PDA

View Full Version : Patch 4.02m and thunderstorms



agarofa
10-28-2005, 09:28 PM
Has anybody tried to takeoff in a single-engined fighter during a thunderstorm with patch 4.02m? I find that the planes just get blown off the runway even when you apply full-rudder to oppose the crosswind and simultaneously apply the brake. The return to apparent weightlessness is also very disapointing and the combat behaviour of the AI planes seems more artificial than ever. All they seem to do now is to dart around outside your field of view which has nothing in common with airwarfare and sadly everything to do with a computer that knows your exact X-Y-Z coordinates and velocity. Am I the only one who is gnashing his teeth with this new patch or would anyone else prefer a return to patch 4.01m ...which genuinely seemed to represent a giant leap forward with the IL2-Sturmovik series?

agarofa
10-28-2005, 09:28 PM
Has anybody tried to takeoff in a single-engined fighter during a thunderstorm with patch 4.02m? I find that the planes just get blown off the runway even when you apply full-rudder to oppose the crosswind and simultaneously apply the brake. The return to apparent weightlessness is also very disapointing and the combat behaviour of the AI planes seems more artificial than ever. All they seem to do now is to dart around outside your field of view which has nothing in common with airwarfare and sadly everything to do with a computer that knows your exact X-Y-Z coordinates and velocity. Am I the only one who is gnashing his teeth with this new patch or would anyone else prefer a return to patch 4.01m ...which genuinely seemed to represent a giant leap forward with the IL2-Sturmovik series?

neural_dream
10-28-2005, 09:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by agarofa:
...Has anybody tried to takeoff in a single-engined fighter during a thunderstorm with patch 4.02m? I find that the planes just get blown off the runway even when you apply full-rudder to oppose the crosswind and simultaneously apply the brake... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
That existed in 4.01 too. Generally 4.02 has significantly better AI than 4.01, although not in that respect.

stansdds
10-29-2005, 05:05 AM
There is a reason real pilots do their best to not take off or land (or fly through) during a thunderstorm. Planes are no match for the winds generated by thunderstorms, so getting blown off the runway does not sound like something that is a gross departure from reality.

agarofa
10-29-2005, 08:31 AM
I agree that taking off in a thunderstorm equates to putting your life on the line. My concern here, however, is that the planes get blown through an angle even before they've started their takeoff run. Is the modelling of the aircfrat's mass and the strength of the crosswinds really correct to allow this to happen and why does Dgen even generate fighter-bomber missions under such unrealistic conditions?

With regard to the AI planes I'm still evaluating the new patch and with the exception of the 'weightlessness' issue I haven't found any negative aspect so far. My comments about the defensive manouvres of the AI planes during combat relate to previous releases as well as patch 4.02m. Perhaps this is just something we are stuck with given the restraints of present flight-sim technology and computer CPUs but I feel that it does represent THE major challenge for Oleg Maddox and his team for future development.

If anybody has any positive or negative comments about patch 4.02m I thought that it might be good to group them together in a list, either here or in a new thread and then perhaps we could send the feedback data to Oleg.

Chuck_Older
10-29-2005, 09:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by agarofa:

If anybody has any positive or negative comments about patch 4.02m I thought that it might be good to group them together in a list, either here or in a new thread and then perhaps we could send the feedback data to Oleg. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I see that you don't look in General Discussion or Oleg's Ready Room http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

This exact thing is being done constantly, since the very first patch of Il2:FB.

jds1978
10-29-2005, 09:41 AM
my advice: scrap the mission...it's what would've happened in RL http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

agarofa
10-29-2005, 09:41 AM
Ereeka!... For the benefit of those like myself who never check out Oleg's Ready Room there is indeed a bug reporting thread for the new patch. There you can air your grievances and gnash your teeth to your heart's content so I guess this thread is redundant. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

danjama
10-29-2005, 10:33 AM
You is wrong! I run one of my coops regularly with Thunderstorm weather (P40s rescuing lost C47s) and we always take off just fine. Either your rudder is broken or your brakes are! In fact id go as far as saying i enjoy flying in thunderstorms. Great fun. Especially trying to aim. If Oleg tones the wind effect down i know who i will be looking for http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

major_setback
10-29-2005, 10:45 AM
Thats funny. I have also experienced impossible winds (did I just say that?). In a Hurricane, no pun intended. Really.

(I never look anywhere!)

Whenever I've been to Oleg's Ready Room... Olegs never ready! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

agarofa
10-29-2005, 10:46 AM
Ok Danjama. I shall be waiting for you at 7500m in the Me-262-1a. The skies are all yours, however, if there is a thunderstorm! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

agarofa
10-29-2005, 11:15 AM
Major Setback. To alleviate your problems with 'impossible winds' I recomend that you substitute your Hurricane with a Spitfires MkIX as quickly as possible. Let wind be the other guy's problem ...that's what I say! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

|CoB|_Spectre
10-30-2005, 01:46 PM
You might try modifying your takeoff precedure. I found a few changes in technique made a big difference. A lot of people advance to full power either right before or immediately after brake release, which works well under normal weather conditions. For heavy weather, ensure your tailwheel lock is engaged, release brakes, then add power slowly and allow speed to buildup sufficiently for airflow over the tail to increase rudder authority. Judicious use of brakes to maintain runway alignment in the interim may be necessary. This will also prevent torque from adding to the problem and should reduce the wild nose swinging you may be seeing with your present technique.

Antisub
10-30-2005, 02:37 PM
You're talking about a coop or campaign mission, right?

I read somewhere that high winds in the game blow from the north or the east (or at least from one of the four cardinal points). Get in a plane and let it weathervane into the wind for a few minutes. If the plane turns almost completely around, you've got a massive tailwind and it will be nearly impossible to take off. Go into FMB and move the takeoff point to the far end of the runway. Another option is to move the takeoff point to a nearby base that is pointing more into the prevailing winds.

agarofa
10-30-2005, 03:47 PM
Thanks you guys. I tried your advice and it really does help. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

But would any second world war pilot really fly a combat mission in such conditions? Without GPS or electronic weapon guidance systems it just seems to be risking the life of the pilot and his aircraft with hardly any chance of success. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Arm_slinger
10-30-2005, 03:51 PM
I've done a mission int he B25 with a full bombload in a thumber storm, getting into the air is bloody hard work!! It took all of the run way, the land beyond it, full right rudder, full flaps and right aileron to get her up, even then the main wheels brushes the sea.

Hairy stuff!!

|CoB|_Spectre
10-30-2005, 05:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by agarofa:
But would any second world war pilot really fly a combat mission in such conditions? Without GPS or electronic weapon guidance systems it just seems to be risking the life of the pilot and his aircraft with hardly any chance of success. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to books by USAAF fighter pilots in the ETO, missions were often scrubbed (cancelled) due to weather, either before launch or enroute due to thunderstorms. As escort duties took them deeper into Axis held territory and mission durations ran longer, weather conditions often changed dramatically and the fliers had no choice but to fly through it on the way back to bases in England. A significant number of losses were directly attributed to the weather. One factor recognized by Adolph Galland was how well trained in instrument flying the Allied forces were, giving them a decided edge particularly as late war training for Luftwaffe pilots was foreshortened. There are numerous stories of clouds over the continent towering beyond 30,000 feet, making linkup and escort duties very difficult.

Much of what we know and take for granted in meteorology today has its roots in WWII aviation...things like knowledge of the jet stream. Accurate forecasting was more difficult then and still is no exact science today.

Radar directed bombing by specially equipped Pathfinder bombers was developed to address the problem of not being able to visually acquire targets. While that kind of weather usually meant the Luftwaffe would probably stay on the ground, flak had no such compunctions. Much of the navigation was by dead reckoning using clock and compass, but there were electronic aids used by both sides.

Unfortunately, the FB+AEP+PF engine can only handle global weather settings. It is hoped the next generation will allow for variable and localized weather like in the real world. You might take off under sunny skies only to fight mother nature for your life when you head home.

LEXX_Luthor
10-30-2005, 08:59 PM
Sometimes they were ordered into the Weather by incompetent base commanders and for no reason...


Bottom of part 2:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Thus M. Sgt. Hayashi took off that day, doing his acrobatic steep take off climb and circling the airfield once at low altitude, waving the wings at Sgt. Fujii. Then Hayashi was gone, heading towards a mountain range 10,000 feet high with gigantic cumulonimbus clouds up to 30,000 feet high on his low altitude bomber plane.

Radio contact was lost in an hour, and his plane was never found again.


M.Sgt. Shiro Hayashi - Ki48 pilot Part 1 ~&gt; http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/stories/hayashi.html
M.Sgt. Shiro Hayashi - Ki48 pilot Part 2 ~&gt; http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/stories/hayashi2.html
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

jarink
10-30-2005, 09:22 PM
I find it much, much more annoying that turbulence does not seems to affect AI planes. Try this: while bouncing all over the place just trying to fly straight and level, hit the autopilot. Ta Da! smooth sailin'. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

I really, really hope this gets fixed in BoB.

wintergoose
10-30-2005, 11:46 PM
Just flow a mission in thunderstorm last night in a Hurrycane.
Start engine, step on the breakes, full rudder against the wind. Dont look the tailweel.
Give 80% of trottle. The plain will slowly mone against the wind.
When the nose is in line, ore a little more, with the airstrip let go off the breaks and when the plain start rolling look the tailwheel ang give full trottle.
The rest is just watch the rudder and keep the nose along the runnway.

Old_Canuck
11-02-2005, 01:55 PM
In RL you tie them down or even better roll your toys into a hanger.
http://level2.cap.gov/documents/0510_swr_tx_corpus_christi_sq_elt_searchhiresjpg.j pg

TooCooL34
11-03-2005, 12:10 PM
1) Start engine.
2) Power to 30~40% and apply full rudder and break to align with runway.
3) When it properly centered, hit lock tailwheel
4) Power to about 80%
5) Now it's same with normal take-off with more rudder input. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif