PDA

View Full Version : Flying by the book?



msalama
07-23-2005, 02:25 AM
Ladies & gents, requesting your comments concerning these questions:

1) Have you ever tried to fly "by the book" in IL-2, i.e. adhering to flap & gear extension speeds, published engine settings, takeoff trim settings etc.?

2) Is it even possible, i.e. are the planes that accurately modelled in the 1st place, and which types are if any?

3) Are the aircraft fault tolerances too wide, i.e. are the planes too forgiving when mismanaged?

Just asking, because I've been very liberal in driving these things around myself...

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2005, 02:34 AM
Hello,

1) Yes, I have tried and it is possible.

2) In all flyable planes it is possible and if I listen to my friend how is a pilot the flight model is quiet realist.

Have a nice day.

Sensei.

msalama
07-23-2005, 02:47 AM
Thank you Sensei. Other opinions, ladies & gents?

msalama
07-23-2005, 02:57 AM
But as regards AC fault tolerances: I think they are way too wide, and f.e. gear extension speeds can be exceeded HUGELY without any damage whatsoever! Now this is wrong & should be fixed if it's _realism_ that we're really after here...

PS. Just my opinion of course http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

F19_Ob
07-23-2005, 03:26 AM
I'm quite happy with the possibilities but accept there is some slack cut for us.

It would be fun with more sensitive engines though and if we were forced to fly the same plane in the next sortie as before.
I'm not too familiar with engines but I know lots of bad stuff could happen if one firewalled it to suddenly.

perhaps in BoB we will have a "cry mode" setting, a hardest setting for the superfreaks of simulation. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

msalama
07-23-2005, 03:36 AM
...a hardest setting for the superfreaks of simulation. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Aye, seconded! It's not that what we've got is BAD - nossir, not at all! - but I sometimes _do_ feel that things're somewhat incomplete. Not the end of the world that one, mind you, but it _would_ be nice nevertheless to have it nailed down 100%...

(Yeps, just IMHO again)

VF-29_Sandman
07-23-2005, 04:08 AM
can u imagine how much whining would happen if engine torque was modeled right down to the letter? like, if they suddenly firewalled a spit's engine, hmmm.....'why am i upside down?'

or maybe we could have it so that, forgetting to adjust to the proper supercharger gear would wind up being fatal; and not just for the engine, but to the pilot since the engine basically exploded.

hell maybe the p-40 isnt 'tough enough'. since the p-40 was notoriously difficult to get off the ground in 1 piece, hmmm.....with torque modeled right, omg there'd be more whine flowin than the current flap about the late p-38 L. hahaha

NorrisMcWhirter
07-23-2005, 04:22 AM
Originally posted by msalama:
Thank you Sensei. Other opinions, ladies & gents?

Me? Not really. It's a game and there's as much wrong with it as right.

Ta,
Norris

msalama
07-23-2005, 11:24 AM
...omg there'd be more whine flowin than the current flap about the late p-38 L.

Oh, absolutely! Heck, we'd probably hear the whines even with our computers switched off http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

But I'd love it. Definitely.

msalama
07-23-2005, 11:26 AM
It's a game and there's as much wrong with it as right.

Yeah, but what if there was as much RIGHT with it as possible? Would you still play it?

NorrisMcWhirter
07-23-2005, 11:34 AM
Not sure what you're asking but "as much right as possible" could mean 1% of it is right http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I play this game because it seems to be better than other things on the market (of which there are very few) for online air combat i.e there's less wrong with it than CFS3. Not only that but the community is amusing, also http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I don't put too much trust in the blurb about pilot endorsements etc for reasons I've said elsewhere.

Ta,
Norris

msalama
07-23-2005, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Not sure what you're asking but "as much right as possible" could mean 1% of it is right http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Ah, U is wys-ars http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

No, I of course meant that if 100% (or as near as possible) of it was right - including realistic AC fault tolerances - making it MUCH harder to play... would you play it then?

msalama
07-24-2005, 03:08 AM
So no-one is interested in getting this game _truly_ more realistic? Sad http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Anyone? Or am I the only fookin' cretin here who'd like to have his virtual planes just (or as near as possible) like the real thing, huh???

NorrisMcWhirter
07-24-2005, 03:36 AM
^ me? nah http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Yes, I'd still play it if it were much harder and it would be interesting to have to apply engine starting sequences including priming and plug clearance etc as well as navigation and flight as well as what you have suggested.

You might recall this very subject being discussed in ORR maybe a year or so ago and I think a lot of people (IIRC, Oleg too) said that they wouldn't actually mind it being in but that they wouldn't particularly want a lot of time spent on implementing it at the expense of new aircraft/weapons etc because it would only have a certain novelty value. I'd tend to agree with that to some extent; after all, implementing correct sequences for individual aircraft would mean more development/testing time per plane and, as we know only too well, Oleg has limited resources available.

Besides, you know they'd have a switch where you could still bypass it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ta,
Norris

msalama
07-24-2005, 05:27 AM
...as we know only too well, Oleg has limited resources available.

*SIGH* You're right, of course. But it's still sad, because this game would make an excellent base for an ultra-realistic WWII simulator with RL AC starting sequences and fault limits implemented & everything...

But never mind. Life goes on regardless!

Friendly_flyer
07-24-2005, 05:52 AM
The planes are perhaps a bit too forgiving, though getting the 109 in the air is hard enough as it is. However, I think the "over forgiving" model counterweights a number of things that makes the game harder than real life would be.

In reality, you would feel the engine vibration through the seat, giving you input on how the engines was faring, you would feel every little change in G and you could look freely around the cockpit. These things aren't possible to model in a game (though Track IR will alleviate the last point a bit). So yes, the planes may be a bit on the easy side, but the game interface makes flying harder than it would in real life too.

deltaVtango
07-24-2005, 06:26 AM
Originally posted by msalama:
But as regards AC fault tolerances: I think they are way too wide, and f.e. gear extension speeds can be exceeded HUGELY without any damage whatsoever! Now this is wrong & should be fixed if it's _realism_ that we're really after here...

PS. Just my opinion of course http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Real planes don't just fall apart if you overspeed/overstress them by 1 knot/0.1G. They just have to have the relevent inspections carried out (which usually find nothing). If you continuously overstress them though (over a period of years)then that is bad and may lead to catastrophic failure.

Most civil lighties (I don't know about airliners, but I suspect not more than the air data computer G input)don't have any way of recording these limit exceedences and I'm sure WWII planes didn't either. (Some) mil jets have many strain guages mounted everywhere to safely sqeeze every hour out of the airframe possible.

...But I digress. IL2 does currently model overstresses. Trying going fast with your flaps down and see what happens. Keep the throttle firewalled and you get an overheating engine (don't forget the radiator!). You won't hurt the plane much if you only go a coupla knots over (not anything that could be modelled in any sim anyway), but going way over will bend it.

I think the limits are modelled pretty **** well. BTW, I am a pilot and an aircraft maintainer.

Remember: limits are there only if the aircraft is to be flown again!

deltaVtango
07-24-2005, 06:30 AM
Originally posted by deltaVtango:

I think the limits are modelled pretty **** well.



Wow apparently D A M N is a swearword. It was automatically ****ed out by the friendly skynet computers at UBI. 20c in the swear jar for me...
Goshdarndiddlyarnit...

han freak solo
07-24-2005, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by msalama:
So no-one is interested in getting this game _truly_ more realistic? Sad http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Well, I'd like a couple of high volume fans on either side of my monitor that would switch on when I open the cockpit in the game! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

msalama
07-24-2005, 09:46 AM
Remember: limits are there only if the aircraft is to be flown again!

...which, now that you mention it, should be a possibility too. Now I surely DO understand people yelling "overkill!" to a bozo like me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif who has the audacity to crawl in & suggest such nondy s**te in public, but it _would_ be nice to have persistent planes #nevertheless# so that individual AC lifespans could be implemented. Well of course that'll never happen... But one can still dream, can't one?

But as regards AC overstress damage: I'm sorry, but I still think that it's too lax as it is. Why, you can f.e. apply flaps 1 (combat) at almost any d**n airspeed you want, without any imminent danger/damage (blow-outs, stiction etc.) at all. And that just isn't true IRL...

PS. I may sound like an ungrateful b**tard, but I assure you that I'm not. What we've got here is the best darn sim I've _ever_ tried, even with its (perceived) shortfalls and everything!

msalama
07-24-2005, 09:50 AM
Well, I'd like a couple of high volume fans on either side of my monitor that would switch on when I open the cockpit in the game!

Yeah, but you can always buy hardware at your own discretion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif