical Engineer. I'm not a person who defends Oleg blindly either. But I wonder where people get such "sure" facts and knowledge when it shows that they are not literate in the field of aeronautical engineering or even physics. I am not making an argument about uber planes, but about your FM criticism.


You seem sure about what should be done yet your description is incoherent.

avimimus wrote:
- This is because various movements of the plane
- generate stability in different amounts and in
- different ways during everchanging flight.

That is not proper, movements don't generate stability, plus you are meaning to say adverse movements. Stability is generally the resistance to acceleration (i.e, what you call movement, a crude term to use in physics), so how could acceleration cause stability? Also, it doesn't change in various amounts, it's only a descriptive term (not quantifiable). You might be talking about how as the angle of attack of stabilizing surfaces increase, they create lift in opposite directions, thus creating restoring forces in different amounts. In this case, you are asking for decreased damping values, but the way damping and moment of inertia works here is the best I've seen.

Real planes I've flown in act similarly, apart from torque and yaw to the left, not much happens when you pull back and let go without wind. How a plane reacts when you pull up and let go depends on trim, airspeed, etc... If you think IL2 aircraft return to level flight no matter what, you are misperceiving. In many cases the aircraft will return towards level flight or stall or start descending, the only thing that must be compensated for is the leftward yawing and torquing tendency, IL2 has this.

While I do believe certain flight model characteristics can be improved, I am unclear about what you are trying to describe, your terms are mushy: various, different, varying, everchanging. Implementing what you want often results in poor randomized flight model parameters that have no aerodynamic significance.

Message Edited on 07/28/0301:58AM by Flightvector

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:27 AM
yes oleg is the best

every patch change his flightmodel

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:38 AM
im copying & pasting from another post here : ......

PLZ read it



-----------------------------------------------------



On the takeoff roll, the prop engine aircraft in FB tend to drop a wing (yet they roll pretty straight on - if you keep the wings level with aileron, you do not need any rudder input at all).

Well.. any power pilot know that this does not happen in real-life aicraft. Period. In real life aircraft experience YAW, not ROLL due to engine torque on the takeoff run (especially the tail draggers).
I have the impression that this roll tendency is meant to simulate some kind of engine torque - but if so, why does it disappear imediately once lift off?

Even worse - if you look closely, you will see the same roll tendency even in the 262


Switch off one engine in a He-111 - apply full power on the remaining engine... and try to find ANY yaw tendency. You won't find any. Because it is simply not modelled. You want a challenge? Switch off the 2 engines on the wing of a TB3... again not the slightest yaw....!???????



Fly an aircraft really slow at full power. You do not need ANY rudder to keep it straight, and only some very minor corrections with the aileron to keep the wings level (the roll stability goes down the slower you fly - in real life this simply does not happen. Should this simulate engine torque in FB?). If you stall it from very slow speed out of a very steep climb, any aircraft in FB will lower the nose gently, having no more than 20-30 kp/h on top of the arc. Nice move - some kind of hammerhead-autopilot. Absolutely NO influence of engine torque. None. You simply cannot stall.

Of course people might argue now that prop torque is there in FB... but I ask where?
If I apply full power from idle at very low speed, I expect the engine torque to throw my aircraft into a snap roll, followed by a spin (this speed was 130 mph for the P-51D, for example). In FB the plane yaws a bit... and yaws back till the ball is centered again. It needs absolutely no rudder or aileron input to keep it level



----------------------------------------------------

ok the guy who posted that is a pilot IRL & plays FB & CFS2 before that & hes a REALLY good gamer

FB is way cool but is FAR from real life



Message Edited on 07/29/0304:20AM by WUAF_Badsight

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:39 AM
avimimus wrote:

- Choose a Fw-190d9 or La-5FN or I-153 or similar
- aircraft hit [del] to zoom up to maximum
- magnification then pull back on the stick and then
- let go and watch how the aircraft returns at once
- and then maintanes perfect flight without twisting,
- snaking, drifting or comensating.

I have never flown any WWII plane, but the planes I have flown do not twist, shake or drift when they maintain level flight after a nose-up.

If you carry out the experiment in FB you will also see that they do not instantly return to level flight as you claim. They oscillate between a nose-up and nose-down position until that dampens.

cheers/slush

http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsdage/files/Eurotrolls.gif

You can't handle the truth!
Col. Jessep

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:39 AM
As useual you are all over looking the fact that this is a flight Simulator.
Also you have over looked the technical ability of the guys at 1C.
They could create a true to life flight Sim, in every way , but the facts are people that while PC technology is speeding up expotentialy, it will be some time yet before we have PCs powerfull and affordable enough, for IC to really impress us with what they could do.

For now they give us the best compromise that technology will allow.

And of course like the people that have already posted here, they are not happy with that.
Not much we can do about it at the moment people.

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:41 AM
Here we go again.

This flight model debate is so subjective:
It seems even the pilots themselves will argue because they`re biased towards particular aitcraft... Even official WWII documents cannot be totally relied upon since aircraft were sometimes pushed beyond the actual specs or behaved differently in real combat situations. There`s no way an independent comparison test can be done of every WWII aircraft.


I guess this will never be solved. All Olegg can do is get it as real as he can and stop. (Since it seems the `experts` will always insist on their particular version of the AIR WAR WORLD)!

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 09:58 PM
Flight Vector: I posted this as a sure fact because when I posted it as a question I didn't get any replys.
I don't know that much so I was deliberetly trying to get corrected.

Many aircraft have poor short term stability and good long term, you introduce movement into the aircraft and it begins to see saw along the movement axis but after a while this movement is cancelled out. Some aircraft are different and are either initially very stable and therefore unresponsive or inherently unstable and need fly-by-wire or a lot of pilot work.

I assume you vote for the Avimimus is crazy option?

Flightvector wrote:
- What you say doesn't hold hard facts, you can't just
- take such crude info and build something out of it
- without adding random parameters that engineers
- hate. Oleg isn't a man of low intelligence or
- precision when it comes to being an Aeronautical
- Engineer. I'm not a person who defends Oleg blindly
- either. But I wonder where people get such "sure"
- facts and knowledge when it shows that they are not
- literate in the field of aeronautical engineering or
- even physics. I am not making an argument about uber
- planes, but about your FM criticism.
-
-
- You seem sure about what should be done yet your
- description is incoherent.
-
- avimimus wrote:
-- This is because various movements of the plane
-- generate stability in different amounts and in
-- different ways during everchanging flight.
-
- That is not proper, movements don't generate
- stability, plus you are meaning to say adverse
- movements. Stability is generally the resistance to
- acceleration (i.e, what you call movement, a crude
- term to use in physics), so how could acceleration
- cause stability? Also, it doesn't change in various
- amounts, it's only a descriptive term (not
- quantifiable). You might be talking about how as the
- angle of attack of stabilizing surfaces increase,
- they create lift in opposite directions, thus
- creating restoring forces in different amounts. In
- this case, you are asking for decreased damping
- values, but the way damping and moment of inertia
- works here is the best I've seen.
-
- Real planes I've flown in act similarly, apart from
- torque and yaw to the left, not much happens when
- you pull back and let go without wind. How a plane
- reacts when you pull up and let go depends on trim,
- airspeed, etc... If you think IL2 aircraft return to
- level flight no matter what, you are misperceiving.
- In many cases the aircraft will return towards level
- flight or stall or start descending, the only thing
- that must be compensated for is the leftward yawing
- and torquing tendency, IL2 has this.
-
- While I do believe certain flight model
- characteristics can be improved, I am unclear about
- what you are trying to describe, your terms are
- mushy: various, different, varying, everchanging.
- Implementing what you want often results in poor
- randomized flight model parameters that have no
- aerodynamic significance.
-
- Message Edited on 07/28/03 01:58AM by
- Flightvector



__________________________________________________ Il-10

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:03 PM
Slush69 wrote:
-
- avimimus wrote:
-
-- Choose a Fw-190d9 or La-5FN or I-153 or similar
-- aircraft hit [del] to zoom up to maximum
-- magnification then pull back on the stick and then
-- let go and watch how the aircraft returns at once
-- and then maintanes perfect flight without twisting,
-- snaking, drifting or comensating.
-
- I have never flown any WWII plane, but the planes I
- have flown do not twist, shake or drift when they
- maintain level flight after a nose-up.
-
- If you carry out the experiment in FB you will also
- see that they do not instantly return to level
- flight as you claim. They oscillate between a
- nose-up and nose-down position until that dampens.
-
- cheers/slush
-
- <img
- src="http://dk.groups.yahoo.com/group/aktivitetsda
- ge/files/Eurotrolls.gif">
-
- You can't handle the truth!
- Col. Jessep


I don't see it in soem of the aircraft, maybe it's jsut me in anycase we are talking about very minor movements here.



__________________________________________________ Il-10

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:05 PM
Yes, I'm mainly running on instinct but I still think some aircraft were a bit more like this.

In the originial Il-2 the Mig-3 felt this way, but it seems more normal now.

Still I am not sure I will get immerssed while flying a yak or a PZl until they are more in my habit.

So ev eryone thinks I'm crazy?

SeaFireLIV wrote:
- Here we go again.
-
- This flight model debate is so subjective:
- It seems even the pilots themselves will argue
- because they`re biased towards particular
- aitcraft... Even official WWII documents cannot be
- totally relied upon since aircraft were sometimes
- pushed beyond the actual specs or behaved
- differently in real combat situations. There`s no
- way an independent comparison test can be done of
- every WWII aircraft.
-
-
- I guess this will never be solved. All Olegg can do
- is get it as real as he can and stop. (Since it
- seems the `experts` will always insist on their
- particular version of the AIR WAR WORLD)!
-
-



__________________________________________________ Il-10