PDA

View Full Version : Oleg, how about adjusting the soviet planes



XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 07:46 AM
as we all know the iL2 games are all created by russian designers , but these planes are getting way out of hand. you castrate the german planes with easy stalls and limited performance yet give La7s and Yaks the ability to turn on their wingtips and yet dive and climb with 262's. There needs to be a serious effort into adjusting the flight models of some of the soviet aircraft to a more realistic level, thus also making things more equal all the way around...

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 07:46 AM
as we all know the iL2 games are all created by russian designers , but these planes are getting way out of hand. you castrate the german planes with easy stalls and limited performance yet give La7s and Yaks the ability to turn on their wingtips and yet dive and climb with 262's. There needs to be a serious effort into adjusting the flight models of some of the soviet aircraft to a more realistic level, thus also making things more equal all the way around...

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:04 AM
I agree with you.


I bet they do nothing to soviet planes, but at least we know the truth! So when ever you are shot down by a soviet aircraft you can think that well i have undermodelled aircraft and he has overmodelled so this kind of explains it all and if i had a realisticly modelled planes the one who was shot might have been him instead!


Message Edited on 10/28/03 09:05AM by Reozil

Message Edited on 10/28/0309:17AM by Reozil

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:40 AM
Somehow I doubt FM errors are conveniently arranged by nationality so as to fit nicely into your conspiracy theories.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:40 AM
EDIT:: ugh I made a nasty post. This could be a constructive thread.


ns = no spitfire


Message Edited on 10/28/0308:58AM by LEXX_Luthor

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:41 AM
hairy

A message from your spelling police.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:53 AM
You obviously have not been flying long.

With a little flight experience, the current modelling gives the German aircraft a noticable advantage over the VVS aircraft.

Some points to remember, if you are engaging VVS aircraft under 5000m, then you are operating in their optimal flight envelope, and your suboptimal flight envelope. Reguardless of what some forumites say, superchargers optimised for high altitude efficiency sacrifice low altitude performance.

The VVS engines, however, are made to produce their best power at low altitudes. Less of the engine power is dedicated to driving the blower, and more is put to work pulling the aircraft. If you check, the La-7 is the fastest of all aircraft in the game, at sea level, by a significant margine. If you are fighting them on the deck, then you are going to lose. Lesson: stay high.

Additionally, VVS aircraft all tend to be very light, with low wingloadings. They will turn loops around LW aircraft in any sort of turn fight, as they should. Lesson: don't turn with VVS aircraft.

Now, all the LW fighters have an advantage in the extended dive. Instantaneous dive is a bit weaker than in the higher power to wieght ratio VVS aircraft, but the LW aircraft will pick up much more speed from a long light dive than any VVS aircraft will. Use that to your advantage, by picking up altitude before entering a battle zone, and coming in in a shallow dive to gain some very high speeds.

Line up, fire once, then extend away. Don't stick around for an extended turn fight, you will lose that. Climb up a bit, gradually turn around, then dive back in for another pass.

When you need to turn large amounts, in short periods of time, start by pulling up, to nearly verticall, then roll the aircraft, so the spine is pointing in the direction you want to end up pointing, then pull the plane back down. You will keep nearly all of your speed, and you can actually cut inside the turns of many VVS fighters. (I've cut inside La-7's with the 1.0 P-47 using that manuver. It works *really* well.)

Once you have learned energy fighting, you will discover that VVS fighters are very easy to defeat, much more so than the German aircraft, actually, because the German fighters at least have the option to use engery, or turn. The VVS aircraft are almost universally limited to turn fighting, with no abbility to use energy tactics.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 09:05 AM
LA7 can easily follov any LW fighter in climb.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 10:08 AM
Reozil::
-- LA7 can easily follov any LW fighter in climb.

At what altitude does this happen? This "following" may be correct at low levels.

It may be worth considering that La~7 never made a good ground attack plane, unlike Fw190. Why?

Harry Voyager, what if La~7 follows your P~47 in that maneuver? Isn't that kinda dangerous? I'm not so sure, late war VVS fighters were good energy fighters too but they just couldn't dive (apparently).

Zayets
10-28-2003, 10:16 AM
Yep,I think you didn't fly for long time. Me 262 is UNTOUCHABLE by the AI La's. Altitude does not matter.Keep that speed above 400. La's will get bored after a while.
Don't try to do what the AI is doing. AI is cheating , they have a really simple FM. Know your plane , its limits.And I mean it! In a furball, an I-16 can kill FW's if the last one does not pay attention.Fly online.The reward is greater if you fly fighter planes.If you preffer moving the mud (like I do),then offline is ok as well. However is really nice when you sneak BEL and give'em hell.Wait for (the last) patch and add-on,you might be surprised. That I was told .
Have fun! Be a good man. Respectful.Cheers!

Zayets out

http://www.arr.go.ro/iar81c.JPG

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 10:51 AM
It's an offensive manuver, not a defensive one.

On a side note, if the LW fighters are so pathetic, how the blazes can they catch an aircraft moving over 800 km/h at the bottem of a 3000m dive? That 109 was below me before I started my dive, andd he just dashed up and dumped Mk108's into my aircraft at point blank. The 109 was engaged in a deck level furball when I started my dive, but somehow, he managed to accellerate up to a much greater speed than my 800, close and total my aircraft, all with a height disadvantage of nearly 3km.

Sanity seems to go out the window the moment I go online.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 11:06 AM
There are still few issues with cramped FM and DM, but nothing serious as it was in FB 1.0.. thanks for that for Oleg, Imho game is totally different from FB 1.0..

Couple of issues: Lagg3 DM and FM are way off (lagg3 aka flying tank), as LA-7 climbing 30m/s (should be something like 24M/S, LA-7 climbs with Dora) up to 3000 meters. After that, climb degreeds severely.. SO lesson, stay high from LA-7s, and go above 3km, where you can outrun and outclimb them.The higher you go, the easier chances you have to fight the LA-7s. Also you can usually escape any vvs planes, when going into dives (LA-7 breaks apart on about 700km IAS), whereas your german plane keeps going..

Once late 109 get their correct perfomance( missing some top speed and acceleration), and Lagg3 and LA5FN and LA-7 gets fixxed (superclimb), and FW-190 Roll rate, then I am happy once again.. -/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

____________________________________



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/sig3.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 02:56 PM
If anyone has read the reports from the Pacific Theater from experienced US pilots saying "never turn with the Zero". Well, you've got a similar situation with the Russian airforce.

Like mentioned above, use speed and altitude for your advantage. The problem is that many players on DF servers take off and engage the enemy right there at ground level. Its much harder to compete.

That being said, it still hurts when you do just take off and you've got no time for altitude.

No matter what the case is, try and use the speed of your plane to deal with the situation. In particular, the FW190's are decent performers at low altitude (at high they are much better) and they can really pour on the speed. So if you are being engaged at low level, hit the boost, close the cowling flaps, and try and speed your way outa there. Then use that speed to gain more alt, swing back, and show them what four 20mm cannons can do to their plane (remember as well that German 20mm's are slightly slower firing than the Russian ones - multiple hits are required to sever wings - but a couple of well placed hits can sever controls, kill pilots, and eat up engines).

http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/icefire/icefire_tempest.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 03:04 PM
Vipez said
"Also you can usually escape any vvs planes, when going into dives (LA-7 breaks apart on about 700km IAS), whereas your german plane keeps going.."

This is just WRONG :
if i'm in a LA when you dive with your 109 i will just follow you :
while you dive near verticale i will only do a small dive , thanks to Padlock i will not lose you and when you stop diving cause you are too close of the ground you will start to loose very quickly your built speed and
i will keep my small dive thus keeping my speed very high.
Sonner or later i will overtake you because you lost all your Energie in the dive and i will jump you and kill you.

It is that simple, Vipez.



I like VVS people giving advice on how to use german planes and especially when they tell us how german planes are better than VVS in FB. This is so funny.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 04:36 PM
Harry-Palm wrote:
- as we all know the iL2 games are all created by
- russian designers , but these planes are getting way
- out of hand. you castrate the german planes with
- easy stalls and limited performance yet give La7s
- and Yaks the ability to turn on their wingtips and
- yet dive and climb with 262's. There needs to be a
- serious effort into adjusting the flight models of
- some of the soviet aircraft to a more realistic
- level, thus also making things more equal all the
- way around...

If you want to turn fight with the VVS planes then use the G2. But I would pay attention to what others have said and spend a little time learning the tactics needed to succeed in the LW planes before making blanket statements about the developer's motives.

It seems everyone who starts playing the game wants to turn fight since it the simplest tactic to use: sticking on your enemy's six and shooting him down. If you want to use the 109's totting the 108 that won't work, though. BnZ as mentioned is the way to go.

Alternatively, the 190 is a deadly weapon. Used correctly you can engage and disengage at will and shred any VVS fighter to pieces in one pass. It takes practice though. For starters, next time you're downed by a soviet plane, rather than complaining that he's simply in an over-modelled plane, analyse what you did wrong and avoid doing it again.




<CENTER>http://home.cogeco.ca/~jkinley/FB_JG27.jpg

Message Edited on 10/28/0310:55AM by Chadburn

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 05:20 PM
Vipez- wrote:
- There are still few issues with cramped FM and DM,
- but nothing serious as it was in FB 1.0.. thanks for
- that for Oleg, Imho game is totally different from
- FB 1.0..
-
- Couple of issues: Lagg3 DM and FM are way off (lagg3
- aka flying tank), as LA-7 climbing 30m/s (should be
- something like 24M/S, LA-7 climbs with Dora) up to
- 3000 meters. After that, climb degreeds severely..
- SO lesson, stay high from LA-7s, and go above 3km,
- where you can outrun and outclimb them.The higher
- you go, the easier chances you have to fight the
- LA-7s. Also you can usually escape any vvs planes,
- when going into dives (LA-7 breaks apart on about
- 700km IAS), whereas your german plane keeps going..
-
- Once late 109 get their correct perfomance( missing
- some top speed and acceleration), and Lagg3 and
- LA5FN and LA-7 gets fixxed (superclimb), and FW-190
- Roll rate, then I am happy once again..


I would by happy too Vipez but i don't.

Oleg M. said that in 1.2 make only small changes in FM.
I doubt that he will corect La7, I-16, I-153,Bf G-2, Mig 3, P-39 - extra climb rate; stall/spin character of P-39 and I-16 (like in IL2 was). I only read that DM of Fw-190 will be corrected. What about effectivity of german weapons compare to rusian?

I'm not Lufftwaffe enthusiast but I wish that FB will be close to reality as possible

I lost my hope that FM/DM will be correct http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif(

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:13 PM
The flight models are tested and true. I have personally tested various climb rates, turn ratios, ect at various altitudes using both German and Russian fighters based on thier actual specs and found little variance. The phenomenon you are experiencing in online play is due to the fact that amatures like ourselves are not employing the proper tactics. We take off, get up to about 1200 feet, with no regard to wingmen, or any type of organization and teamwork. HELLO you are one on one in a BF-109 at low altitude against an LA-7, and you have just become another victim to a pilot employing the tactics appropriate to thier aircraft.

The United States Air Force....
When you absolutely, positively, have to have it blown up over night.

492FS 48th FW Lakenheath England
http://www.raflakenheath.homestead.com/files/F_15TaxingTakeoff.jpg

ZG77_Nagual
10-28-2003, 06:22 PM
On a '44 server I have no problem with any vvs types in the 190 a9. La7s were fantastic dogfighters - but they don't do bnz tactics well, and they lose maneuverability at higher speeds - I have often outturned la7s in the 190 above 550k. I actually banned the 262 from my server - once you sort it out it is just to easy. I like the early 109s best - f4 and g2 - and have flown the f4 successfully against yak3s. VVS planes are generally more condusive to the kind of turn and burn dogfighting popular in simms like janes ww2 fighters (though the afj - who adopted bnz tactics in the p47 (best energy fighter in the simm) dominated competitions) and the cfs series. This simm has much better and more realistic modeling - so you must adapt your tactics.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:23 PM
Read game descriptions of planes ..........
Read game descriptions of LA-7 and Yak 3 and that is how the game is set up................keep up the good work Oleg

The genuine Hawg-dawg...soon to be Bad-MF(mongrul fighter)
Proud former member of Kelly Johnson's "SKUNK WORKS"
Fat Boys and.... Props For Life

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:31 PM
I think citing the old "Russains made this so the Russain planes are overmodelled" line is getting more and more tedious.

There are a good number of really good posts in this thread which get at the actual issue here- the LW/VVS planes are very accurately modelled, you just have to stop, read up about what you are flying, check out your opposition and use the right tactics.

It just happens the LW tactics are maybe not so "obvious" as the VVS ones (although this does not mean the VVS are easier to use, if both sides know their planes!).

Now what was that old saying about workmen and their tools?

