PDA

View Full Version : LW a/c testers, especially Kurfurst



Pirschjaeger
02-03-2006, 10:20 AM
Look guyz, it is obvious that you won´t accomplish much here other than ulcers and wracked nerves. This forum is just way too bias.

My suggestion is this.

Start a PT thread and pick and choose who is in. Then, working together, make all your tests and record everything. Once the tests are complete and you have the results, post them in GD.

The whiners and ahats only make up a very small minority of the reds. But there´s enough of them to impede any decent testing.

I would be happy to host the PT testing and even help with the testing but there are two problems. Firstly, I haven´t a pc. Secondly, I´ve never done any testing and am quickly turned off threads involving LW a/c testing, therefore, I would know who should and shouldn´t be invited. I think Kurfurst probably knows best.

This is the only way to make the testing fair and get constructive results.

Kurfurst, if you wanna try this, starting testing in PT, please invite me. I´ll do whatever I can to help. The discrimination against LW a/c testing in this forum is really sickening. This is why I never get involved, although I want to.

Fritz

Tator_Totts
02-03-2006, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Look guyz, it is obvious that you won´t accomplish much here other than ulcers and wracked nerves. This forum is just way too bias.

My suggestion is this.

Start a PT thread and pick and choose who is in. Then, working together, make all your tests and record everything. Once the tests are complete and you have the results, post them in GD.

The whiners and ahats only make up a very small minority of the reds. But there´s enough of them to impede any decent testing.

I would be happy to host the PT testing and even help with the testing but there are two problems. Firstly, I haven´t a pc. Secondly, I´ve never done any testing and am quickly turned off threads involving LW a/c testing, therefore, I would know who should and shouldn´t be invited. I think Kurfurst probably knows best.

This is the only way to make the testing fair and get constructive results.

Kurfurst, if you wanna try this, starting testing in PT, please invite me. I´ll do whatever I can to help. The discrimination against LW a/c testing in this forum is really sickening. This is why I never get involved, although I want to.

Fritz

And what makes you think their are no whiners or asshats on blue.

Kurfurst__
02-03-2006, 11:59 AM
Roger, good idea I think it would be best to wait until the patch comes out, and do some real through testing. I dont have much time until then anyway.

If anybody is interested doing testing, please signal it here in this thread, and Ill invite him in this thread, or if I forget, Pirsch would you do it?

Much easier to work when 80% of the energy isnt wasted on a few... strange people.

Pirschjaeger
02-03-2006, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by Tator_Totts:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Look guyz, it is obvious that you won´t accomplish much here other than ulcers and wracked nerves. This forum is just way too bias.

My suggestion is this.

Start a PT thread and pick and choose who is in. Then, working together, make all your tests and record everything. Once the tests are complete and you have the results, post them in GD.

The whiners and ahats only make up a very small minority of the reds. But there´s enough of them to impede any decent testing.

I would be happy to host the PT testing and even help with the testing but there are two problems. Firstly, I haven´t a pc. Secondly, I´ve never done any testing and am quickly turned off threads involving LW a/c testing, therefore, I would know who should and shouldn´t be invited. I think Kurfurst probably knows best.

This is the only way to make the testing fair and get constructive results.

Kurfurst, if you wanna try this, starting testing in PT, please invite me. I´ll do whatever I can to help. The discrimination against LW a/c testing in this forum is really sickening. This is why I never get involved, although I want to.

Fritz

And what makes you think their are no whiners or asshats on blue. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did I say there wasn't? This is about getting some testing done without the hassles and the LW a/c test threads get hassled way more than the Allied a/c test threads.

We need results, not insults.

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
02-03-2006, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Roger, good idea I think it would be best to wait until the patch comes out, and do some real through testing. I dont have much time until then anyway.

If anybody is interested doing testing, please signal it here in this thread, and Ill invite him in this thread, or if I forget, Pirsch would you do it?

Much easier to work when 80% of the energy isnt wasted on a few... strange people.

Sure, I´d be happy to. Just point out the test subject for those who might be interested. I'll put this thread in my favorites.

waffen-79
02-03-2006, 12:22 PM
count me in

fordfan25
02-03-2006, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Look guyz, it is obvious that you won´t accomplish much here other than ulcers and wracked nerves. This forum is just way too bias.

My suggestion is this.

Start a PT thread and pick and choose who is in. Then, working together, make all your tests and record everything. Once the tests are complete and you have the results, post them in GD.

The whiners and ahats only make up a very small minority of the reds. But there´s enough of them to impede any decent testing.

I would be happy to host the PT testing and even help with the testing but there are two problems. Firstly, I haven´t a pc. Secondly, I´ve never done any testing and am quickly turned off threads involving LW a/c testing, therefore, I would know who should and shouldn´t be invited. I think Kurfurst probably knows best.

This is the only way to make the testing fair and get constructive results.

Kurfurst, if you wanna try this, starting testing in PT, please invite me. I´ll do whatever I can to help. The discrimination against LW a/c testing in this forum is really sickening. This is why I never get involved, although I want to.

Fritz

agreed. we would not want him to have to go threw all the BS mud sliging that the p-38 late or "clown" plane went threw http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Viper2005_
02-03-2006, 12:47 PM
I'm in. I don't have any data on LW aircraft, but I can test fly...

Kurfurst__
02-03-2006, 12:54 PM
Roger, when patch comes out, we open a PM and test the hell out of it! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Pirschjaeger
02-03-2006, 01:06 PM
Great!

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
02-03-2006, 01:33 PM
Kurfurst, I'f this works out, I'd like to see every LW plane tested. Whether they turn out to be über oder unter, I'd like to see them all fixed to be as close as possible to reality.

We´d have a lot of work ahead of us. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Fritz

robban75
02-03-2006, 02:23 PM
I can do climb tests, acceleration tests and so on. If you need my help, just let me know! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

3.JG51_Stecher
02-03-2006, 02:46 PM
I'll throw my hat in.

Gibbage1
02-03-2006, 02:56 PM
So, if you guys find out that the K4 climbs too well, then WOULD you tell Oleg, ir just sit on it for a few years all happy and content?

luftluuver
02-03-2006, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
So, if you guys find out that the K4 climbs too well, then WOULD you tell Oleg, ir just sit on it for a few years all happy and content? Cut the manure Gib. There will be 'reds' and 'blues' doing the testing. You think a 'red' or a 'blue' would not report on the other if they found something irregular. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 01:18 AM
Originally posted by Gibbage1:
So, if you guys find out that the K4 climbs too well, then WOULD you tell Oleg, ir just sit on it for a few years all happy and content?

Gib, you are truly inspirational.

Thanx for pointing out the need to test through PT. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

pourshot
02-04-2006, 01:42 AM
And just when you think this place could not get any more divided we have this http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

It's like a blue circle jerk http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Werg78
02-04-2006, 01:57 AM
i dont post much but fly A LOT and would be interested in the outcome of this interesting "experiment" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 02:01 AM
Originally posted by pourshot:
And just when you think this place could not get any more divided we have this http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

It's like a blue circle jerk http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Some of you guys are really amazing. You can type but you can´t seem to comprehend others's posts. This has nothing to do with blue or red. It's about valid testing and serious people who are willing to invest their time in getting accurate results. Removing the biased people is a must.

The results and details of how the tests are made will be posted for all to see. Then, you are welcome to bring you intellect and challenge the tests, which I am sure by your post, you will. Good luck.

As for your reading comprehension, I am willing to help but you must be willing to help yourself a little. If you take the time from you busy schedule to reread the thread, you'll find that no where was it said that only blue can test. The tests are open to all, or atleast the "honest and unbiased" all. In much easier terms to follow; red and blue.

But worry not, if you are still interested in circle jerks, you can keep the center position. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 02:03 AM
Originally posted by Werg78:
i dont post much but fly A LOT and would be interested in the outcome of this interesting "experiment" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The more testers the better. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I think it would also be a good learning experience. I´m curious as to exactly how the tests are done and I like to knit-pic details.

