PDA

View Full Version : Oleg,make up your mind!!!



carguy_
11-11-2005, 01:46 PM
I flew two planes minutes ago,the zero and Ki61.

Both are completely changed compared to 4.01!

Zero is now a medium fighter at horizontal combat.The rudder will not help getting anything more out of historically great turner like the zero!

Ki61 at first in 3.0 was a Gustav handling plane,since 3.04 it was a Yak handling plane and now it is a P51 handling plane!!!

Makes you wonder if Oleg has ANY flight data on those planes.

HayateAce
11-11-2005, 01:51 PM
P51 flies like a DC3.

Oleg has no data for Mustang either.

danjama
11-11-2005, 01:57 PM
Ki61's havn't changed at all. Prove it or shut it...

p1ngu666
11-11-2005, 02:01 PM
yeah, the japanease planes are REALLY dubious in modeling..

Airmail109
11-11-2005, 02:20 PM
As Danjama said...prove it our shut it...I fly the P51 a lot and find it to be fine

crazyivan1970
11-11-2005, 02:33 PM
Carguy, if you trying to be CRASH... you aint there yet http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Professor_06
11-11-2005, 02:41 PM
The early Zero was reported to do a 360 at turning speed under 7 sec. In game doesnt come close. but its only a game.

But the Ki61 is one of the toughest planes to kill with 50s. So, fair and balanced.

nakamura_kenji
11-11-2005, 03:14 PM
he do bit point, i feel ki-61/100 lose abilty turn bit maybe second two turn no proof own feel. other thing seem that ki-100 handle much like ki-61-I-otsu/hei where was mean more manoverable

this compare k-100 v ki-61-II which bit hever than ki-61-I still close late model ki-61-I think

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/File0014.jpg

nice quote ^_^

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/0011.jpg

msalama
11-11-2005, 04:22 PM
P51 flies like a DC3. Oleg has no data for Mustang either.

*YAWN* Well, as Danjama said: prove it or shut it...

Except that you of course won't do either http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Feathered_IV
11-11-2005, 05:03 PM
P51 flies like a DC3.

Oleg has no data for Mustang either.


Actually, the P-51 is quite deadly. Providing you don't keep trying to chuck it around like a Sopwith Camel. Your aviation coffee-table books lie about its performance.

Chuck_Older
11-11-2005, 05:23 PM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">P51 flies like a DC3.

Oleg has no data for Mustang either.


Actually, the P-51 is quite deadly. Providing you don't keep trying to chuck it around like a Sopwith Camel. Your aviation coffee-table books lie about its performance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did somebody say 'chuck'?


Oleg, I know you don't listen to Carguy anyway, so I trust you'll keep on working on the unattainable goal of perfection as a work in progess


carguy-

Let me ask you a serious question here.

Have you ever started on a project, taken a look at it, called it complete, and then later on, by expanding your horizons, and by learning from your mistakes and others', and with the availability of improved technology, revised that project to reflect what you've learned?

if the answer is 'no', then you either know everything already, or aren't interested in improving or even continuing to learn about things

if the answer is 'yes', then why should Oleg's work on this sim be an exception to all that?

It is a source of wonder to me that there is even an attitude that Oleg has all perfect info from the get go, and then picks and chooses what features of that info to afflict us with.

Look at the Me 262. Why was work ever done to improve it, if that plane was the technological best at one time?


The answer is: time moved on. You ask for stagnation and seem to approve of it, when what keeps this sim alive, and what drives input on the next generation of sims, is change

SpartanHoplite
11-11-2005, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">P51 flies like a DC3.

Oleg has no data for Mustang either.


Actually, the P-51 is quite deadly. Providing you don't keep trying to chuck it around like a Sopwith Camel. Your aviation coffee-table books lie about its performance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So people keep saying. But where is the proof otherwise?

SH

VW-IceFire
11-11-2005, 05:41 PM
I'm creating a Ki-61 and Ki-100 campaign right now...it flies nearly the same as the 4.01 version and I've put alot of flight hours testing missions...

Hydra444
11-11-2005, 06:43 PM
I've found that the Zero seems stable as a rock now and still turns better than most the planes the Allies can throw at it.I don't see what he's talking about http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

LeadSpitter_
11-11-2005, 07:52 PM
I really dont know where you come up with this stuff carguy equal to the mustang in turnrate is uncorrect and i will call you on that besides that bs comment the k61 infact it can out turn the wildcat which out turns the p51s by far but the ki61 can not out run the wildcats p40s p400 which makes no sense nor can the zekes.

The ki61 turns very well this patch its no ufo slat bug turning 109 and historically the ki61 should turn alot better then a g6 both low and high speed and the ki61 was almost equal in performance to a g6 too 3-20kmph slower depending on alt and had a climb that was slightly worse compaired to the g6.

To me the ki61 has never been correct since 3.0, as for the zekes they are really unaccurate in sl speeds climb and especially roll, the zeke was not a very good high speed rolling ac but in game its much to slow like many other ac highspeed for example the p47 rolled faster then a fw190 highspeed so did alot of other ac. The look at the matchups of the spitfires roll compaired to the 190.

The games all off for every single aircraft, some by alot some are reasonable close and has been since day one.

when looking at the roll charts they are degrees a second and ac all are only a few degrees better or worse then eachother which is not that noticable. In game its ridiculous the speed of the 190 then the zeke which was one of the worst rollers besides the tempest.

then theres low and high speed rolls which are all off in both categories for all planes in game.

i wont go into it its a waste of time..

But i do agree with you the zeke ki61 ki100 are some of the most undermodeled ac in the game as well as the hellcat p-47 and corsair.

whats funny is do some matchs with friends ki61 vs emils f2 f4 g2 g6

then do some matches with corsair hellcat vs 190a4 a5 a6 a8 its comical really and overmodeled and undermodeled ac have a giant gap. 3.0 the corsair and hellcat were pure ufos as the zeke was in and ki84 2.04.

until we have the tools for the community to come up with a realism patch that matchs manufactures data it will be in olegs hands and always will be.

im sure fms will all change again next patch too and should all be corrected 1 time and not touched. But its not our choice olegs team made the game, complaining about it never does good either does sending manufactor data to them. All we can do is enjoy what olegs team gives us and 4.01 is by far the best patch we have gotten yet. Im not a big fan of what they did to rudders tho being one without pedals but theres alot more fixes then problems this patch and to me thats a very good patch.

Doug_Thompson
11-11-2005, 08:58 PM
Great article, nakamura_kenji. The most interesting thing for me was that an air-cooled engine could have been considered in 1944.

TAGERT.
11-11-2005, 08:59 PM
Originally posted by carguy_:
I flew two planes minutes ago,the zero and Ki61.

Both are completely changed compared to 4.01!

Zero is now a medium fighter at horizontal combat.The rudder will not help getting anything more out of historically great turner like the zero!

Ki61 at first in 3.0 was a Gustav handling plane,since 3.04 it was a Yak handling plane and now it is a P51 handling plane!!!

Makes you wonder if Oleg has ANY flight data on those planes. Got Tracks? то

carguy_
11-11-2005, 09:31 PM
First off,I`d like to point out the obvious - the thread was summoned out of frustration.

Chuck_Older,
My exact point is that many planes in the game tend to change their FM with every patch.Changes are sometimes(results vary according to patches)quite big and change aircraft flight characteristics to an extent where you can`t use your known plane to its abilities.
So if the plane changes so drastically,one begins to wonder what causes Oleg to change it so.It looks as if Oleg tested every FM release to see what suits his data.
Is there one type of performance data anyway???
Is he taking bit out of multiple sourses or takes one print and tunes a certain plane according to this source???

In this case,I got wiped out of the sky flying Ki61 Otsu`43 while fighting Spitfire VIII.First time in 4.02.

Altitude was 3870m at the start of engagement.
I knew my plane exceeded the Spit at T&B combat in 270-340kph speed field.I did just that and entered turning combat,the Spit followed which was going as planned.
To my disbelief the plane came up with stall after stall whenever I tried to gain angles.I panicked and began losing alt in order to make him overshoot and get a firing solution on him.I did that but missed.Soon lost alt,leveled at 900m and got shot.Speed was 320kph and the plane had no maneuverability.

Tests performed default weapon loadout,25%fuel,Okinawa map[QMB],closed rad,100% throttle.
I tested the Ki and I could not push it to less than 23seconds on the exact speed field and alt flown in the sortie.
My pre 4.02 tests gave me 17sec 360 turn.

So after flying two hours in 4.02 I came to conclusion that the Ki61 FM is something between IAR and Me109G6`43.
It has poor horizontal performance below 360kph(below 4500m - didn`t test higher) and very similar elevator authority to this of FW190A8.It gives stall(very malicious flip) at 260kph.
Nearly unmaneuverable below 1200m.
Over 360kph it gains abilities.However,there are many enemy planes the Ki61 encounters that vastly outclass the plane in this department.

The Ki61(Otsu - most frequently flown by me) was a sleek low speed medium alt performer which developed a good advantage in this speed/alt niche.Now it seems to be a high speed wannabe heavy fighter which does not accelerate well,turns on par with FW190 Anton(above 360kph) and features a snap stall most similar to this of IAR earliest model.

NOTES:
1.Didn`t test figures in 4.01 but since 3.04 there was no change in overall performance besides the way new FM acts.
2.I have been using rudder since 4.01 so I have no trouble with it in 4.02.Making a horizontal turn without a rudder results in a stall.


ZeroA6M5(also the most frequently used by me) also lost its low speed abilities.It gains above 340kph(below 6000m) but below this speed it is a dog!!!a 15sec 360 turn radius?!A light plane with a powerful engine???
Also in this case the plane performs as a Corsair wannabe and as a result is totally useless!


I`d like ofcourse someone to show me his test figures and a track.Mine state objectively the same,everytime I make a test.

fordfan25
11-11-2005, 09:41 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
yeah, the japanease planes are REALLY dubious in modeling..

specialy there dive rates http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

dispite what some have said i feel strongly like you that serten planes have changed in a big way. the p-38 is for me the loudist change. it now wants ti flip stall badly. but thats OT sorry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

fordfan25
11-11-2005, 09:47 PM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">P51 flies like a DC3.

Oleg has no data for Mustang either.


Actually, the P-51 is quite deadly. Providing you don't keep trying to chuck it around like a Sopwith Camel. Your aviation coffee-table books lie about its performance. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Your aviation coffee-table books lie about its performance" and yours is SOOOOO much better http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Grey_Mouser67
11-11-2005, 09:50 PM
especially dive rates....

Yes...If you test dive aircraft with the engines off or cut back you'll find significant differences in the speeds different aircraft acheive and the Japanese planes are noticably slower doing this.

Crank the engine up and the whole thing changes...it should but not the way it is. In climb, power divided by weight is important because the engine is overcoming gravity. In the dive it should be power (thrust to be more exact) plus weight. So not only should the japanese planes be penalized due to their lighter construction but a Pratt and Whittney R2800 produces much more thrust than the A6M5's engine and since the relationship is additive in the dive, the difference between the two should be more pronounced not less.

Obviously there are a whole bunch of other things like wingloading, parasitic drag, altitude etc at work but from a basics standpoint the heavier planes out dive Japanese planes but barely and really, I find dive accelaration to be very similar...only E retention after leveling out is significantly different.

Do a dive test and you Hellcat pilots are guarenteed to be thoroughly dissapointed in the relative performance of the Hellcat. It is truly nerfed in the dive...I think this is a bigger issue than the A6M series dives too well. Fw is the best no power diver followed by the Mustang...the Fw should be behind the Jug, Lightning, Corsair and Hellcat...the 109 should be way back but it is close to equal to the Jug...power on, the late war planes are as good as the Jug.

Oleg has lots of work to do on dive modelling if he ever wants to simulate this aspect of flight.

ElAurens
11-11-2005, 09:56 PM
While I don't "have tracks", I do fly the Ki61 and Ki100 a lot. I don't see much difference between 4.01 and 4.02.

However...

Reports by Imperial Japanese Army Flying Corps pilots of the 68th. Sentai and 78th. Sentai who were the first units equipped with the Hein and who both transitioned from Ki43s state that the Ki61 was nearly as maneuverable as the Ki43. That is not relflected in the game at all. Nor is it's real world speed advantage over the P40 series, including the N model. In it's test phase the Ki61 outurned a captured LaGG 3. Try that in game....

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

They are not bad aircraft, but they do fall short of their real world performance.

Xiolablu3
11-12-2005, 01:25 AM
I love the Ki61/Zero/Ki84 vs Spitfire 8/9/Corsair match ups.

UKded1 has some great maps using these planesets and I love them, will fly for either side and have a ball.

Aaron_GT
11-12-2005, 02:23 AM
Leadspitter wrote:

In game its ridiculous the speed of the 190 then the zeke which was one of the worst rollers besides the tempest.

The Tempest had an excellent roll rate, very similar to the P51. I presume you mean the Typhoon. instead.

nakamura_kenji
11-12-2005, 04:49 AM
if person think way to test and explain exact very much how do i will fly test in all patch from pf to 4.02 we see how change it do. then target have his track ^_^

design ki-61 was do 595kph/370mph but never be able get performance in game close get about 570kph.

i have more article but no sure if post cause copy right if allow post or no >_<

TAGERT.
11-12-2005, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by carguy_:
First off,I`d like to point out the obvious - the thread was summoned out of frustration.

Chuck_Older,
My exact point is that many planes in the game tend to change their FM with every patch.Changes are sometimes(results vary according to patches)quite big and change aircraft flight characteristics to an extent where you can`t use your known plane to its abilities.
So if the plane changes so drastically,one begins to wonder what causes Oleg to change it so.It looks as if Oleg tested every FM release to see what suits his data.
Is there one type of performance data anyway???
Is he taking bit out of multiple sourses or takes one print and tunes a certain plane according to this source???

In this case,I got wiped out of the sky flying Ki61 Otsu`43 while fighting Spitfire VIII.First time in 4.02.

Altitude was 3870m at the start of engagement.
I knew my plane exceeded the Spit at T&B combat in 270-340kph speed field.I did just that and entered turning combat,the Spit followed which was going as planned.
To my disbelief the plane came up with stall after stall whenever I tried to gain angles.I panicked and began losing alt in order to make him overshoot and get a firing solution on him.I did that but missed.Soon lost alt,leveled at 900m and got shot.Speed was 320kph and the plane had no maneuverability.

Tests performed default weapon loadout,25%fuel,Okinawa map[QMB],closed rad,100% throttle.
I tested the Ki and I could not push it to less than 23seconds on the exact speed field and alt flown in the sortie.
My pre 4.02 tests gave me 17sec 360 turn.

So after flying two hours in 4.02 I came to conclusion that the Ki61 FM is something between IAR and Me109G6`43.
It has poor horizontal performance below 360kph(below 4500m - didn`t test higher) and very similar elevator authority to this of FW190A8.It gives stall(very malicious flip) at 260kph.
Nearly unmaneuverable below 1200m.
Over 360kph it gains abilities.However,there are many enemy planes the Ki61 encounters that vastly outclass the plane in this department.

The Ki61(Otsu - most frequently flown by me) was a sleek low speed medium alt performer which developed a good advantage in this speed/alt niche.Now it seems to be a high speed wannabe heavy fighter which does not accelerate well,turns on par with FW190 Anton(above 360kph) and features a snap stall most similar to this of IAR earliest model.

NOTES:
1.Didn`t test figures in 4.01 but since 3.04 there was no change in overall performance besides the way new FM acts.
2.I have been using rudder since 4.01 so I have no trouble with it in 4.02.Making a horizontal turn without a rudder results in a stall.


ZeroA6M5(also the most frequently used by me) also lost its low speed abilities.It gains above 340kph(below 6000m) but below this speed it is a dog!!!a 15sec 360 turn radius?!A light plane with a powerful engine???
Also in this case the plane performs as a Corsair wannabe and as a result is totally useless!


I`d like ofcourse someone to show me his test figures and a track.Mine state objectively the same,everytime I make a test. That's nice, but Got Tracks? то

TAGERT.
11-12-2005, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by nakamura_kenji:
if person think way to test and explain exact very much how do i will fly test in all patch from pf to 4.02 we see how change it do. then target have his track ^_^ Now your getting it! One of the main problems with the whole bug thing is the difference between what it should be doing vs. Peoples perceptions of what it is actully doing, and thier ignorace of what it should be doing, in that typically both are wrong and the sim is actully right.

If your going to test something I only see two ways of doing it.

1) Have some real world test data
2) If no test data exits, test one plane relative to another (baseline)

In both cases the key to is to come up with a REPEATABLE METHOD!

By repeatable I mean a test that you can perform over and get nearly the same results, better known as the scientific method. If you can NOT do that, then there is something wrong with your method that makes it USELESS.

Once you have a repeatable method, then you can focus on the variable of interest.