View Full Version : Which sim, besides IL2, has the most realistic FM and DM?

07-19-2005, 07:22 PM
Which sim is the best for FM and Damage models:

1) CFS2, or whatever the newest one is called, with all the mods and add-ons...

2) Aces High...

3) WarBirds...

And does any of the above have early WWII maps & planes for the N. African threater...Italian/German axis and Brits...?


07-19-2005, 08:26 PM
I think its CFS3 with the firepower addon.

07-19-2005, 09:40 PM
Most Reastic FM and DM?

Any person with at least one brain cell who has laid eyes upon ANY footage of the Su-25T In the LOMAC "Flamming Cliffs" addon will say just That; The LOMAC "Flaming Cliffs" 1.1 Addon!

It is virtually as realistic as you will EVER get, and is regarded as the new standard to beat in flight dynamics and damage modeling.

07-19-2005, 09:44 PM
Su-25T "Flamming Cliffs" 1.1 Addon for LOMAC.




http://www.lockon.ru/img/products/large/0b555a10d44e16d3342bee7ab3c9f271.jpg (Note the Shredded and deflated Tires, collapsed landing gear detaili, ect)



07-19-2005, 09:47 PM
As for Flight Dynamics. Obviously it cant be seen in Screenies, but definitely in Videos.


You need to register/sign up. Login, and then head to files, then videos.

Watch the videos: "Landing" and "Su-25T in action"

han freak solo
07-19-2005, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by Kuoster:
Su-25T "Flamming Cliffs" 1.1 Addon for LOMAC.

You got my vote. D@mn, blood on the cockpit glass, too!

07-19-2005, 09:57 PM
http://www.medairwar.com <- Mediterranian Air War for cfs3

All of the above. tons of italian, german, british, american stuff and more. realistic FMs DMs, fantastic effects(PF's will look so lame compared to master fox's) all being built for a med map. Quite a selection of beautifully modeled planes some that haven't seen the light of simulation day at all. I can't think of any other sim you can fly a Re.2005 saggitario or a fairy fulmar in, alongside countless others.

Yes, its based off cfs3, don't bash. It's been rebuilt from the ground up.

07-20-2005, 02:40 AM
Target Rabaul!

07-20-2005, 03:29 AM
I assume ww2.

however what about Falcon 4?

07-20-2005, 04:54 AM
Hey! I thought Lock-On didn`t have a visual damge model. Is it new with the add-on? Does the add-on add a dynamic Campaign?

07-20-2005, 05:08 AM
What LOMAC is for flight-modelling, Falcon4 is for Avionics and CampaignSystem. Still no competitor on the horizon, though it's really old, now.

There is a new version on the market, right now. Excellent simulation.

Concerning flight-modelling: Many LOMAC-fans think it's far off from reality, but I read many reports of F16-Pilots who claimed the flightmodell is very precise to what it feels like in reality.

TgD Thunderbolt56
07-20-2005, 07:22 AM
I liked this one: http://acn.waw.pl/sturm/forgotten_noobs.swf

07-20-2005, 08:25 AM
Sure, LOMAC and particularly Flaming Cliffs add-on is by far the most advanced sim in terms of FM and DM out there...FB/PF in its current status looks like a beggar compared to it and you know what ?...even for BoB it will be a tough challenge to get to the level of FC...Always harrows me why those Russian guys of Eagle Dynamics don`t get on some WWII based sim and let Oleg face some heat...

07-20-2005, 10:17 AM
I am sure Oleg and his team can do the same if they only had to focus on one plane, like LOMAC's flaming cliffs.

07-20-2005, 02:24 PM
I wish Eagle Dynamics would create a simulator called something like "P-38 Lightning and P-47 Thunderbolt versus Me-109 and Focke-Wulf 190." Oh, yes! I would be ecstatic. Eagle Dynamics gives American equipment its due, every time.

07-20-2005, 03:50 PM
from my own personal experiance I'd have to say CFS2 add-on aircraft for the most part have pretty good flight models, especialy if they are built useing 1% spread sheets. The Stock aircraft, I would deffinatly say not to though, they need some tweaking if you want them right, but if you do that, thay are alright.

But thats just my own opinion and experiance. I have not flown CFS3, Falcon 4.0, or LOMAC so I can't really state anything on those sims. I have limited time on FS9, but mostly flying M$ Skyhawks, so I won't comment on that plan'e FM. It feels alright since I do fly a Skyhawk in real life, but I also know its a M$ stock aircraft.

07-20-2005, 11:39 PM
Nubarus, yes that is partly true. The Eagle Dynamics Team has spent more than a year working on the single Su-25T's new advanced FM and DM. Sure, the advanced flight models and such could be transfered over to the other planes, but it would be a long task, especially for modeling them for advanced planes like the Su-27.

Even so, the stock, or the upgraded FC version of lomac still is holds the current status as king. X-plane is renown for its Flight Dynamics as well.

07-20-2005, 11:42 PM
Originally posted by LuftWulf190:
I have limited time on FS9, but mostly flying M$ Skyhawks, so I won't comment on that plan'e FM. It feels alright since I do fly a Skyhawk in real life, but I also know its a M$ stock aircraft.

Flight Simulator's Flight Dynamics are great for civilian flying such as general aviation and airliners, But anything that goes fast at all (fighter jets), is absolutely horrendous. Flight Sim's dyanmics for fighter jets is beyond terrible. Not that it was ever meant to excell in that area though..

07-21-2005, 02:03 AM
Flamming Cliffs, the addon for Lock-On. Absolutely a superb SU-25T!

07-21-2005, 11:23 AM
For me CFS2 and Forggoten/Ace/Pacific Fighter are the best Simulator in the Market follwed very closely by EAW.

CFS3 is a nice game but even with the the Fire Power Addon it runs short of the mark. I still like it but its too limit in scope to be call a great Simulator. CFS2 only becomes a great Simulator after you have learn to upgraded it through all the upgrades available from its dedicated community. Its the only Simulator that allows you to fly and fight all over the World thru its it World map and MB.

This Simulator also allows you to fly throughout the World but only in on limited conditions due to its limited maps size. I still love this Simulator alot as well.


07-21-2005, 12:57 PM
Does LockOn(with expansion) have just jet planes? Are there any ground attack planes? What type planes are in game and how is MP?


07-21-2005, 02:09 PM
I don't know how acurate the FM/Dm's were, but I always enjoyed Jane's WWII Fighters. It was a pretty good game when it came out, and there is a community of modders keeping it alive: http://www.ww2fighters.org

You can find several campiagns there including the Med.

07-21-2005, 02:40 PM
cfs3 with the firepower addon and 1% addons, theres no dispute all come with pilotmanuals and multiple data charts, all gauges work, are clickable, all ac have correct accelaration dive accelaration, climbm roll, combat turn, cem works like the real thing, and all aircraft reach full compressibility much earlier then thier breakup speeds.

weapons and dms are done well also, but theres no difficulty settings or anti cheating aids that the FB series offers..

07-21-2005, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by MichaelMar:
Does LockOn(with expansion) have just jet planes? Are there any ground attack planes? What type planes are in game and how is MP?

There are a few modern prop AI aircraft in there, if that's what you mean (C-130 for example).

Yes, there are plenty of ground attack planes. The sim wouldnt be much without ground attack aircraft. What would be the point of air superiority if you couldnt even destroy the target that you cleared the path towards?

The Su-25T itself Is a A2G aircraft.

07-21-2005, 05:13 PM
Does LockOn(with expansion) have just jet planes? Are there any ground attack planes? What type planes are in game and how is MP?

The fliable aircraft in LOMAC are,

Fighters: Su-27, Mig-29, F-15 and the naval variant of the Flanker, the Su-33 which you can operate out of the Kuznetzov.

Attack: A-10 and Su-25. You can also fly the Su-25T with the advanced flight model if you have the expansion, Flaming Clifs.

No prop planes besides AI cargo, which are just targets.

MP experience is...intense. You have to know your bird, your weapons and specialy your avionics to survive. Simple flying ability is not enough, you have to get the best out of your weapons platform to be competitive.

07-21-2005, 09:59 PM
Actually, it's more luck than anything. The avionics are fairly realistic (that means that they are better than anything else I have seen, except for perhaps Falcon Four), and that means that while you know the direction that the missile is coming from (if you are lucky and your threat indicator picks it up), you have no clue about the distance. Since long range missiles generally don't leave a trail in the game, and you can't see the missile itself, it's basically guesswork when to break. If you do it too soon, the missile leads you, and if you do it to late, it doesn't have to lead you!

Close quarters combat is another story, and requires nearly as much skill as Pacific Fighters. But virtually no one is man enough to do that online. And guns? Ha! I've never seen a gunshot fired online. Fortunately for me, I mostly did duels with my friend, who is also not a big fanatic of beyond visual range combat. We either traded shorties or, more often, shells.

Flight models, both general and specific, are much more realistic than Pacific Fighers', even without Flaming Cliffs. Damage models are a bit more simplistic than Pacific Fighters', although apparently the Su-25T's is better than Pacific Fighters' if you have Flaming Cliffs. Ground handling is about on par without Flaming Cliffs - the taxiing is much more realistic, but the ground physics are almost non-existent (for instance, crash landings and dipping wings). If you have Flaming Cliffs, ground handling is, on average, better than Pacific Fighters'.

Basically, Flaming Cliffs is the most realistic simulator out there. Unfortunately, the realistic flight, damage, and physics models only apply to a single aircraft, and that aircraft is a ground attack aircraft, not a fighter. A Russian ground attack aircraft... An ugly Russian ground attack aircraft, thrice cursed! Still, even without Flaming Cliffs, Lock On: Modern Air Combat beats anything else for realism (though not playability). I personally prefer Pacific Fighters, since I don't like modern air combat very much. And Pacific Fighers is a lot harder - jets tend to hold your hand when you fly them. "Do you want to shoot down the enemy airplane? Very well, please wait while I point my nose at it. Here we are! Fire when ready."

07-22-2005, 03:07 AM
In real terms Lomac is a game, not a sim.

07-22-2005, 06:07 AM
after talking to real F15 pilots and f16 pilots its a general concensus that FAlcon 4 SP4.2 or AF is the most realistic FM sim. Falming Cliffs models the Frogfoot well, but who cares. I prefer Falcon over Lomac. Pacific fighters does as well as anybody on DMx. Falcon 4.0 AF DM is the most complex. by far...

07-22-2005, 08:08 AM
Originally posted by Nero111:
In real terms Lomac is a game, not a sim.

As is PF.

07-22-2005, 08:55 AM
Bob and Mig Alley, by Rowan ....

07-22-2005, 10:47 AM
Agreed, MS Flight Simulator is more of a sim than Lomac, or PF, as it simulates the workload in the cockpit, ie Falcon 4 is a sim.
Dont get me wrong, Lomac is a great game full of fun, just not a sim.

07-22-2005, 10:06 PM
Originally posted by Blackdog5555:
after talking to real F15 pilots and f16 pilots its a general concensus that FAlcon 4 SP4.2 or AF is the most realistic FM sim.

Oh, no, not this argument again. Firstly, I've yet to see an F-15 pilot say that. It's the F-16 pilots who do. And the real F-16 has an absolute authority fly by wire system that does not allow the airplane to exceed the maximum angle of attack. It's nearly impossible to stall in real life. Therefore, Falcon does a decent job of modelling things for an F-16. However, it is completely lacking stall characteristics of normal aircraft. High angle of attack? The only game that correctly models stalls and high angle of attack behavior is Lock On: Modern Air Combat.

07-24-2005, 10:26 AM
If someone comes in here and says Targetware, I'm going to uncork my lunch........

07-24-2005, 10:57 AM
Have to agree Mortoma.I downloaded it out of curiosity once.Not good even free!Speaking entirely impartially(I have tried most of the popular sims)on balance no sim comes near IL2.

07-24-2005, 11:41 AM
Someone already has, mortoma, sorry...

and it's true. The FM, even with an unfinished ground model, is better than IL-2. The engine/fuel/heat etc. systems are better modelled, too. The damage model, I'd have to say is a tossup; there are things TW does better, and things IL-2 does better. Graphics, IL-2 wins hands down (and that, seemingly, is what is the deciding factor for most folks, especially those "gamer folks" who don't really know much about aircraft). GamePLAY, Targetware by a MILE. You don't see ueberplaneism there, because action is set up for realistic, historic matchups, not "which La7 can I fly with the most guns, even though just a dozen were ever built?"


07-24-2005, 12:18 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

This thread is a riot......