I would imagine the thread would start with an introduction to the testing. Then a discussion on the parameters until everyone agrees. Then the testers follow the tight parameters and make tracks. Then we´d have to have a certain amount of people review the tracks to make sure the parameters were followed accordingly. After this we´d have to tally the results and then write a conclusion based on these results.

Sounds like a lot of fun and I think Oleg and the general community will appreciate the efforts. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Fritz

Gibbage1
02-04-2006, 02:07 AM
The fox are guarding the chicken house now..

pourshot
02-04-2006, 02:09 AM
This forum is just way too bias.

You are proof of that.


Start a PT thread and pick and choose who is in.

Yes this will help keep it un-biased. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif


The whiners and ahats only make up a very small minority of the reds. But there´s enough of them to impede any decent testing

Same can be said of the guys flying blue.


I think Kurfurst probably knows best.

Thats really scarry. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif


This is the only way to make the testing fair and get constructive results.

Right.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

pourshot
02-04-2006, 02:12 AM
The tests are open to all, or atleast the "honest and unbiased"

Good luck with that one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 02:30 AM
Gib and Pourshot,

You guyz obviously have biased issues with LW a/c and blue pilots.

Fact: testing will be done by red and blue

Fact: details of the tests, the results, and the conduct will be posted for all

Fact: individual testers' a/c preferences will not effect the tests. See the first fact.

It annoys me that someone like you, Gib, who has contributed so much to this community, comes to a thread aimed at getting accurate tests done and try to sabotage it.

You guyz should get your facts straight and control your biases. Can`t you comprehend that your posts ARE your credibility in this community?

Fritz

pourshot
02-04-2006, 02:54 AM
You guyz obviously have biased issues with LW a/c and blue pilots.

I cant speek for Gib but try and find a single post of mine were I show bias about any planes performance.

FYI I fly all planes.

blindpugh
02-04-2006, 03:14 AM
Originally posted by luftluuver:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
So, if you guys find out that the K4 climbs too well, then WOULD you tell Oleg, ir just sit on it for a few years all happy and content? Cut the manure Gib. There will be 'reds' and 'blues' doing the testing. You think a 'red' or a 'blue' would not report on the other if they found something irregular. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You mean like the p40 being almost 50 mph short @5000ft

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 04:12 AM
Originally posted by pourshot:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You guyz obviously have biased issues with LW a/c and blue pilots.

I cant speek for Gib but try and find a single post of mine were I show bias about any planes performance.

FYI I fly all planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"You guyz" is more than one. You and Gib are "you guyz". You are obviously biased against "blue", check your post.

You are digging for something that isn´t there in your attempt to ruin this thread or the idea behind it but actually all you are doing is showing the need for private testing before being posted in the community. Thank you.

Before you claim that I am biased against reds, reread what I posted. The red whiners make up a very small minority of the red side. Got it? You are a minority.

Why don´t you go and start a thread about testing planes by a minority?

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 04:16 AM
Originally posted by blindpugh:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by luftluuver:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Gibbage1:
So, if you guys find out that the K4 climbs too well, then WOULD you tell Oleg, ir just sit on it for a few years all happy and content? Cut the manure Gib. There will be 'reds' and 'blues' doing the testing. You think a 'red' or a 'blue' would not report on the other if they found something irregular. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You mean like the p40 being almost 50 mph short @5000ft </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Read my first post. Get a crew together and test it. If the P40 is slower than it should be, or faster, then the only way to solve the issue is to do proper tests and cover all the parameters. Do this properly, unbiasly, and keep good records and tracks, and Oleg will listen.

"p40 being almost 50 mph short @5000ft"

Prove it. Like I said, Oleg will listen

If you wanna start this, I´ll help however I can

Fritz

robban75
02-04-2006, 04:31 AM
I'd like to know if we should conduct climbtests using IAS, instead of TAS? In real life pilots climb using IAS. In-game however, faster climbrates can be achieved using TAS. I don't think this was the case in real life.

Any thoughts on this? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 04:32 AM
Originally posted by robban75:
I'd like to know if we should conduct climbtests using IAS, instead of TAS? In real life pilots climb using IAS. In-game however, faster climbrates can be achieved using TAS. I don't think this was the case in real life.

Any thoughts on this? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

I don´t know the different, TBH, but it is a good point if they are different. We´ll have to remember to bring this up in the PT thread. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Can you explain what each is and what the differences are?

Fritz

robban75
02-04-2006, 04:57 AM
Indicated Airspeed (IAS). This is what you read from the airspeed indicator in the cockpit. It registers the amount of air molecules entering the pitotube. The amount of air molecules varies with altitude, temperature. The higher you go the lesser the amount of molecules. A plane always stalls at the same IAS, no matter what temperature or altitude.

True Airspeed (TAS). This is what you read from the speedbar in wonderwoman view. Under zero wind conditions this is equal to the speed over the ground.

One can fly at 200km/h IAS with a Fw 190 at sealevel as well as 10,000m. You can fly with 200km/h TAS at sealevel in a Fw 190, but you can't at 10,000m as there's not enough air molecules traveling over and under the wing to get enough lift.

Man, I suck at this! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

luftluuver
02-04-2006, 05:03 AM
Pirsch, not sure what you are asking but as one goes higher IAS and TAS get further apart.

here's some rough examples.
Pressure Altitude S/L OAT +15c IAS 300MPH TAS 300
Pressure Altitude 5000' OAT 0c IAS 300MPH TAS 319
Pressure Altitude 10000 OAT -20C IAS 300MPH TAS 332
Pressure Altitude 20000 OAT -40C IAS 300MPH TAS 395
Pressure Altitude 30000 OAT -60C IAS 300MPH TAS 463


Gib, no fox in the henhouse. Dispite that I think Kurfurst uses a big shovel, he will not be able to hide his reference sources in this testing unit, nor will anyone else. The testing results will have to be backed up by real life data, NDA or no NDA.

blindpugh, that was then, not now.


Pirschjaeger, a very good idea of yours. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 05:14 AM
Robban and Luftluuver, thanks for the info. This is just one of the many reasons I wanted to do this. I want to learn what you guyz are talking about exactly without having to sift through all the BS. I beleive there are many more in this community that would like to learn also.

Imagine, eventually we could have all FM's tested, leaving more time and thread space for posting pics of bikini babes. What a great retirement that would be. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Fritz

pourshot
02-04-2006, 05:33 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:

"You guyz" is more than one. You and Gib are "you guyz". You are obviously biased against "blue", check your post.



Well I looked and I see no bias, and I was flying blue a long time before I joined a red squad.I just find it funny that you want no bias but you want to pick and choose who joins in on the test?

Do you think Kurfy can be objective?

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 05:47 AM
Do you think he or anyone has a choice? That´s the purpose. Wasn´t it Kurfurst who put forward the evidence that the 109 might be overmodelled?

The fact is, Kurfurst, bias or not, knows much more about this stuff than most. He also has a lot of experience in testing, as with others who will be involved. The information won´t becoming from only Kurfurst. It will be coming from various sources.

I see threads whereas someone is trying to test an FM and in the end nothing really comes of it due to the negative influences.

Most people will be welcome to participate. It doesn´t matter whether the participants are from the blue side or the red side. Credibility and honesty is what matters. Namecalling and insults do nothing but sabotage the tests.

These tests are not to see which a/c is the best. It´s not to talk about who won the war. It´s nothing to do with red or blue. It´s not even limited to the LW planes. One plane I´d like us to test the hell out of is the P51, since there seems to be so much whining about it.

It´s about honestly and accurately testing FM´s in the attempt to get them as real as possible. Isn´t that the most important point of this sim?

The idea is to recruit a crew who will invest their time to end all these silly arguments about a/c and develop a system for testing, in which Oleg can trust and count on.

BTW, your bias about blue testing LW a/c is obvious. Your false assumption is enough to see that. I wonder how you´d react if LW pilots tested an Allied plane and found it to be overmodelled. Based on your posts in this thread, I think I already know. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz

AFJ_Locust
02-04-2006, 05:56 AM
I wana help test

I like all the ac

I want to learn how to test properly

I learn very fast

pourshot
02-04-2006, 06:03 AM
BTW, your bias about blue testing LW a/c is obvious. Your false assumption is enough to see that. I wonder how you´d react if LW pilots tested an Allied plane and found it to be overmodelled. Based on your posts in this thread, I think I already know.

I would be happy to have my fav ride tested it's the spit IXe and LF clipped

BTW I think the clp climbs too well.

Pirschjaeger
02-04-2006, 06:07 AM
Cool! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Good choice, I´ve seen a lot of complaints about the Spits.

Fritz

pourshot
02-04-2006, 06:15 AM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
Cool! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Good choice, I´ve seen a lot of complaints about the Spits.

Fritz

Yep me too, my pet hate is how you cant get 3000rpm at take off unless you use WEP, not very realistic.( yes I sent oleg a track and yes he agreed it was incorrect)

Pirschjaeger
02-05-2006, 06:31 AM
Then we`ll have to do the tests and make it public. But, there are so many things to be tested. I don´t follow all the threads so I don´t know what the biggest issues are. Maybe we should find out what are the 5 biggest issues, then run a poll and use the poll to figure out what should be done first, second, third,.... and so on.

What do you think?

BTW, I´m only brainstorming here.

Fritz

BSS_CUDA
02-05-2006, 07:10 AM
and what standards are you planning on using for the testing? as has been proven with our 38 testing, if you stray from those standards even a little you get incorrect results. are they going to be NACA standards?

Kurfurst__
02-05-2006, 07:25 AM
Why use NACA standards for a non-American plane in a non-NACA test....?

BSS_CUDA
02-05-2006, 07:41 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Why use NACA standards for a non-American plane in a non-NACA test....? because I dont know what the German tests are called http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif I just want to know what standards are being used

AKA_TAGERT
02-05-2006, 08:14 AM
Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
Why use NACA standards for a non-American plane in a non-NACA test....? Cuda is right, to do it right we should find out what method was used by Jerry to test his planes. To do a good test you need to know some basic things

1) The config of the plane (typically it is 100% fuel, standard ammo load)
2) The power settings used.
3) The NACA ground start method or air start method.

The NACA ground start method is a BoB like scramble. You know, How long does it take a plane to get to XX alt as opposed to an aircraft already being airborne and starts climbing.

It is good to know, because it can effect your TTA values by about 30 to 40 seconds. But, it really does not affect your ROC values because when they curve fitted the ROC values they would ignore the first few data points.

Just so you know, everyone up to now has done an air start, even I did an air start.. I actually did a ground start, but I ignored the data in my analysis until I was air born and started pulling on the stick.

Pirschjaeger
02-05-2006, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by BSS_CUDA:
and what standards are you planning on using for the testing? as has been proven with our 38 testing, if you stray from those standards even a little you get incorrect results. are they going to be NACA standards?

I am no expert but the standards will be discussed before the actual testing begins. We´ll find the correct standards and go with them. I wouldn´t be suprised if the standards are given by Oleg, or at least oked by Oleg.

Fritz

LEXX_Luthor
02-05-2006, 07:14 PM
Pirsch::
I wouldn´t be suprised if the standards are given by Oleg, or at least oked by Oleg.
This is what I have always hoped the community would do. This is how you learn about Oleg's flight models through merely using the game like a real test pilot would do.

As an alternative to private PM testing, public testing would be useful for the majority of simmers who, like Pirsch recently, wish to read and learn what is going on. For the minority who post to troll or sabatoge tests, a serial moderator could be selected to patrol the test threads with an unusually big stick. Better, an open Test Forum with a dedicated Test Forum serial moderator would be sweet.


It took 3 YEARS for Oleg to "look at" the LaGG, because nobody said anything about it -- nobody bothered to test. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif Although why Oleg's Team never tested it, I dunno.

Marcel_Albert
02-05-2006, 07:31 PM
Because only a minority of pilot fly VVS Lexx , and also because Oleg was too busy implementing new western planes these last 2 years , and his team is not big and were working on PF .


I think this idea of testing in group , and keeping it private until it's finished , with unbiased results (verified results) is a great idea , i just hope you do it for all sides planes , cause some issues might affect many planes .

LEXX_Luthor
02-05-2006, 08:14 PM
Marcel::
I just hope you do it for all sides planes, cause some issues might affect many planes.
Not just all sides' planes, but all planes. The way to understand Oleg's flight models is to compare them all. That would require a great community effort, but would be worthwhile if we want to have input for Oleg's next sim BoB And Beyond, as that will start out with 1940 planes and not the 1944/1945 planes popular with the flight model cult. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Don't forget, the New FM we are using now is beta FM for BoB And Beyond.

Marcel::
Because only a minority of pilot fly VVS Lexx ,
I never said "Fly"

I said "Test"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

LEXX_Luthor
02-05-2006, 10:14 PM
*ooops* ... I posted a reply to GreyMouse in the Test Thread, but that should be for test discussion. Apologies to the testers.


GreyMouser (Kurf thread, page 8)::
I've never spent time testing and certainly don't have the expertise or time to do what Target is doing but based on my experience with the game, if I were a betting man, I'd bet the following aircraft are climbing at or below rated speeds....

P47's
P51's
Corsair
Hellcat
Fw...Antons
Lightnings

Planes that are probably overacheiving...'
G and K series 109's
Dora
La series
Lagg series
Ki -84's
Beaufighter
Early MkV's, but late MkV's probably under
Spit MkIX's by a hair...maybe...


Maybe, just maybe, there is actually some logic to all this whining and it really doesn't have as much to do with one nation's fans, but rather actual modelling deficiencies! Now wouldn't that be a novel concept!
Yes! There is deep logic behind the Whining, and the Whiners never saw it. Classic http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Pirschjaeger
02-06-2006, 05:09 AM
I know what you are saying Lexx, it´s the good idea but it´s, well almost, already being done, save the serial mod.

Mods have to sleep also so you´d need 3 mods on a 24 thread. Once someone trolls or flames, it´s all downhill from there. After the tests are completed, they will be available for the public forum to pick at.

Fritz

Blutarski2004
02-06-2006, 05:17 AM
Terrific idea, gentlemen. Testing under "laboratory conditions" makes a great deal of very good sense. Just one question, though ..... how will you agree upon what historical performance parameters will be used to judge in-game performance? As I recall, there has been a distinct lack of agreement here regarding exactly what this or that a/c could actually achieve in the air.

Pirschjaeger
02-06-2006, 05:28 AM
That would be part of the discussion before the actual testing. I would hope that Oleg would be willing to give his imput.

Another possibility, if we, as a team cannot agree, we could bring the discussion to the community for advice and suggestions. Even the the trolls cannot effect the original test thread.

Fritz

Meshsmoother
02-06-2006, 05:53 AM
This is a very interesting idea and hopefully will serve for many puorposes, from asking a FM fix to the Dev Team to learning about many airplanes characteristics. I flew and fly blue a lot on my Anton (my #1 plane of choice)and I allways suspected it was not at it's best performance settings most of all for the A8-F8, since A6 is great and so it is A9.
But now I'm also interested in the P51-D true performance (my #2 plane of choice, and I'm flying it very, very often lately) since it, being a good plane in game, is IMHO far from being the "flying legend" they talk about. I'm sure that this serious testing will bring only good things to the comunity knowledge, we might like it or not, but at least we'll know what are we talking about.

=S=

T.

Pirschjaeger
02-06-2006, 06:15 AM
Mesh, are you interested in being one of the test pilots?

Fritz

Meshsmoother
02-06-2006, 06:21 AM
Sure Pirschjaeger! just let me know which type and conditions, and what software I need to track the results. I'll be glad to help! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

=S=

T

Flying online as CPS_Tenato

Pirschjaeger
02-06-2006, 06:47 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I´m not expert on the testing conditions and such, but others are and we´ll learn as we go.

Fritz