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

"As weaponry, both were good, but in far different ways from each other. In a nutshell, I describe it this way: if the FW 190 was a sabre, the 109 was a florett, or foil, like that used in the precision art of fencing." - Gunther Rall

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:34 PM
Look at these link:

http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=004181;p=1


No comment


"the true is out there"

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:37 PM
JaboTex wrote:
- Vipez said
- "Also you can usually escape any vvs planes, when
- going into dives (LA-7 breaks apart on about 700km
- IAS), whereas your german plane keeps going.."
-
- This is just WRONG :
- if i'm in a LA when you dive with your 109 i will
- just follow you :
- while you dive near verticale i will only do a small
- dive , thanks to Padlock i will not lose you and
- when you stop diving cause you are too close of the
- ground you will start to loose very quickly your
- built speed and
- i will keep my small dive thus keeping my speed very
- high.
- Sonner or later i will overtake you because you lost
- all your Energie in the dive and i will jump you and
- kill you.

- I like VVS people giving advice on how to use german
- planes and especially when they tell us how german
- planes are better than VVS in FB. This is so funny.

Exactly. I used a dive to shoot down a La7 that tried to follow me, but it worked out of surprise. That's not something you can do when the pilot knows what he's doing.

I love it when people say that German planes are better than Russian ones, and go on assuming the German is an ace and the one that flies the La is a noob who'll break his wings diving every time.

Nic

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 06:48 PM
Every know that every planes have own "+" and "-"

But not in FB http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif


"the truth is out there"

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 07:09 PM
JaboTex wrote:
- Vipez said
- "Also you can usually escape any vvs planes, when
- going into dives (LA-7 breaks apart on about 700km
- IAS), whereas your german plane keeps going.."
-
- This is just WRONG :
- if i'm in a LA when you dive with your 109 i will
- just follow you :
- while you dive near verticale i will only do a small
- dive , thanks to Padlock i will not lose you and
- when you stop diving cause you are too close of the
- ground you will start to loose very quickly your
- built speed and
- i will keep my small dive thus keeping my speed very
- high.
- Sonner or later i will overtake you because you lost
- all your Energie in the dive and i will jump you and
- kill you.
-
- It is that simple, Vipez.


- I like VVS people giving advice on how to use german
- planes and especially when they tell us how german
- planes are better than VVS in FB. This is so funny.
-

for your knowledge, I only play axis in this game, and I have no problem dealing with Las once we get to altitudes above 3km.. if you are below that, dealing with Las is very hard. La-7 super climb should be fixxed in 1.2 (Oleg is aware of the bug), so it should get easier.. as well as 109 acceleration and DM will once again become little tougher.. So yes you may follow me below 3km but if we go 1vs1 duel on above 3km, you can also build up your speed to above 700kmh, where LA-7 cant follow you..And LAs have very little chances of catching up 109s and FW-190s on hugher alts.. And forget padlock.. it simply sucks.. just play on full real servers /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


____________________________________



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/sig3.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 07:52 PM
and some people wonder why Oleg doesnt come here....and have the nerve to bitc# about his lack of input in this forum......./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

If you want to loose an La in a dive make sure you are high enough to get the distance...then when you come out of the dive and go level....dont climb right away..you looses too much E he wont catch you.

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

Message Edited on 10/28/0301:56PM by Bearcat99

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 08:21 PM
nerve to admit this? i hope so
http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=004876

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 09:20 PM
Hans: Have you tested the best climb speed for the 109s? I know for the 109K in this game if you hold the speed of 210-220 kph you will achieve best climb rate ingame (I dont know the figure, but its much better climb rate than 300 kph). Is this not a bug? To be hanging on the propeller in real life will not achieve best climb rate. If Oleg would adress this issue and give the germans a decisive advantage back to them, then we could MUCH more often use real world tactics to their fullest.

However, I don't think this is german nerfing. I think this best climb rubbish is a general FM error because it seems the majority of a/c are like this.

XyZspineZyX
10-28-2003, 09:21 PM
It's worse that i ever thought http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I have flown for 2 years in I an FB. I'm not anynewbie. I learn tactics T&B & B&Z & Energy Fight. I fly planes both side red and blue. After every patch I worry much more about realism of FB.

ZG77_Nagual
10-28-2003, 09:46 PM
There goes the freakin neighborhood again

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 12:08 AM
i dont know if its that the german planes are undermodeled as much as it is that the russian planes are overmodeled. the la7 and yaks should be less menuverable and have a bit less climbing. i think the german planes are pretty accurate, just the russian planes should be able to stall.

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 12:56 AM
I found the little B-239 is the best on the deck fighter the axis have. As long as its a turn fight I have no real problem with any of the WS fighter including the LA-7 as long as they dont put it to the fire wall and burn out of there. I do use manual prop and engine coltrol to sqeeze a little more out the poor little bird.I admit I dont fly the 109 or 190 much but I have notice the same as the other ppl in this thread the higher you go with LW birds the better your chance of making it home. I also agree with the ppl above in the LA-7 climb rate is a bit high but other then that most the fms are pretty close inline maybe a few small tweeks are needed here and there but other then that alls well.IMHO no one ele has came as close as FB has so im happy .Good hunting

http://www16.brinkster.com/hawkspage/hawkssig.jpg

Your not getting my buffalo wings

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 01:39 AM
RCAF_Hawk2 wrote:
-most the fms are pretty
- close inline maybe a few small tweeks are needed
- here and there but other then that alls well.IMHO no
- one ele has came as close as FB has so im happy

Oh, really? I know plenty of sims which have more accurate FMs performance wise. FB is better in other areas, but as is - it's only good looking game. There are 2 well modeled planes to play sim with, Yak-9 an 109g-2. Others are more or less off the mark.

You're saying FMs are pretty close. Can you post data to support your claims? I would be very interested as everything i've found out contradicts with your statement.

Just please read these:
http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=004876
http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=004181

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 02:01 AM
HarryVoyager wrote:
- You obviously have not been flying long.

I could say same about you.


- With a little flight experience, the current
- modelling gives the German aircraft a noticable
- advantage over the VVS aircraft.
- Some points to remember, if you are engaging VVS
- aircraft under 5000m, then you are operating in
- their optimal flight envelope, and your suboptimal
- flight envelope.

It's not that simple. Ie. Mig-3 was high alt interceptor. Every planes has their owns strenghts and weaknesses to know. It's not good to generalize.


- If you check,
- the La-7 is the fastest of all aircraft in the game,
- at sea level, by a significant margine. If you are
- fighting them on the deck, then you are going to
- lose. Lesson: stay high.

If you check FB La-7 performance comparing to real La-7 you notice it's orvermodeled by a huge margin.

FB data compared to La-7 (Late 1944 patch)
source: http://www.tilt.clara.net/strat/Page09.jpg

1)sustained turn (1000m)
2)maximum climbrate 100% (*@ WEP)

Real La-7
1)20-21 (s)
2)18 / 22.6 (m/s)

FB La-7
1)16.5-17.7 (s)
2)25 / 30 (m/s)


- Additionally, VVS aircraft all tend to be very
- light, with low wingloadings. They will turn loops
- around LW aircraft in any sort of turn fight, as
- they should. Lesson: don't turn with VVS aircraft.

This is not true. Modified Yak-1 (1942) was the first russian up to date fighter plane that could match 109f and g in horizontal turn. Yes VVS had I-16 and I-153/I-15, but otherwise germans had clear edge in horizontal turning until 1943. Check turn rate comparison at at SIM HQ forum for reference.


- Now, all the LW fighters have an advantage in the
- extended dive. Instantaneous dive is a bit weaker

- than in the higher power to wieght ratio VVS
- aircraft

109 series has generally highest power/weight ratio at any given time of ww2. La5FN and La-7 are very good in this too. You are correct about advantage in dive though. Maximum speed limit is higher for german planes. (Ie. 190s tested up to 955kmh TAS.)


- by picking up
- altitude before entering a battle zone, and coming
- in in a shallow dive to gain some very high speeds.
-
-
-
- Line up, fire once, then extend away. Don't stick
- around for an extended turn fight, you will lose
- that. Climb up a bit, gradually turn around, then
- dive back in for another pass.
-
- When you need to turn large amounts, in short
- periods of time, start by pulling up, to nearly
- verticall, then roll the aircraft, so the spine is
- pointing in the direction you want to end up
- pointing, then pull the plane back down. You will
- keep nearly all of your speed, and you can actually
- cut inside the turns of many VVS fighters. (I've
- cut inside La-7's with the 1.0 P-47 using that
- manuver. It works *really* well.)
-
- Once you have learned energy fighting, you will
- discover that VVS fighters are very easy to defeat,
- much more so than the German aircraft, actually,
- because the German fighters at least have the option
- to use engery, or turn. The VVS aircraft are almost
- universally limited to turn fighting, with no
- abbility to use energy tactics.

And what have tactics to do with badly modeled FMs?
I've flown online simulations for some 10 years and im quite confident about my tactics thank you. I have no problem getting kills in ANY FB plane, but that simply isn't the point here.

Point is i'd like to fly plane with FMs representing their RL examples. period.



Message Edited on 10/29/0301:40AM by ladoga

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 03:01 AM
I dont think its just russian planes the g2 190s and me262 have alot of the same problems, but the 109ers notice it alot more with the useless 20mm

the p11 p40 hurricane p47d27 are the worst planes and are way below data while the rest are all above accurate data.

Look at the b239 for ex in 1.0 im sure a couple people remember the finnish b239 pilot who was testing the fm to get it accurate but now in 1.11 it seems like a superplane but now it can hold its own against the i153 and i16, to me it seems with all the manuevering the addition of constant speed props being able to not bleed speed at all like the p40 it can take off with 0 pitch and doesnt slow down but the vvs stop on a dime with 0 pitch. I dunno i just hope everything gets tested and tested again before 1.2 comes out. the sense of realism has gone out the window for me

the p40 seems like the only realistic fm in the game because it has simulated stick pressure on the alierons rudder and elevator and you bleed alot of speed just rolling the a/c but compaired to the non e bleeding aircraft its tough to hold your own even against a lagg 3 and cant even bnz a b239

<center>http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LS1.txt
Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter</center>

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:24 AM
FW 190 can´t achieve speeds they should!
see TA152 thread for info.

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 10:57 AM
Ladoga you are right. Some poeple know that FM/DM is bad in FB but rest enjoy new planes, maps etc. and don't care about realism.

I WISH FB WAS REALISTIC AND THIS SHOULD BE PRIORYTET.

Other thing may come after

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:25 PM
LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- Look at the b239 for ex in 1.0 im sure a couple
- people remember the finnish b239 pilot who was
- testing the fm to get it accurate but now in 1.11 it
- seems like a superplane but now it can hold its own
- against the i153 and i16, to me it seems with all
- the manuevering the addition of constant speed props
- being able to not bleed speed at all like the p40 it
- can take off with 0 pitch and doesnt slow down but
- the vvs stop on a dime with 0 pitch. I dunno i just
- hope everything gets tested and tested again before
- 1.2 comes out. the sense of realism has gone out the
- window for me

Brewster in v1.11 has hugely overmodeled climbrate. (as well as I-16)

FB max 20m/s
RL max 13m/s

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 08:37 PM
Reozil wrote:
- FW 190 can´t achieve speeds they should!
- see TA152 thread for info.

Actually level max speeds are spot on correct with 190 (as with most other planes too).


Problems with 190 IMHO? Yes, some.

-It's maximum attainable divespeed (structural limits) seem to be too low. (La-5 series has same problem I suspect.)
-190 rollrate should start to decrease steadily over 500kmh.
-Empty frames of armored glass (there should be glass refracting view higher) bothers forward view.
Otherwise 190 is quite well modeled.



Message Edited on 10/29/0307:37PM by ladoga

XyZspineZyX
10-29-2003, 10:02 PM
I have to take an in between stance here. I don't think there is any purposeful bias towards the Russian planes.
But there is a slight overmodelling of the late russian planes and a slight undermodelling of the late 109 planes.
Notice that there's a gigantic difference in the way the G-6 flies compared to the way the G-2 flies. In my opinion, the disparity is too overdone. The G-6 was 50-150KG heavier
than a G-2 and had a few more bumps on it. So what?? If you are a real world pilot you have to take a step back when comparing the two and say, "Wait a minute here"!! My wife weighs 50Kg and when I fly my favorite rental C-172, I can't tell the difference in any way. Also, two of my braver
guy friends go flying with me all the time and they both
about 90kg each. I can't tell any difference when I fly with them either!! I do fly with a little less fuel when I take them though, otherwise I'd be overweight. And a Cessna doesn't have near the power of a 109 of any stripe. I just don't think the G-6 would be that much slower ( especially in acceleration ) and the handling difference should not be as great as it is currently. Those who insist that the flight models are always right might do well to ponder on the logic of that for a time. If that's the case, why have we had so many changes in FMs, especially in the case of the 109. Which patch had the flight model right?? Why are you assuming this latest one has it right?? Maybe a version of IL2 had it right, or the first version of FB?? Ever think of that?? Huh?? I feel this is the worse 109 FM we've had in any patch of either FB or IL2.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin - 1755



Message Edited on 10/29/0309:12PM by mortoma

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 01:03 PM
It's always the same. Developers say "FM is close to reality and correct". Patch comes and strangely more than a half of them change... Then people get data, complain (aka. "whine") and again the "correct" FM is being "corrected" etc. It's so correct that it now is uber-perfect... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

It's hard not to believe in bias etc. especially when flying for some longer time, reading documents, books and seeing such wonderful articles like that from cube (~s~ Good work).
It's odd that there'S hardly any complain from the soviet drivers and even Roshko (if memory serves right)admitted that the FM of these soviet bird would need some attention.

I think the problem lies in the beta-testers and to some extent in the developers. They may have used right data (even if I think that soviet data is in no way more accurate than any german or british document of that time..)
but it's triking that the flight performance is even better than in these russian documents..
Some things are hard to believe at all. Be it the Cockpits or the striking performance of the "correct-FM Hurricane" back in 1.0...

One begins to wonder on "how bad have the pilots of the VVS been when having SUCH equipment they had this high losses.."
I still think that the soviets constructed great stuff and good equipment but after nearly one year of flying FB I hardly respect LA-7 or Yak-3 jockeys (and yes I shot down some of them too. please don't teach me how to fly. thx)...
BTT: I think the beta testers had big influence on the flight performance of these birds and now it's difficult to "tone them down" a bit in order to make it more "realistic" for all others and prevent an uprising in eastern europe http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

happy hunting...

http://www.hell-hounds.de/sigs/gotcha.jpg

----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
No forward view was obscured during the creation of this post...
----------------------------------------

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 01:26 PM
A thing I don't really appreciate in the latest patch, is that it was before possible to make a "one pass-kill" with the 190 and that now it's the same old story, you have to stay in the six of your target and begin to cut it in pieces very slowly!

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 02:33 PM
you are such a tweedle! This has already been brought up too many times! Just get over it like the real pilots did.

Boosher-PBNA
----------------
<center>It's your fault... <center>
Boosher-ProudBirds-VFW
http://www.uploadit.org/files/220903-Boosher%20Sig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 04:21 PM
Bravo JaBo_HH--Gotcha.
You said true. If it were more poeople like you (expecially betatesters) maby FM was better.
It's pity that are only few people who wants realism FM in FB http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 08:47 PM
Kwiatos wrote:
- Ladoga you are right. Some poeple know that FM/DM
- is bad in FB but rest enjoy new planes, maps etc.
- and don't care about realism.
-
- I WISH FB WAS REALISTIC AND THIS SHOULD BE
- PRIORYTET.
-
- Other thing may come after



That's exactly the point, but some guys at 1:C think more about stupid "eye candy" while players get annoyed over and over by the old stupid disbalancings....

I'd be surprised if there ever will be a really well balanced FB where no planes is more than 10% off real data, just like Warbirds.

I hope so, but there seem so many things more important than realism of balance.

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 09:28 PM
ladoga wrote:
- Actually level max speeds are spot on correct with
- 190 (as with most other planes too).

At high alt topspeed is very much spot on. At low altitude the late war Dora could achieve 622km/h, not so in FB. Nevertheless, it's a great sim!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


<center>


http://members.chello.se/unni/rote3.JPG



'When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!'

</center>

ZG77_Nagual
10-30-2003, 09:51 PM
I see several references to cube's excellent work with il2compare - however il2compare is only a very rough idea of relative performance. In tests it diverges considerably from actually in game performance - usually making the planes look like they perform better than they do. It is not a valid vehicle for detailed critiques of flight model accuracy.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 10:35 PM
ZG77_Nagual wrote:
- I see several references to cube's excellent work
- with il2compare - however il2compare is only a very
- rough idea of relative performance. In tests it
- diverges considerably from actually in game
- performance - usually making the planes look like
- they perform better than they do. It is not a valid
- vehicle for detailed critiques of flight model
- accuracy.
-
<img
- src="http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.
- jpg"> -

Il-2 compareis gives definetely than rough idea. It's data comes directly from FB code and theres no relative variation in performances. (Oleg confirmed this IIRC)

Can you post those tests you mention?

If not. Just time your climbs to set altitude and you see it matches very well il-2 compare data. If you find any differences im interested to know.

If you suspect something is wrong it's better to test it out yourself. Then you have something to back your statements with.


Ie. with La-7 (2xShvak) 100% fuel i got average 28.5m/s climbrate from 0 to 2km. (Starting from 250kmh). Il-2 compare has 27.5m/s average for same 0-2km range. 1 m/s error is propably from minor zoomclimb (incorrect speed at start of climb) before sustained climbrate.

However real mid-late 1944 La-7 would get around 20m/s average climb at 0-2km range. (see my sources above- 22,6m/s max)

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 10:58 PM
Here's what Oleg has to say about Il2Compare and Cube's most recent tests:

_____

Oleg Maddox
Member
Member # 446

posted 10-30-2003 05:12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, Cube is cool guy comparing to all other real whinners. He try to make something that usually do good engineers when try to explain some others that know close to nothing about it...

I just would like to point that he missed many other things. Let say that some of them are:

1. Airfoil profile also plays _very_ great (some time major) role for turn time, radius, lift, etc. For that he need simply take the test of Hurricane.... Russian planes had "wide" airfoil profile and if he will take in calculation such things he will get REALLY other results then in his curves. Some time dramatically other.

2. He use Il-2 compare, but that isn't our own program at first and in the game REAL things are other. Before to post it he need to test it himself in a sim for the listed by him aircraft with methods that he describe. Il-2 compare is good just for novices that like to select for the first time the plane for online dogfight... Only for this. In the sim real turn times are greater than in Il-2 compare, ESPECIALLY for Russian planes. What Youss's program reads from sfs files is just "cover" of the tunes in code of FM.... lets say that it use just for intial tunes. Other tunes are absolutely in other places and do not show any digits - that are special formulas that do not use direct digits from the data that he reads with his porgram.

3. For each type of plane we can find many different sources.
Let say for example that Russian tables posted here are from the tests of broken series...where the special comission (Defined by Stalin himself!) defined why and were was in use non-original technology or bad workers on the manufacture.... But why nobody that post them do not translate other than tables pages? Interesting, isn' it? ....
Then we can find German tests that show what _should be_ and test of serial aircraft produced in Germany, Italy, Czech and Hungary... and then we may find easy that just Hungarian production Bf-109G series planes match the test data..... But other are slowly on 20-30 km/h due to used of "erzatz", non original technologies on these Messerschmitt owned manufactures..... If to model by such way what LW fans will say?

Then we may found data for Mustang P-51D in UK.... where several just arrived units where tested with very serious settings (using theodolits, radars, etc) and no one of them was able to match declared performance and on WEP power they were able to run just about 40 sec before total overheating..... Why some don't like to post that trial? However we don't model it by the test of Uk or USSR (that was also similar to UK trials for 10 units sent as lend-lease P-51B in SU as a sample for selection together with other type of fighter planes)... We model it by NACA and USAF _official_report.... Becasue the whinners of "realistic" will again say something and we are tired of that. Very tired.

So now and later we select the best known for western and Japanese aircraft performance data and middle calculation of Soviet. Thats all.

If someone like to post tables of Soviet fighter planes then look for Stepanetz book about Yak series planes. He was one of the test chiefs in NII VVS and write even all weaknes of _all_ soviet figher planes...(La series there are for comparison with Yak) Turn times we took from that book. That is really documeted data for each type, experimental or series, engines, etc. But not selection of some misses on SOME manufactures due to production failures...

The FM in FB isn't perfect in terms of what I would like to get in a HOME PLAYING SIM. But with limits that we have in speed of processors and if you are looking with attention to other aspects that should work together with FM calculation on a single _home PC_ processor (AI, Graphics, etc) probably you may be agree that it is still the best implementation that created for the last time.

Thats all what I would like to say today.
Sad that some people (Not Cube) do not understand many things and try to say something that they realluy don't know.


PS. Cube, you are wrong very much about Bf-109E. If to follow your statement then we need to say that 109E was better turner than Spit Mk.I or Hurricane MK.I. But we all know that it wasn't... and the differences was really great in that Item.
And we also all know that the Spits were not better turners than Soviet planes, except high altitude turns. That confirm easy the only tests of NII VVS of lend lease Spitfires V and IX, including low altitude versions and French pilots that flew both Yak-3 and Spit IX in trials of August 1945....

And you are wrong that Germans didn't test for turn time. There are such digits for a half turn in comparison to Soviet fighters and recommendation to German pilots to do not stay in turn with Yaks and LaGGs (They wrongly named till the end of war Las by LaGGs in many doc..Even Gunter Rall in his one of the latest interview said "LAGG-7" was the best from Soviet planes... )....

It is also good to remind the special 1944 order of Luftwaffe High Command for LW pilots on Russian Front: "To avoid any fights bellow 5,000 meters altitude against new Russian Yak with inclined antenna and removed oil radiator from under nose" It was about Yak-3 and Yak-9U.
And we don't model the best known data for these planes.... The best for Yak-9U if to do not use the troops made limit screw for full throttle due to periodical oil leak in reductor of propeller for example will be 600-610 on SL and 700 at altitude for 20 min without overheating. Is it in our sim?

[ 10-30-2003, 05:49: Message edited by: Oleg Maddox ]

_____


http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
10-30-2003, 10:59 PM
As a PS, as far as I know, Youss indicated that the LA7 climb in version 1.11 is considered a bug. One that has been documented. With a trackfile. And sent in. You know - the way you're supposed to go about these things?


http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 08:03 AM
@clint-ruin:Thx for supplying the info from OLEG.

Are there any known information about what uber-correct FM will be corrected in next patch ?

Still I think that he's using this "A HOME SIM" thing as a excuse for all inefficencies of the game. I wonder why he doesn't anwer on the "Initial Turn rates" and "high-g" performance of axis vs soviet planes thing.
Next is the fact that I didn't see him comment on the "to high stall-speed" issue.
These are all facts I'd like too see changed/taken into account too. BUt nice you provided this info Clint.

I'm really looking forward to the Patch and add-on and then we'll see a lot of "western front" or "pacific front" only servers popping up !

What I think to be annoying is the fact that Oleg states the stuff about bad-high-alt performance of certain soviet planes. Besides the lack of speed in the YAK-3 I never saw any kind of performance problems with LA-5 and LA-7 guys(turns and energy bleed).
Furthermore I see YAK-9 becoming more and more unpopular and most guys flying YAK-3 or LA series but maybe it's only my observation....
And finally wasn't it already known that the high-alt model of IL2FB is not good ? So what's the advice he can give the LW whiners ?

Happy hunting...



http://www.hell-hounds.de/sigs/gotcha.jpg

----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
No forward view was obscured during the creation of this post...
----------------------------------------

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 01:04 PM
Lagoda wrote:
-
- Brewster in v1.11 has hugely overmodeled climbrate.
- (as well as I-16)
-
- FB max 20m/s
- RL max 13m/s

It's nice to see people throwing in links to Cubes comparison threads on SimHQ. Here's another post from there for you:

http://oldsite.simhq.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=004876;p=3#000 094

For the click-shy, here's a picture of Camos in-game tests:

http://www.pp.htv.fi/vpitkane/bw_climb.gif

And Cubes [red line shows '100%' power, "historical" test conditions, done in-game]:

http://www.zmogausteises.lt/fb/climb1.jpg

In the Il2Compare thread that exploded over at VOWHQ, Youss himself stressed the importance of checking whether a figure shown in Il2Compare is actually attainable in the game. It's not necessarily so. Pulling 'absolute' numbers down to a single M/sec out of Il2Compare and assuming them to be totally correct with no in-game testing is no fun for anyone. If you're going to use those figures it helps to state them tentatively and ask if anyone can confirm them in-game.

Gotcha: if you are interested in the discussion I pulled Olegs post from above, probably your best bet is to read the whole thread taking place over at SimHQ. The url is
http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=004876;p=1 - so far it seems to be mostly polite and with a low BS tollerance in the thread.

The astute will notice the way that Oleg seems to appreciate well documented and researched information such as the tests Cube has presented, far more so than pointless carping and whining. Seriously, Lagoda, if there are much better sims out there - with better flight models, and more responsive developers - I am sure that noone would mind too much if you went and played them instead.


edit: fixed cube picture link

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

Message Edited on 10/31/03 12:11PM by clint-ruin

Message Edited on 10/31/0302:14PM by clint-ruin

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 01:23 PM
You guys, threads like this are exactly why Oleg rarely shows up in here anymore.

They're why he gets torqued enough to mention all the whining in these forums ONSTAGE AT AN INTERNATIONAL TRADE SHOW.

So pack it up and take it somewhere else, ok?

Stenciled on the side of my Dora:

"Lasst das H¶llentor ¶ffen, es friert hier oben!"
("Leave the gates to Hell open, it's FREEZING up here!")

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 01:34 PM
Please see bellow:



Harry-Palm wrote:
- as we all know the iL2 games are all created by
- russian designers , but these planes are getting way
- out of hand. you castrate the german planes with
- easy stalls and limited performance yet give La7s
- and Yaks the ability to turn on their wingtips and
- yet dive and climb with 262's.


First of all I'm tired of such demands. I'm Russian born but my family name says all. For me doesn't matter which country origin was a plane. And I fly online exlusively 109s. Probably will change for Ki-84 later.

Second, the dive of last Yaks and La-7 is done worse than real due to such type of demands. Yes due to such type of demands..... Need even more worse? Really?

Third, Russian planes, especailly Yaks was more easy to fly than 109 and FW-190, be sure. And they were known as easy handling planes for the novices with very low level of experience. And Stall here is one of the most known things that in that item listed by you planes was known as almost "non-stalling" planes comparing say to 109 and especially to 190...

4th, Turntimes of russian planes really was better for most fighter types. So if you don't use German tactic then you simply can't win if you are low experinced pilot. It seems that you even lower than low. Sorry. So better learn more tactic and use real advantage of the plane that you selected. German pilots were well trained, far much better than Russian. In 10 times better! So you demand is here due what? Yes due to your low experience.


Thats all.

Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games


Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 01:42 PM
Firs i think that surname Maddox is such that i cant tell that you are russian from that, but name Oleg gives me a strong hint to east!

And i do not whine about turn rates, but speeds like i cannot catch up with YAK (1942) with my BF109F4 even in staight or climb this bothers me. Everything else seems to be acceptable.(This might be because of my low experience)

And thanks for this great sim!

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 02:01 PM
@OLEG: thx for you finally coming here and give us an answer and your opinion on this.

I think the problem with the people here that feel bias is a culmination of factors which add up in a unpleasent way.

I fly FW190 all the time so I spare you my complains about the View.

But to sum up. Applying real time tactics included Bounce.
(surprise).
In FB Bounce is impossible. Even if we turn off external views, Icons and all this kids-arcade-stuff one can hear the enemy up to 800 meters away.
This means that you fly as follow:

If (hear_sound)
{
make hard horizontal turn to r/l;
}

The guy doing the bounce (if doing Boom and zoom) has superior speed and has next to NO chance in turning into the enemy and do a firing solution. So he breaks off and zooms out. Now the Bounced pilot simply follows him and keeps his eyes on him. he doesn't need to shoot. He already made him useless. If he'd at least pay for his folly to let somebody sneak on his six it would be much better...

Then one factor is G-Load. With all respect to your sources and your work the G-Load thing IS a factor and doesn't seem to be reflected properly. Since low-speed turning/fighting is not to be used (which is ok as we're not in WW1) you can't do High-speed turning either since you black out faster although you'd normally have a certain degree of advantage due to the construction. This results in the othe rguy doing a better turn, with lower speed and simply kill you. (we've done plenty of trilas of YAK vs. any LW fighter and you best corner velocity to prove this. Blue blacks out, bleeds more speed, and the red-guy drinks a cup of coffee while following suit..)

Of course this is a home sim, but these above mentioned factors combined with the high-alt FM and various other stuff mentioned by others make flying Axis planes highly unenjoyable. I simply have NO PROBLEM with knowing yaks /Las turing better whatever as long as I know I can use my chances. Right now you need a lot of luck to have this chance though and the guy flying the RED ones must be
a) deaf
b) a real Beginner
to get him down. (Our squad has some success with team tactics however, but this again relies on various other facts.)

This makes flying Planes that simply turn and Burn very easy and flying BnZ rather frustrating.
Teamtactics are a fine thing but the two above mentioned factors (Sound issue and Black-out together with various other issues make it far to easy to spoil "axis" tactics by simply doing the X-Wing turn (point your canopy to the enemy and PULL ).

Good Hunting !

http://www.hell-hounds.de/sigs/gotcha.jpg

----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
No forward view was obscured during the creation of this post...
----------------------------------------

Message Edited on 10/31/0302:04PM by JaBo_HH--Gotcha

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 02:28 PM
Oleg wrote::
------------------------

So if you don't use German tactic then you simply can't win if you are low experinced pilot. It seems that you even lower than low. Sorry. So better learn more tactic and use real advantage of the plane that you selected. German pilots were well trained, far much better than Russian. In 10 times better! So you demand is here due what? Yes due to your low experience.

Thats all.

Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games


-----------------------------------------------------

Yes! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

The computer VVS simmer has equal flight sim experience of computer Luftwaffe simmer. How do we simulate real combat, given we *all* sim the Aces, and only the Aces, and wear Their skins as our own?

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 03:28 PM
JaBo_HH--Gotcha wrote:
- @clint-ruin:Thx for supplying the info from OLEG.
-
- Are there any known information about what
- uber-correct FM will be corrected in next patch ?

/i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif But I smile about you.

- Still I think that he's using this "A HOME SIM"
- thing as a excuse for all inefficencies of the game.
- I wonder why he doesn't anwer on the "Initial Turn
- rates" and "high-g" performance of axis vs soviet
- planes thing.

I answered him in direct message

Why do you think that Axis "high-g" planes are greater than Soviet? Any facts please. Any pictures, any confirmed doc text. Just because It pointed in British report about Emil? But this report do not say about Soviet planes isn't it?.
If you mean the durability of wings longerons for sustained damage then you need to know that Sovet planes had highest weight-load on the longeron on static trials before it damaged. It was two times greater then on Emil say on LaGG-3. And 1,5 times greater then for P-39D....
As for Pe-2 the standard fro the wing damage was 20G constant continues... The common - 11G. I think tyou even can't name me any other plane of WWII two which had the same standard, except close to that Me-163 wing damage under Hi-G.


- Next is the fact that I didn't see him comment on
- the "to high stall-speed" issue.
- These are all facts I'd like too see changed/taken
- into account too. BUt nice you provided this info
- Clint.


There are comment. If you don't inderstand it, that menas that you don't know about which terms there are speech. Look for the airfoil profile. That "wide" also means lower speed for stall as well. As more speedy profile of the wing (190) the more stallable aircraft. Of course if to take just this item for the account with all other parameters similar. Need more explanation?



- I'm really looking forward to the Patch and add-on
- and then we'll see a lot of "western front" or
- "pacific front" only servers popping up !

/i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif I will fly probably Ki-84 myself against any opponent /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif .


- What I think to be annoying is the fact that Oleg
- states the stuff about bad-high-alt performance of
- certain soviet planes. Besides the lack of speed in
- the YAK-3 I never saw any kind of performance
- problems with LA-5 and LA-7 guys(turns and energy
- bleed).

All planes begins to turn worse at altitude.
Please make a test of La-7 on 8,000 meters altitude and post it here. Be sure to make it yourself but not by Il-2compare program that is far from reality more at high altitudes curver where the differences in a sim and in that program may be up to 70 km/h if not more


- Furthermore I see YAK-9 becoming more and more
- unpopular and most guys flying YAK-3 or LA series
- but maybe it's only my observation....

Probably that is correct.

- And finally wasn't it already known that the
- high-alt model of IL2FB is not good ? So what's the
- advice he can give the LW whiners ?


I think you think wrongly. FM is one for all altitudes. . But envirounment changes with altitudes and mainly air dencity. So at altitude all maneuvers NEED TO BE gentle on high speed only.If you lost the speed the stall and other bad things begin to happen more early than on low altitude. So to fly on high altitude - need more attention to control. Ask other real pilots about this, if you don't trust me. /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif


- Happy hunting...
-
-
-
-
http://www.hell-hounds.de/sigs/gotcha.jpg
-
-----------------------------------------
- Disclaimer:
- No forward view was obscured during the creation of
- this post...
-----------------------------------------



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

T_O_A_D
10-31-2003, 03:33 PM
I really like seeing Oleg in here.


He has some free time, I would assume.

Assuming that, I would say the patch is about ready /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Good to see ya old boy!

<Left>
131st_VFW_CO_Toad (http://www.geocities.com/vfw_131st/index.htm)

<Left>
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif MY Track IR Fix read the whole thread (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_ts&id=zwqtg)


<Center>http://home.mchsi.com/~131st_vfw/Mad_toad.jpg </a>
<font size="1" color="black">After eating an entire bull, a mountain
lion felt so good he started roaring. He kept it up until a
hunter came along and shot him...
The moral: when you're full of bull, keep your mouth shut!</font>
<font size="0" color="#59626B">

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 03:46 PM
Intersting why I prefer all Bf-109s (year by year) and do not fly Yaks... Maybe becasue I can't them catch? If you lost the speed then really posible such thing. Yaks accelerates better on low speeds... Even Yak-1.

As for the sound on 800 meters. As I think we found the way to do not damage the sound and make all happy. Of course there are not guarantie for other than SB cards that are more simple or use more simplest drivers and don't use hardware accelerations.


JaBo_HH--Gotcha wrote:
- @OLEG: thx for you finally coming here and give us
- an answer and your opinion on this.
-
- I think the problem with the people here that feel
- bias is a culmination of factors which add up in a
- unpleasent way.
-
- I fly FW190 all the time so I spare you my complains
- about the View.
-
- But to sum up. Applying real time tactics included
- Bounce.
- (surprise).
- In FB Bounce is impossible. Even if we turn off
- external views, Icons and all this kids-arcade-stuff
- one can hear the enemy up to 800 meters away.
- This means that you fly as follow:
-
- If (hear_sound)
- {
- make hard horizontal turn to r/l;
- }
-
- The guy doing the bounce (if doing Boom and zoom)
- has superior speed and has next to NO chance in
- turning into the enemy and do a firing solution. So
- he breaks off and zooms out. Now the Bounced pilot
- simply follows him and keeps his eyes on him. he
- doesn't need to shoot. He already made him useless.
- If he'd at least pay for his folly to let somebody
- sneak on his six it would be much better...
-
- Then one factor is G-Load. With all respect to your
- sources and your work the G-Load thing IS a factor
- and doesn't seem to be reflected properly. Since
- low-speed turning/fighting is not to be used (which
- is ok as we're not in WW1) you can't do High-speed
- turning either since you black out faster although
- you'd normally have a certain degree of advantage
- due to the construction. This results in the othe
- rguy doing a better turn, with lower speed and
- simply kill you. (we've done plenty of trilas of YAK
- vs. any LW fighter and you best corner velocity to
- prove this. Blue blacks out, bleeds more speed, and
- the red-guy drinks a cup of coffee while following
- suit..)
-
- Of course this is a home sim, but these above
- mentioned factors combined with the high-alt FM and
- various other stuff mentioned by others make flying
- Axis planes highly unenjoyable. I simply have NO
- PROBLEM with knowing yaks /Las turing better
- whatever as long as I know I can use my chances.
- Right now you need a lot of luck to have this chance
- though and the guy flying the RED ones must be
- a) deaf
- b) a real Beginner
- to get him down. (Our squad has some success with
- team tactics however, but this again relies on
- various other facts.)
-
- This makes flying Planes that simply turn and Burn
- very easy and flying BnZ rather frustrating.
- Teamtactics are a fine thing but the two above
- mentioned factors (Sound issue and Black-out
- together with various other issues make it far to
- easy to spoil "axis" tactics by simply doing the
- X-Wing turn (point your canopy to the enemy and PULL
- ).
-
- Good Hunting !
-
- http://www.hell-hounds.de/sigs/gotcha.jpg
-
-----------------------------------------
- Disclaimer:
- No forward view was obscured during the creation of
- this post...
-----------------------------------------
-
- Message Edited on 10/31/03 02:04PM by
- JaBo_HH--Gotcha



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 04:13 PM
T_O_A_D wrote:
- I really like seeing Oleg in here.
-
-
- He has some free time, I would assume.
-
- Assuming that, I would say the patch is about ready
- /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
- Good to see ya old boy!
-
I think he came down here to finally clean the house and silence the whiners for good.
It's a blessing I say

http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/tests/damned/reincarnation.jpg (http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/tests/damned/)
Are you damned? (http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/tests/damned/)
<

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 04:34 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- Second, the dive of last Yaks and La-7 is done worse
- than real due to such type of demands. Yes due to
- such type of demands..... Need even more worse?
- Really?
-

eh?!.......sorry,but I'm a little bit disappointed. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
I believed that Oleg always sticked with the authentic documents regardless of such demands..........hmm.....
Oleg, will you change FM & DM whenever some people request regardless of real data? ..........errr....maybe, I will start whining. I really want to do it though. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

------------------------------------
"Heaven Shall Burn...When We Are Gathered"


Message Edited on 10/31/0303:37PM by Flying_Marduk

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 04:54 PM
All I have to say

Oleg you have provided me with Many - Many hours of entertainment - although my wife is not happy with this -

Kudos - Keep up the great work, I for one was not in WW2 so I can't complain about any of the FM as I am not fortunate enough to actually fly one of these birds -

But I am sure, from the post, most of these guys have either flown in WW2 or own several of these planes and fly them daily...

I guess I am just a virtual flyer only - oh well

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 05:04 PM
ladoga wrote:
-
- Just please read these:
- <a
- href="http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/
- bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=004876"
- target=_blank>http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims
- /boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=00
- 4876</a>
-
- <a
- href="http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/
- bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=004181"
- target=_blank>http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims
- /boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=00
- 4181</a>
-
-

And what? Do you think that he is right? Using simple calculation? Wrong number (but not different _numbers_ for different Yaks) for Cl max for Yaks that should be 1,3 to 1.4, but not 1.0 as _HE THINKING_ in mind...

Do you know why he do not post my answer for his private message.

Ladoga.... Read my post there with more attention. And if you don't understand some terms but read just his output and you can't operate with them then please don't repeat wrong things.

Please be sure, that the curves that are in some other sims do not define the behaviour of plane in air. These _curves could define the flight of the stone in air_ as well. That is right. But FM as a term that is far from that (far from the flight of the stone defined by curves). Its a beghaviour of the plane (any) in complex envirounment that defines not only by curves but by thouthands more paramenters. I would be glad if you will understand the terms of FM and differences between tunings of speeds and climbs and general FM. That are VERY different things.


And as you like German tests: please take in account the German test of so called "La-5FN" report about restored from a crashed aircraft with more precise, if you call you specialist(that is easy visible from the text and photos of that report):

- They had La-5F, it is easy visible just when you look for airintake for carburater that FN hadn't the same... That means that the engine there is ASh-82F without direct injection of fuel that became available on ASh-82FN as a copy of BMW-801 automatc injection control system.
- They wasn't able to use forsaz (boost of engine for maximal performance). Instead of this they tryed to use only second stage of supercharger on low altitude.
- There was missed cowlings of gear (Speed less already on 15 km/h) and they didn't recovered it for the tests.
- they used quickly restored from the crashed aircraft.
- They use German fuel that do not allow to get full power for the engine that works on not worse than 86 octan (96-98 need to be used for ASh-82F and FN) Its similar to back side why many US test shown better performance for German and Japanese aircraft than original manufacture data...

And.... Russian never had the M82FNV engine..... They had just experimental ASh-82FNV where V means "Visotnuy" (for high altitude) and they were not in a series during war....

German tests of some Russian planes is something.... They even hadn't right designations for the planes in LW high command docs till end of the war!....And "La" there everywhere named as "LaGG"..... But in general they
hadn't so great opportunity to grab working and flyable Soviet aircraft except beginning of the war.... There was sepcial order of Stalin for that.... Do not fly over enemy territory (for first years) and destroy aircraft if you land there by mistake or so... And this crashed La-5F is the only one case when they get relatively new type of Russian aircraft for tests, even restored from crashed....








Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 06:17 PM
Hi Oleg!

Thanks for taking your time to repond to this thread!

I think I can understand where the opinions on russian bias is comming from. And IMO it's just a question about ppeople misunderstanding eachother. AFAIK most players fly offline, and the AI russian planes are several times more difficult to beat than the Axis and American fighters. The reason why this is so has been brought up many times before!
If the German and American planes would use Hit'n run and BnZ tactics I'm sure at least 50% of the so called "whiner" posts could be avoided. Everyone that flies online knows that the German fighters are way more dangerous when correct tactics are being applied! And when the russian fighters aren't being flon by the cheating AI, there's no reason to expect any russian bias.
I must say however that I'm a bit puzzled why you decrease the divespeed of the russian planes instead of decreasing their erroneus climbing abilities. The most widely used russian fighter is the Yak-3. I have no problems with it though, performance wise, It was a dangerous opponent in RL so why shouldn't it be in FB. The La-7 on the otherhand brakes apart at very low diving speeds, you say it's because of people whining? Wouldn't it have been better to take 7-8m/sec of its climbrate instead?
Please look at this as constructive critisism. It's hard making ones thoughts come out right in a typed message, at least it is for me!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif So correct me if you think I'm wrong but I don't think that the people who actually take their time finding good and valid historical information should suffer because some less articualate people can't keep their mouth's shut!
Anyways, I'm an IL2 addict, there's no doubt about that, and I'm not the only one for sure. Thanks to IL2 I've come to liking and seeing WW2 fighterplanes in a totally different way! I'm thoroughly grateful that you made such an outstanding product!

See you in the virtual sky!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


<center>


http://members.chello.se/unni/rote3.JPG



'When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!'

</center>

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 06:28 PM
BM357_Disciple wrote:
-
- But I am sure, from the post, most of these guys
- have either flown in WW2 or own several of these
- planes and fly them daily...
-
- I guess I am just a virtual flyer only - oh well
-
-

Thank you for that Joke. Someone deserve it /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 07:03 PM
Hi Oleg!

How about climb rate? You did'nt say nothing about for example climb rate of La7 - 3.5 minutes to 5000 km in FB. Is these correct? How about climb rate Bf F-2,4, Bf G-10, G-14 compare it to La7, La 5 FN, P-39. Russian planes have better climb rate than BF (except K-4, G-2 or maby A/S). I used to make spiral climb and rope a dope in I2 but now in FB it isn't posible http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif Climb rate in russian planes is amazing but uncorrrect with historical data http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 08:16 PM
Hi Kwiatos,

BF109 models past the G2 are marked for substancial changes in 1.2 in terms of engine management/climb/weights/overheat.

This has been mentioned many, many times before.



http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/worker_parasite.jpg

Need help with NewView? Read this thread. (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=yzbcj)

XyZspineZyX
10-31-2003, 11:49 PM
Hi!
I know from one person that in 1.2 La7 STILL UFO!!!
La7 still climb to 5000m in 3.5 mniutes http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

OLEG PLEASE FIX THIS !!!!

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 01:00 AM
Hi Oleg thx for replying ! At least you kept your humor.. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I'd like excuse for maybe saying something wrong but unfortunately I only was able to read Cube's research and everything I know is "you answered him personally" That's fine and I suggest it's kind of you that in case he really made a mistake would not have to face some flattening. But what does this tell me and the others here ? but never mind... I think it's fine you'Re here... really. Even if I hate my BAR in the cockpit http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

OK back on the issue I meant by talking of High G-Performance.

I am solely talking of the position of the pilot in his seat. Nothing else. I am not talking of wing stress. Only the ability of the pilot to withstand high-gs due to position of his seat...
I think it's no coincidence that the brits pointed this out.

About the HIgh alt performance: Well I am was trying numerous things even online asking some people to check where the heck this LA-7 may have disadvantages. I (sitting in the La-7) or rather 3 other guys didn't find any... The guys really did their best but the only thing that killed me was my way to fast downswing.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

BTW: I am happy to hear that you took care of the SOund-Bounce issue. I still think that MOST of this BIAS stuff is a culmination of bad issues mixed with 1 or two real problems.

Happy hunting...

do skorawa


http://www.hell-hounds.de/sigs/gotcha.jpg

----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
No forward view was obscured during the creation of this post...
----------------------------------------

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 01:16 AM
Kwiatos wrote:
- Hi!
- I know from one person that in 1.2 La7 STILL UFO!!!
- La7 still climb to 5000m in 3.5 mniutes /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
-
- OLEG PLEASE FIX THIS !!!!

-
-

Yawn /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

In case anyone is interested, the P39Q-1 and Q-10 are fine fighting machines, and imho well modeled.

The P39-Q10, was the FIRST plane to win the coveted Thompson Trophy in 1946, after the war. It was the plane of choice (or money) of the famous test pilot Tex Johnston.
Now it did have the Allison V-1710-135 P63 engine, and was lightend... but, so were all the Corsairs and P-51's !

I'm sure the Russians flew their P39's closer to the 7300-7500 type weight max, not the 8400 lbs at the upper limit with bombload/extra fuel !

The P39 is nicely modeled in climb and aerodynamics.. and was a proven air superiority fighter ...

Enough whining about the P39 !


http://www.airrace.com/society_of_air_racing_historians.htm

92T1 Tex Jonston-How to prepare for and race (a P39) in the Thompson Trophy Race

http://www.airrace.com/thompson_trophy_story.htm

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p39_23.html




" The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down ": General Chuck Yeager, USAF, describing his first confrontation with a Me262 - - -
" Aggressiveness was a fundamental to success in air-to-air combat and if you ever caught a fighter pilot in a defensive mood you had him licked before you started shooting ": Captain David McCampbell, USN, leading U.S. Navy ace in W.W.II.

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 05:41 AM
The bottom line is some people want real world results in a virtual world... it isnt going to happen. None of us with few eeptions have done more research on the subject than Oleg & the 1C team. You know why? Because we do this for fun. They do it for a living. It is WHAT THEY DO. Not only that...if you factor in as Oleg said processing capabilities, other factors...you dont really think the CPU is concentrating on FMs do you? We want the graphics, we want the sounds,we want the FMs,DMs, AI and we want it all perfect.


Riiiiiiiiiight.

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 07:28 AM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- Please see bellow:
-
-
-
- Harry-Palm wrote:
-- as we all know the iL2 games are all created by
-- russian designers , but these planes are getting way
-- out of hand. you castrate the german planes with
-- easy stalls and limited performance yet give La7s
-- and Yaks the ability to turn on their wingtips and
-- yet dive and climb with 262's.
-
-
- First of all I'm tired of such demands. I'm Russian
- born but my family name says all. For me doesn't
- matter which country origin was a plane. And I fly
- online exlusively 109s. Probably will change for
- Ki-84 later.
-
- Second, the dive of last Yaks and La-7 is done worse
- than real due to such type of demands. Yes due to
- such type of demands..... Need even more worse?
- Really?
-
- Third, Russian planes, especailly Yaks was more easy
- to fly than 109 and FW-190, be sure. And they were
- known as easy handling planes for the novices with
- very low level of experience. And Stall here is one
- of the most known things that in that item listed by
- you planes was known as almost "non-stalling" planes
- comparing say to 109 and especially to 190...
-
- 4th, Turntimes of russian planes really was better
- for most fighter types. So if you don't use German
- tactic then you simply can't win if you are low
- experinced pilot. It seems that you even lower than
- low. Sorry. So better learn more tactic and use real
- advantage of the plane that you selected. German
- pilots were well trained, far much better than
- Russian. In 10 times better! So you demand is here
- due what? Yes due to your low experience.
-
-
- Thats all.
-
- Oleg Maddox
- 1C:Maddox Games
-
-
-
- Oleg Maddox
- 1C:Maddox Games
-

Oleg has put the SMACKDOWN!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif ! I enjoyed that Oleg...I would like to see more of you speaking you mind in the future please.
S~

http://www.angelfire.com/ab4/airplanes/P47_Thunderbolt/P47.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 07:35 AM
-- SMACKDOWN

lol /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 09:40 AM
remember,oleg had say,

43 was the german pilots not better train as the russia

and 44 was the russia better train as the german pilots.

which time was german pilots better train?,
certain not 44.

russia plane could better turn,yes

but certain not sustain 15-16sec with la-5/7 how in game.

Germans had most use g6 43/44

g14 came november 44 jg52 and only few

but with this g6, had she at eastfront much better survival chance as at westfront,

Oleg when you compare real tatik 43/44 eastfront,than use g6.

remember,you had most fly g6/as with mw50, bird that had never see combat eastfront 44


Message Edited on 11/01/0312:21PM by Skalgrim

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 02:34 PM
Bearcat99 wrote:
- The bottom line is some people want real world
- results in a virtual world... We want the graphics,
- we want the sounds,we want the FMs,DMs, AI and we
- want it all perfect.
-
-
-

An accurate observation and indeed unattainable given the limitations of current technology. Curiously though, the one modification I would really like to see in future sims is variability among aircraft of the same type and series. To me, one of the most unrealistic aspect of current flight sims is that each time you spawn an aircraft of a particular type, it performs in exactly the same way as its predecessor.

That is not real. There were always variabilities between the performance of individual aircraft of the same type. Indeed, the performance of any individual aircraft will change over time. Modelling this aspect would really add a further touch of realism - adding a perhaps disconcerting sense of unpredictability that real combat pilots had to face all the time.

This is a wish that will probably remain just a wish for a long time, given that the computing resources required to do this would be considerable, but it is the one feature I really would like see.

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 04:23 PM
Posted by Oleg Maddox
>And as you like German tests: please take in account the
>German test of so called "La-5FN" report about restored from
>a crashed aircraft with more precise, if you call you
>specialist(that is easy visible from the text and photos of
>that report):

Why are you saying me that i like german tests? Who has told you so? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I have referred almost solely on soviet sources. Im not taking any sides here or "liking" any tests as you put it. Im not pro-german nor pro-soviet. And why bother posting about that LA 5F test again? I have not made any claims about that test. Have I? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Most references i've used are russian which you sure would have noticed if you even tried to take a look.

Here's the "german" test i like so much http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
(osince when NII VVS was german or germans use cyrilic font?)
http://www.tilt.clara.net/strat/Page09.jpg


Whatever. GL.

Message Edited on 11/01/0304:10PM by ladoga

ZG77_Nagual
11-01-2003, 06:35 PM
I'll just say this - I've been flying 190s since il2 - I have no complaints about vvs fms.

In fact - with very few exceptions - every time I find myself complaining I do a little more research and am invariably impressed by the quality of this simm.

Just let it go - new books are being written revising the popular american opinion of the p39 - etc. etc.

These guys did absolutely first rate research for this simm. And implemented it masterfully.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 06:58 PM
Wow the thread really becomes interesting when you reply,Oleg./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

"degustibus non disputandum"

<center>http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sig23d.jpg

<center>"Weder Tod noch Teufel!"</font>[/B]</center> (http://www.jzg23.de>[B]<font)

XyZspineZyX
11-01-2003, 08:16 PM
ZG77_Nagual wrote:

"Just let it go"

If anyone has a desire to learn more about how WWII comabat airplanes actually stacked up against each other then a natrual tendency will exist to indentify, measure, judge, evaluate, quantify, inspect, realize, communicate, and debate any and all available information pertaining to that subject.

IL2/FB is a source of information that concerns how WWII combat airplanes stack up.

What purpose is there in discouraging, deriding, denouncing, disparaging, or degrading someones expressed interest in finding out how accurate IL2/FB manages the realtive performance capabilities of WWII combat airplanes?

If the interest is not shared then "let it go"




JG14_Josf

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 12:56 AM
JG14_Josf wrote:
- ZG77_Nagual wrote:
-
- "Just let it go"
-
- If anyone has a desire to learn more about how WWII
- comabat airplanes actually stacked up against each
- other then a natrual tendency will exist to
- indentify, measure, judge, evaluate, quantify,
- inspect, realize, communicate, and debate any and
- all available information pertaining to that
- subject.
-
- IL2/FB is a source of information that concerns how
- WWII combat airplanes stack up.
-
- What purpose is there in discouraging, deriding,
- denouncing, disparaging, or degrading someones
- expressed interest in finding out how accurate
- IL2/FB manages the realtive performance capabilities
- of WWII combat airplanes?
-
- If the interest is not shared then "let it go"
- JG14_Josf

Discussion is great...dialog is absolutely essential.... The problem comes in when you have these people who think they know more than the people who built the sim and did more research than most of us can even imagine. The problem comes in when you have people who havent taken the time to learn the tactics neccessary to win in thier chosen mount or to find the proper way to fly said mount to it's full potential and yet they want to come in here with a bunch of "facts" that dont hold any water.....or "fact" that at the very least leak profusely. When you have people saying really dumb $hit like "You are Russian so why did you make the Russian planes better??!!" or constantly saying things like "You is wrong!!" Mocking the man's lack of command of the English language which after all is NOT his native tounge.... as if to insinuate that he is stupid or something....or when you have people who are so bent on what THEY want from the sim instead of looking at the sim for the gem it is and learning it.....this is the only sim I have ever had to learn. All the others I just got used to and became a killer.... This one I had to learn and am still learning. I am still in middle scholl with this sim. When I get my PHD in IL2/FB then I guess I can rest.... but till then I just keep on enjoying it. The problem comes in when you have people who think Oleg,1C or UBI owes them something. If there is ONE PERSON who did not get his money's worth from this sim then this person is basically beyond satisfaction and needs to save thier money to take flying lessons. I know I got my $49 worth right out of the box..... Maybe I am a little enthralled because I cam here staright fom CFS1....CFS2 was ok...Warbirds was......ok...Aces High was.....OK.... Sure...FB isnt perfect.......it cant be with the technology we have today...but find one sim...JUST ONE..that matches it.....that even gives it a good run for it's money.... You cant. Maybe in a year or two after the 3rd party folks put more sweat and work into CFS3 it will be on par with FB...but by then BoB will be around the corner...... and most of us will be right there the day it goes on sale getting our copy...or very shortly thereafter.

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron



Message Edited on 11/01/0307:18PM by Bearcat99

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 01:27 AM
They arent that better

IF you still think so just practice!

I can shoot down anything that flies in the BF109E

Know the limitations of your plane and your opponet's plane



<h1 align=center>
<A HREF="http://jointforcescommand.com" TARGET=_blank>
C:\Documents and Settings\Bobby\My Documents\My Pictures\JFC 2.jpg</A>
<font size=-2>
<p align=center>Tank: So what do you need besides a miricle?</p>
<p align=center>Neo: Guns. Lots of Guns</font>
</h1>

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 03:54 AM
"And as you like German tests: please take in account the German test of so called "La-5FN" report about restored from a crashed aircraft with more precise, if you call you specialist(that is easy visible from the text and photos of that report):"


If you're talking about the Rechlin "La-5FN" testings, I must say neither dating the aircraft, nor determining its specific type, is so easy as you might think it is, dear Oleg. Not to mention Lerche specifically, and aggressively points out that the La-5FN he tested, was "combatworthy" in it's status. People have been claiming over and over that Lerche's La-5FN was 'damaged, then restored', but no direct evidence of such claim exists.

Also, most of your opinion, that follows the quoted part, is also subject to rebuttal - things such as the tested WEP status or the determination of the engine type, which is reported as a "FN(V)".


Please refer to discussions at the AH forums, on the La-5FN tested in Rechlin - things aren't really that simple, so you can just lay it all down with an assumption that the Germans had a bad, crippled La-5F and just mistook it for a La-5FN.. duh, those stupid Germans, right?


http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=96545


-----------
Due to pressure from the moderators, the sig returns to..

"It's the machine, not the man." - Materialist, and proud of it!

Message Edited on 11/02/0311:56AM by kweassa

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 05:09 AM
Nobody gives altitude data in their complaints, just "Red-X outflies Blue-Y."


Bearcat predicts::
-- When I get my PHD in IL2/FB then I guess I can rest....

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

hehehe Yough Bear you wanna have some FUN? If you are a "full real" FB Pro with CEM then maybe you could help my amateur testing. No rest for you.

Today I got these non-CEM non-overheat climbrates for La~7 and Bf109K. La has nothing like the claimed 30m/s, unless CEM and overheat will allow La~7 to do better than 26m/s *or* one rounds 26 to 30 (/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif ), which would be technically correct which is why 30 should be written 3.0x10^2 to avoid any confusion regarding significant figures.

Altitude in meters, climbrate at that altitude in m/s....

La~7

0500.... 26
1500.... 24
2500.... 21
3500.... 18
4500.... 15
5500.... 12
6500.... 10.......1.0x10^2 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Bf109K4

0500.... 23
1500.... 25
2500.... 25
3500.... 25
4500.... 24
5500.... 22
6500.... 18


Think about it Bear, test piloting is some real detailed laborious lab work, and what better lab could you work in but a cockpit, not just any cockpit, but an FB cockpit. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif



Message Edited on 11/02/0304:12AM by LEXX_Luthor

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 05:23 AM
WAIT!!! *or* 250km/hr is not best climb speed for La~7.

If so, somebody needs to come out with this.

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 06:08 AM
LEXX_Luthor wrote:

- Bearcat predicts::
--- When I get my PHD in IL2/FB then I guess I can rest....
-
Yough Bear you wanna have some FUN? If
- you are a "full real" FB Pro with CEM then maybe you
- could help my amateur testing. No rest for you.
- Think about it Bear, test piloting is some real
- detailed laborious lab work, and what better lab
- could you work in but a cockpit, not just any
- cockpit, but an FB cockpit.

I am too busy having fun with this sim to be doing tests to prove or disprove the FMs. I could care less. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif I am not a "full real pro" I do use CEM and I dont particularly care for icons.. I just want to have fun and I do...more so with this sim than any other I have ever flown or could have ever imagined short of a holodeck..where I can feel the wind in my face feel the Gs on my body and then when its time for bed shut the program down and get some rest. I have no desire to be a test pilt.... I want to seek and destroy, escort the bombers, support the troops etc..... I leave the testing for the developers of the sim who are paid and far better trained than I to determine whether or not it is right or wrong.

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 06:36 AM
I hear and obear you, but now that I tried it, I recommend you do something similar with one (1) and only one favorite airplane of your choice. Making your own data charts *right or wrong* could give you a new appreciation for your fave FB plane for FB, regardless of how it compares to a World War 2 plane.

Although your fave hasn't been releaced yet. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

ZG77_Nagual
11-02-2003, 06:37 AM
My experience in this simm is that when I run into something that really seems like an anomaly - I do more research - time and time again this has weighed in on the side of Oleg and his team - that is historical tactics work - planes fly the way they should relative to eachother. If you read across a broad range of sources it really seems to me the fms are, for the most part, very close to actuality in relative performance. And in cases where they are not adjustments have been made pretty quickly - along with new planes being thrown in along the way. If anything I should be a luftwhiner - since I fly the 190 online for the most part. But I tell ya - read alot of perspectives on the vvs planes - esp the late ones - these were planes comparable to the ki84 and other late japanese types - really great dogfighters. When I say 'let it go' I'm not saying i think people should give up research - I'm saying they should quit being dogmatic and uninformed about whining. VVS planes were some of the best dogfighters ever built. Other times the simm goes against the 'party line' - The P39 for example - with the right tactics in the right hands was a great dogfighter - because of it's excellent aerodynamics (same principal as the mustang) - it got a bad rap in the pacific because it's pilots were inexperienced and implementing and obsolete air combat doctrine against opponents with superior training and experience in aircraft designed for horizontal fights who were on the offensive. A little research would show you this - no problem. P38 is another example - some say it was a truck - in the pacific pilots where outfighting zeros in it - consistently - the mustang didn't do all that well over there - but it shone in the eu.

So, when I say 'let it go ' I mean let go of your predjudices and do some freakin homework. Try historical tactics and see if they work - form an accurate idea of the relative performance of these planes - read alot of different sources instead of only looking to support your preconceptions.

Good source for balanced views on some of the American and japanese planes in the simm can be found here - for example. http://www.yarchive.net/mil/ really some good stuff

BAsed on what I've read It seemed odd to me that the vvs planes come apart so soon - Oleg has explained that here as a way of artificially leveling the playing field to compensate for the simm environment - I appreciate that as it was a puzzle. I also read somewhere the yak9u had phenomenal acceleration - don't see that here either - but I could be wrong. (yak3 I've heard had a monster climb - not seeing that either - but again - I've not focused on these types and could be wrong)


Like I said - I fly mostly 190s online and I do allright against everything.

Offline I'll fly the a9 vs 8 la7s set to ace - for example - to keep it interesting. Online pilots are, obviously much better that the AI - but I still do fine against vvs planes.

What I don't understand is why people get so whipped up about this stuff - moreover its often people who've done very little real research who just go off on some jag.

Hope that deambiguitizes my view somewhat.



http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg


Message Edited on 11/02/0312:40AM by ZG77_Nagual

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 08:32 AM
Yak3 has moster climb compare g6 perhaps,

they have fight against g6 eastfront,not k4,g6/as with mw50


yak3 4,5min 5000m,is very good but not monster climb,
g2 has same climb without wep

yak9u has compare g6 very good accelerate,

but k4,g6/as have much better accelerate as g6

when compare russia bird,then against german plane that had fight eastfront,it was g6

not a9,dora k4,g6/as(m),they have not 44 fight against russia plane







Message Edited on 11/02/0310:33AM by Skalgrim

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 10:29 AM
Skalgrim, where did you find that FB has La~7 climb rate "30"m/s and under what conditions? Thanx.

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 10:52 AM
Here's how I've reached that 30m/sec climbrate. Full fuel, full WEP. Take off, remain low, when 270km/h is reached, a gentle pull up, maintain 270km/h.

<center>


http://members.chello.se/unni/rote3.JPG



'When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!'

</center>

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 10:58 AM
More data please. What FB settings? If you would post your raw data, that would be helpful. Thanx.

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 11:18 AM
I'll post more when I get back home!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

<center>


http://members.chello.se/unni/rote3.JPG



'When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!'

</center>

ZG77_Nagual
11-02-2003, 02:59 PM
Thanks Skalgrim

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 03:42 PM
The climb was performed over water for a more precise altitude reading. La-7, Full fuel, full ammo, full WEP. Crimean online map was used. Climbspeed 280km/h TAS. 100% prop pitch.

Climbtime achieved.

500m = 17sec

1000m = 34.5sec

2000m = 1.15 radiator 4

3000m = 2.02

4000m = 2.58

<center>


http://members.chello.se/unni/rote3.JPG



'When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!'

</center>

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 06:03 PM
Short test climb time of La7:
- start from airfield, fuel 75%, time start when take off with speed 220 km/h, 110% power, radiator close, climb speed 280-290 km/h,

Time:

- 5000 - 3.5 minutes

NO COMMENT

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 06:21 PM
Right on robban75, that La~7 take~off start great procedure.

100% pitch and ROCKET to 1000m in 30 sec. at 250km/hr.

XyZspineZyX
11-02-2003, 06:30 PM
I'm sorry, 33 seconds to 1000m, giving 30m/s, barring sloppiness at low level pullup.

Sick of editing my posts for sloppy mistakes.

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 09:08 AM
who needs afterburners after all...
LMAO....

I guess this is historically not reproducable... Right ?

http://www.hell-hounds.de/sigs/gotcha.jpg

----------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
No forward view was obscured during the creation of this post...
----------------------------------------

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 09:39 AM
I'm sorry to say but climb Rate of La-7 is 4 min 32 sec on 100% power That fully corresponds to the worstest data I have for the _initial_ series La-7 test reports.
If you test on boost mode - then 3 m 30 sec is very close to correct.
The climb data in a view object menu for Russian planes is done for the continues power climb settings of each aircraft, corresponding to their flight manuals. So it isn't on full possible power for russian planes. Thats is a technical rule that was printed in many docs of VVS.

And if you'll ask Guenter Rall which one Soviet plane was most dangerous - he will name "LaGG-7" (taken from his latest interview) /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif


Kwiatos wrote:
- Hi Oleg!
-
- How about climb rate? You did'nt say nothing about
- for example climb rate of La7 - 3.5 minutes to 5000
- km in FB. Is these correct? How about climb rate Bf
- F-2,4, Bf G-10, G-14 compare it to La7, La 5 FN,
- P-39. Russian planes have better climb rate than BF
- (except K-4, G-2 or maby A/S). I used to make spiral
- climb and rope a dope in I2 but now in FB it isn't
- posible /i/smilies/16x16_robot-sad.gif Climb rate in russian planes is amazing
- but uncorrrect with historical data /i/smilies/16x16_robot-sad.gif
-
-



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 09:41 AM
Look here:


I'm sorry to say but climb Rate of La-7 is 4 min 32 sec on 100% power That fully corresponds to the worstest data I have for the _initial_ series La-7 test reports.
If you test on boost mode - then 3 m 30 sec is very close to correct.
The climb data in a view object menu for Russian planes is done for the continues power climb settings of each aircraft, corresponding to their flight manuals. So it isn't on full possible power for russian planes. Thats is a technical rule that was printed in many docs of VVS.

And if you'll ask Guenter Rall which one Soviet plane was most dangerous - he will name "LaGG-7" (taken from his latest interview)

robban75 wrote:
- The climb was performed over water for a more
- precise altitude reading. La-7, Full fuel, full
- ammo, full WEP. Crimean online map was used.
- Climbspeed 280km/h TAS. 100% prop pitch.
-
- Climbtime achieved.
-
- 500m = 17sec
-
- 1000m = 34.5sec
-
- 2000m = 1.15 radiator 4
-
- 3000m = 2.02
-
- 4000m = 2.58
-
- <center>
-
-
-
- http://members.chello.se/unni/rote3.JPG
-
-
-
- 'When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky
- than good any day!'
-
- </center>



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 10:42 AM
Hi Oleg,

I have some problems with current FM&DM in 1.11 version. Problems that are found on either sides, VVS and LW.

1. all planes turn too tight, turn radius on most late war fighters (those with stall speed at loaded weight of around 160km/h), planes like 109K, La7, P39Q and so on. La7 had a turn radius in sustained turns of about 300m. What I get now for most planes is less than 250m, most around 220m. This is almost 100m less in turn radius. This is my biggest complain. I can send tracks together with the method for testing if you are interested.

2. DM: engines are too tough, controls too easy to hit. Only a few planes have armoured parts on the cowlings, most of them should be easy to damage with a couple of cannon hits or a few MG rounds from close distance. I'm not saying to break them at once, but once punctured they should loose coolant and oil, and together with those power.

Controls on the other hand are too easy to cut. Many planes can loose elevator with a single MG hit. This is not accurate. Even with 10 MG round on a control surface, the chances to cut the linkages are very small. Nevertheless shrapnel from a cannon hit on a control surface, should have much better chances to cut the cables/rods. Basic idea is, keep the current controls damage model for cannon hits only (and for special cases in which we have many MG hits on the same control).

3. FM&DM: Please limit the evasive maneuvers of the heavy bombers. I saw Pe-8 doing full rolls and tail slides when attacked. It looks very unrealistic. Also bomber gunners are too accurate at 90 degrees deflection shooting (if it can be called that way): I pass at high speed (over 650kmh) and more than 200m to avoid the bomber I attacked and I often get shot by waist gunners. Normaly they should not be able to track me, because they see me too little time, still they hit me the moment I am (already) parallel with the bomber.

Also since the 1.11 patch the bombers seem to hit most of the time the zone under the nose of the attacking fighter. For most fighters this means nothing, but for Bf-109 is a hit in the oil cooler. It will be very nice if the hits would spread over a larger area, like in reality.

A panic function for the bomber gunners will be very nice too. If there are hits (especially cannon shells) next to a gunner, he should stop firing in that particular pass, even if he wasn't hit, then resume firing on the next fighter attack. And the rear gunners for attack planes and two seat fighters should not be accurate if the pilot is maneuvering hard. It's next to impossible to move the guns to the apropriate deflection angle under heavy G-load.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 11/03/0305:55AM by Huckebein_FW

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 11:05 AM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- I'm sorry to say but climb Rate of La-7 is 4 min 32
- sec on 100% power That fully corresponds to the
- worstest data I have for the _initial_ series La-7
- test reports.
- If you test on boost mode - then 3 m 30 sec is very
- close to correct.

Mr Maddox , allow me not to agree with You. I really respect yours and your team knowledge, but will dare to post some more data on La planes series...

<table height="294" border="1">
<col width="64" style="width:48pt">
<col width="179" style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:6546;width:134pt">
<col width="111" style="mso-width-source:userset;mso-width-alt:4059;width:83pt">
<col width="64" span="3" style="width:48pt">
<tr height="18" style="mso-height-source:userset;height:13.5pt">
<td height="40" class="xl25" width="64" style="width: 48pt">Produced</td>
<td class="xl25" width="179" style="width: 134pt" height="40">Plane</td>
<td class="xl25" width="111" style="width: 83pt" height="40">Serial Number</td>
<td class="xl25" width="64" style="width: 48pt" height="40">Max Speed</td>
<td class="xl26" width="64" style="width: 48pt" height="40">Max Speed/Alt</td>
<td class="xl25" width="64" style="width: 48pt" height="40">Climb to</td>
</tr>
<tr height="18" style="mso-height-source:userset;height:13.5pt">
<td height="21" class="xl25">Year</td>
<td class="xl25" height="21">Plane</td>
<td class="xl25" x:str="Serial " height="21">Serial</td>
<td class="xl25" height="21">Sea level</td>
<td class="xl26" height="21">km/h /meters</td>
<td class="xl26" height="21">5000/min</td>
</tr>
<tr height="18" style="mso-height-source:userset;height:13.5pt">
<td height="21" align="right" x:num>1943</td>
<td height="21">La-5</td>
<td height="21"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>N 39213047ӝ</td>
<td align="right" x:num height="21">560</td>
<td class="xl24" x:num height="21">600</td>
<td align="right" x:num="5.5" height="21">5,5</td>
</tr>
<tr height="18" style="mso-height-source:userset;height:13.5pt">
<td height="21" align="right" x:num>1943</td>
<td height="21">La-5 Œ-82 F</td>
<td height="21">N 39213718 ӝ</td>
<td align="right" x:num height="21">550</td>
<td class="xl24" x:num height="21">595</td>
<td align="right" x:num height="21">6</td>
</tr>
<tr height="18" style="mso-height-source:userset;height:13.5pt">
<td height="21" align="right" x:num>1943</td>
<td height="21">La--5 FN</td>
<td height="21"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>N 39210531</td>
<td align="right" x:num height="21">572</td>
<td class="xl24" height="21">625 / 6200</td>
<td align="right" x:num="5.3" height="21">5,3</td>
</tr>
<tr height="18" style="mso-height-source:userset;height:13.5pt">
<td height="21" align="right" x:num>1943</td>
<td height="21">La-5 FN</td>
<td height="21"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </span>N 39210540</td>
<td align="right" x:num height="21">570</td>
<td class="xl24" height="21">636 / 6200</td>
<td align="right" x:num="5.3" height="21">5,3</td>
</tr>
<tr height="18" style="mso-height-source:userset;height:13.5pt">
<td height="21" align="right" x:num>1943</td>
<td height="21">La-5F</td>
<td height="21">N 39213973</td>
<td align="right" x:num height="21">552</td>
<td class="xl24" x:num height="21">593</td>
<td align="right" x:num="5.6" height="21">5,6</td>
</tr>
</table>

16 ¿ 1944 ¤ ç . * ÷ ü*¨ª 7- . ³¯? â¥*¨¿ *€ Ӛ.. €¥ª¥¥â ¯¨ ¯¨ü ˜ µ³?¨*³.
¯? âª
¥?¯?¨¿²¨¿µ ¯ ³³÷¸¥*¨ ¥²*µ ª ÷¥²â ¥²
ӹ€-7 ²? €˜-82ӝ
¥² ӹ -7 ²? €˜-82ӝ, ¯?¸¥¤¸¨é . ¨¯² *¨¿ â ´¥â? ¥- ?²¥ .. ⠍ˆˆ ӚӚ, ¯ª ç ¥¤³¨¥ ¥²*¥ ¤ **¥:

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt"><ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
<table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="border-collapse:collapse;
mso-table-layout-alt:fixed;mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<tr>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">Œ ª¨ ü*³
?¨ç*² ü*³
ª?²ü <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"> <span lang="RU" style="font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt"><ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">³ 票
¯?¨ ª=1015<ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">597 ª/÷ <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">*
¯¥?âé
? *¨¶¥
â²*²¨
3250 <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">670 ª/÷ <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">*
â²?é
? *¨¶¥
â²*²¨
6000 <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">680 ª/÷ <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">*
â²¥ 5000 <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">661 ª/÷ <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">Ӛ?¥¿
* á?
â² 5000 <ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
<td width="376" valign="top" style="width:281.8pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="RU" style="font-size:
8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt">4,45 ¨*.<ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</ohttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_razz.gif>
</span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>


During the period April 1945 La7 serial No.452132-76 underwent production test trials at the NII-VVS. Below is some of the data from those tests
Maximum sustained climb rates
<table cellSpacing="1" cellPadding="1" width="100%" border="1">
<tbody>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">Height</td>
<td align="middle" colSpan="2">Time</td>
<td align="middle" colSpan="2">Climb rate m/s</td>
<td align="middle">Speed</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">Metres</td>
<td align="middle">@ 2400 rpm</td>
<td align="middle">@ 2500 rpm</td>
<td align="middle">@ 2400 rpm</td>
<td align="middle">@ 2500 rpm</td>
<td align="middle">km/h</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">0</td>
<td align="middle">0</td>
<td align="middle">0</td>
<td align="middle">20</td>
<td align="middle">24.2</td>
<td align="middle">264</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">1000</td>
<td align="middle">0.85</td>
<td align="middle">0.65</td>
<td align="middle">20</td>
<td align="middle">24.2</td>
<td align="middle">259</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">1600</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">1</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">24.2</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">2000</td>
<td align="middle">1.70</td>
<td align="middle">1.3</td>
<td align="middle">20</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">253</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">2650</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">20</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">3000</td>
<td align="middle">2.60</td>
<td align="middle">2.2</td>
<td align="middle">18.6</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">246</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">4000</td>
<td align="middle">3.55</td>
<td align="middle">3.2</td>
<td align="middle">15</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">239</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">5000</td>
<td align="middle">4.65</td>
<td align="middle">4.3</td>
<td align="middle">15</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">232</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">5100</td>
<td align="middle">4.75</td>
<td align="middle">4.4</td>
<td align="middle">15</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">6000</td>
<td align="middle">5.9</td>
<td align="middle">5.45</td>
<td align="middle">12.7</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">224</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">7000</td>
<td align="middle">7.4</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">10.2</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">214</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">8000</td>
<td align="middle">9.3</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">7.6</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">204</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">9000</td>
<td align="middle">12.0</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">5</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">189</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">10000</td>
<td align="middle">16.6</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">2.4</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">166</td>
</tr>
<tr vAlign="top">
<td align="middle">10750</td>
<td align="middle">26.0</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">0.5</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
<td align="middle">-</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>



I have no data that confirm that La-7 could climb to 5000 meters in less than 4 minutes.

At the same time soviet tests of captured Bf-109G4 showed that it climbed to 5000m in 4,4 minutes. (I'm at work now but can provide you the serial number of that captured plane)

Concerning the FM in the latest patch especially climb rates I can say that there are some impressive bugs. Now in the game La-5FN can easily outclimb Bf-109G6, and when it comes to La-7 you feel like Bf-109G6 is missing some 300hp..

In fact Bf-109G6 could be slightly outclimbed only by Yak-3, La-7 and Bf-109G6 had the about the same climb performance.
And no soviet plane could reach K4 in climb...
I hope you know about this and have fixed it in the upcomming patch...

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 11:09 AM
"1. all planes turn too tight, turn radius on most late war fighters"


I agree with that. And it's not a "blue-red" question (biais theory is wrong), I would prefer that all aircrafts would fly with larger turn rates, like on real-life camera movies for instance.

It's especially visible with the AI (but also online with "manned" aircrafts), the aircrafts can make too sharp turns and it doesn't look realistic (G limitations for airframes would be also very useful)!

Cheers,

ZG77_Nagual
11-03-2003, 04:27 PM
I think these kinds of very exact figures will be very difficult to model - relative performance is important but perfect exactitude doesn't really exist - even in rl tests.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 06:46 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- I'm sorry to say but climb Rate of La-7 is 4 min 32
- sec on 100% power That fully corresponds to the
- worstest data I have for the _initial_ series La-7
- test reports.
- If you test on boost mode - then 3 m 30 sec is very
- close to correct.
- The climb data in a view object menu for Russian
- planes is done for the continues power climb
- settings of each aircraft, corresponding to their
- flight manuals. So it isn't on full possible power
- for russian planes. Thats is a technical rule that
- was printed in many docs of VVS.
-
- And if you'll ask Guenter Rall which one Soviet
- plane was most dangerous - he will name "LaGG-7"
- (taken from his latest interview) /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif



With all due respect, and I don't want to falme you /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif . But: What are your "worsest" data???

3:30 to 5000m is 23,8m/s average with Forsazh. 23,8m/s!!! Even in the russian TsAGI Charts the initialclimb isn't that high (23m/s). On SimHQ Cube also posted something about climbs... IIRC he had data which had 24 or even 24,5m/s. But that's MAX for sure.

http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/steig44.jpg


So a serious question /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif : What data do you have??? (because your worst data seems to be better than mine) Also notice on the chart that there's a second curve below 3000m right of the main climb curve of the La-7. It's Forsazh standing there which is full power.

So average to 5000m is rather 18m/s then with Forsazh and 16m/s without that boose. That makes 4:37 with Forsazh (4:32 is the value I've in mind, so it's quite accurate) and 5:12 without Forsazh.

I also might add: http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/Perform.html
"Minimum climb time to 5000m (Nom/WEP) 4.7 [La-5FN] / - mins 4.65/ 4.3mins [La-7]
Climb rate at sea level (Nom/WEP) 18 /23 km/h [La-7]" (Sure it's a typo there, read m/s. 18km/h are 5m/s /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif )
These times are even a bit better than my roughly readage out of the TsAGI chart. But just a bit.

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 06:49 PM
Ah right, just before someone comes up with the FW-190 curves in that TsAGI chart. Germans tested a captured La-5FN at Rechlin (comparable to Russians testing captured German planes). Top speed on the deck with WEP: 520km/h /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ZG77_Nagual
11-03-2003, 07:01 PM
Willey - that test is not credible due to the la being in very bad shape - haveing crash-landed and been rather shoddily rebuilt - also some ambiquity about whether it was an la5f or la5fn.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 09:08 PM
ZG77_Nagual wrote:
- Willey - that test is not credible due to the la
- being in very bad shape - haveing crash-landed and
- been rather shoddily rebuilt - also some ambiquity
- about whether it was an la5f or la5fn.

That test is credible as much as any other test on captured material. Most of those captured machines had crash landings, were repaired in haste and were flown with improper settings.

You can't dismiss german data on russian planes, then use russian data for german planes, because russian test should be somehow more credible. If we use russian data for german planes turn rates then why not use german data for max speed and climb of the russian planes? That goes also for british and american planes.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
11-03-2003, 11:48 PM
ZG77_Nagual wrote:
- Willey - that test is not credible due to the la
- being in very bad shape - haveing crash-landed and
- been rather shoddily rebuilt - also some ambiquity
- about whether it was an la5f or la5fn.
-

You should read this thread, especially what 'Tilt' has to say.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=96545

http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 04:04 AM
Very interesting reading indeed. Those documents would probably be very welcome to some people here if posted in the clear.

Also I note that while there is some trolling there is no pile of others jumping to support any of it. Much better behaved over there, I wonder how the moderating affects it and how much it's just the clientelle?


Neal

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 11:46 AM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- I'm sorry to say but climb Rate of La-7 is 4 min 32
- sec on 100% power That fully corresponds to the
- worstest data I have for the _initial_ series La-7
- test reports.
- If you test on boost mode - then 3 m 30 sec is very
- close to correct.
- The climb data in a view object menu for Russian
- planes is done for the continues power climb
- settings of each aircraft, corresponding to their
- flight manuals. So it isn't on full possible power
- for russian planes. Thats is a technical rule that
- was printed in many docs of VVS.
-
- And if you'll ask Guenter Rall which one Soviet
- plane was most dangerous - he will name "LaGG-7"


So everyone can see (posts before mine) that La7 climb with full power (2500 RPM) to 5000m in 4.3 minutes - best result. In FB La7 climb much better - 3.5 minutes. I don't know how documents Oleg you have but i my opinion climb of La 5FN and La 7 is too good.

These is true that La 5fn and La7 were very good fighter.
Gunther Rall in interview said:

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/photoreports/guntherrall2003/

"In Russian front Rall respected most the La5FN and La7. He said that especially the La7 was a very mighty opponent and both Lai-s could outspeed his G-6 with ease when he tried to chase them"

And these is correct in FB - La5FN and expecially La7 is very fast and acceleration fighter but Oleg besides these adventages you give La extra bonus - super climb rate.

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 01:13 PM
The first table is from the test of broken series.
It is known and here you didn't post that info why it was tested again these series. Look for the numbers. They are all from one manufacture... But La-5 and then La-7 was in production on 4 manufactures. Why all refers to that info if they don't know anithing about methods of tests in VVS and pressure machine if the plane is broken comparing to manufacture (not design bureau) etalon (from the second table - manufacture etalon, not the design bureau ethalon, which is very different things).

For your sure, the practice in VVS before to take the new series from manufacture in troops there was alwasy selective test of the couple planes in a series (series here means the part of 25-30 aircraft). And if it doesn't match the etalon - then the special comission in NII VVS make the test that to define why it happend. Then is going repressive methods to execute the people who did it (beginning from director of manufacture and going down for the workers).
Do you know it? Do you know what happened after that test (in that table that you posted?)
The following execution had result of correction of the work... Lets again say the serial numbers of aircraft posted in that table are from one the same manufacture of 4 manufactures produced La fighters.


Looking for this my answer above, I will correct La-7 if I will receive track with the climb on NOMINAL power (that are on the tables that you posted) that will be better than 4,5 min to 5.000 m.
Then I would glad to receive track that will show the climb with the time less than 4.0 min on 5.000 on Forsaz working all the time.

Then please send me the track, where La-7 with user onboard can outclimb 109K-4 with user of the same experience. That means Online track with two people.
Please make it on different altitudes. (Befor to send me on my address, please select the persons who like to be involved in that test and please send me finalresult only)


Also.... This looks very strange some time....At least for me... You all(not all really, there are German fans that ask for reality) like to decrease some of Soviet planes, that modeled by your opinion by ideal tech data, but then when I offer to model quality of German planes of 1944-45 - all begins to cry.... But they were soo slowly in reality than its declared by the ideal manufacture curves. Germ pilots recall that on 30+ km/h slowly, overheating.... etc... As well as bad German gaz in the end of war had high octan, but bad really bad output in cilinders.... Its why some foreigner tests of German and Japanese aircraft show beter than original manufacture data /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif
The "Russian" test of 190K-4 that after these my words you may want to post really isn't Russian test. Look for the text in that TZAGI book before to post...There is all described about it. Then I wil post the exactly Russian test of K-4 that to compare. /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif
The FW-190D-9 that doens't match any declared data (even when was captured more than 20 brand new, just from manufacture planes and used fresh gaz with 100 octan, fresh mix of water-methanol.... I think 16 pilots of FW-190 squad formed on Baltic Fleet VVS with the planes and test of NII VVS deserve attention?...isn't it? But we model by ideal data....

Then you tell me about G-4 test... But do you know that in these tests (as well as for G-2 test) the testers in NII VVS removed manufacture build limit for maximal power of engine (it was limited by screw on the most captured and found crashed Bf-109s. The most here is appoximum 95% of 109s that was evaluated in NII VVS and on the fields where they were crashed. The was sepcial team for reserch of crashed planes and for each plane that was evaluated there are description in archive)? So... if there was manufacture build limit comparing to German etalon test then why we don't model that? Is it realistic?

Then.... Test in UK of arrived P-51....
- No one match declared tech data. Speed test was done with theodolits and radars that to get most possible for that time precise data)
- Engines overheating for less than 40 sec on full power...

And UK test is worse than Russian test for lend lease P-51B, that was better in terms of maximal performance comparing to P-51D.... (SU received offically by lend lease program 10 new P-51B for evaluation. For the test use US fuel, that need to be used according docs that was received. SU was receiving the fuel as well for the lend lease planes, if you still don't know it).

So, My question... Lets make all planes flying slowly, climbing worse, it... or say as it 50% used...


About turn times radius. Radius and time depends of intial sutained speed and altitude. So if you compare these items then compare with exact ditis and on exact altitude.

In reality radius and turn time is very relative thing if to do not take in account the plane itself. It will depends of pilot very much, even his feel of prestall conditions. In a sim you can't get this feel by your body... it isn't possible to model, so you, especially at more low speed may make smaller radius of turn. And that do not contradict the aerodynamics and physics.





Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 01:34 PM
A very good link to the La-7 performance - showing charts and test results on after war trials


http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/Perform.html



If anyone at my Funeral has a long face, I'll never speak to him again.
Stan Laurel



EJGr.Ost Kimura

http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gif



Message Edited on 11/04/0301:36PM by KIMURA

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 01:40 PM
Willey, you are worng that they tested on WEP (Forsaz)

If you take the German test of crashed "La-5FN" then take in account, that:

- They had La-5F, it is easy visible just when you look for airintake for carburater that FN hadn't the same... That means that the engine there is ASh-82F without direct injection of fuel that became available on ASh-82FN
as a copy of BMW-801 automatc injection control system.
- They wasn't able to use forsaz (boost of engine for maximal performance or by other words - WEP, where really Forsaz doesn't means WEP in exact western terms!) Instead of this they tryed to use only second stage of supercharger on low altitude. I think it isn't the way they need to test /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif
- There was missed cowlings of gear (slowly on 15 km/h already) and they didn't recovered it for the test.
- They used the German fuel with low octan and quality. Be sure that minimal Octan digit for ASh-82F and FN engines was 86. In VVS troops for these planes used Octan 96 in 1943 and 98-100 in 1944. That really add about 20% more power and stability of engine work.
- they used quickly restored from a crashed aircraft. That tells almost everything.


Reading more that English text (maybe problems with translation from German? /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif ) ... Russians never had the M82FNV engine on La-5 series..... They had just experimental ASh-82FNV where:
"F" - forsirovanny, means added more power comparing to M-82 (renamed in ASh-82 when the new version was build).
"N" - Neposredstvenny vprysk, means direct fuel injection system.
"V" - "Visotnuy", means for high altitude

These engines were created, but they were not in a series during war.... Probably the author took the info from post war license build Chinese engines /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif There were in production ASh-82FNV for some time...But in General there are still in production these enginese and they are used on the rebuild-replica of FW-190A by Flugwerk.de

German tests of some Russian planes is something.... They even hadn't right designations for the planes in LW high command docs till end of the war!....And "La" there everywhere named as "LaGG"..... But in general they
hadn't so great opportunity to grab working Soviet aircraft except beginning of the war.... There was sepcial order of Stalin for that....(Do not land on evemy territory and if its happend - you may die but destroy aircraft). And this crashed La-5F is the only one case when they get relatively new type of Russian aircraft for tests.... Please take it in account - just one test of crashed and not fully restored aircraft.


Willey wrote:
- Ah right, just before someone comes up with the
- FW-190 curves in that TsAGI chart. Germans tested a
- captured La-5FN at Rechlin (comparable to Russians
- testing captured German planes). Top speed on the
- deck with WEP: 520km/h /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 01:44 PM
I don¤t know much about historical LA-7 perfomance, but if the real thing really climbed over 30m/s, the thing was a rocket.. In 1.2beta It climbs even better, My climb goggle went well past 30m/s (I know it only a beta, but surely does not look good for us OKL fliers..)

____________________________________



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/sig3.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 01:51 PM
Yes I recommend to look for that table for La-7. But it isn't post war trials. Its war series trials.
La-7 was changed for fully metalic La-9 right after the war. All La-7s that were still in VVS were presented to Czech and other contries.



KIMURA wrote:
- A very good link to the La-7 performance - showing
- charts and test results on after war trials
-
-
- <a
- href="http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/Perform.
- html"
- target=_blank>http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/
- Perform.html</a>
-
-
-
-
-
- If anyone at my Funeral has a long face, I'll never
- speak to him again.
- Stan Laurel
-
-
-
-
- EJGr.Ost Kimura
-
- <img
- src="http://www.jagdgruppe-ost.de/image/ejgrost.gi
- f">
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Message Edited on 11/04/03 01:36PM by KIMURA



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 02:03 PM
Vipez- wrote:
- I don¤t know much about historical LA-7 perfomance,
- but if the real thing really climbed over 30m/s, the
- thing was a rocket.. In 1.2beta It climbs even
- better, My climb goggle went well past 30m/s (I know
- it only a beta, but surely does not look good for us
- OKL fliers..)
-
-

If that is true, then the La-7 climbed at over 5900f/m.


http://www.thundercycle.com/photos/dropdead2.gif



"Only a dead 'chamber pot' is a good 'chamber pot'!"

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 02:24 PM
"
In reality radius and turn time is very relative thing if to do not take in account the plane itself. It will depends of pilot very much, even his feel of prestall conditions. In a sim you can't get this feel by your body... it isn't possible to model, so you, especially at more low speed may make smaller radius of turn. And that do not contradict the aerodynamics and physics."


Perfectly right and it would be even more perfect with G-limitations for airframes.

Would it be perhaps possible to apply the system used for the G calculation of the blackouts also for airframes breaking under high-G?

This would be cool and would make impossible some manoeuvers impossible in real life but possible in FB, like inverted loops (with trim) at very high speed! Or hard ressource near the ground after a very long dive.

Airframe breaking were rather common in WWII, if an aircraft was flown above its limits!

I'd wish to see my wings leave the aircraft, if I fly like it like a mad monkey /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 02:28 PM
Thank you. And that what many LW fan do not like to hear from Guenter Rall....
But as I told above - I need a track that confirm that we gave such advatage in climb for La-7. Here in team we can't get it confirmed.


Intersting why anybody still do not say that some German planes in 1.2b has greater than should speeds with MW50... Especially K-4 at altitude or P-51D at altitude with the second stage of supercharger that will be in final only auto....


Kwiatos wrote:
-
--
--
-- And if you'll ask Guenter Rall which one Soviet
-- plane was most dangerous - he will name "LaGG-7"
-
-
- So everyone can see (posts before mine) that La7
- climb with full power (2500 RPM) to 5000m in 4.3
- minutes - best result. In FB La7 climb much better -
- 3.5 minutes. I don't know how documents Oleg you
- have but i my opinion climb of La 5FN and La 7 is
- too good.
-
- These is true that La 5fn and La7 were very good
- fighter.
- Gunther Rall in interview said:
-
- <a
- href="http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/photorep
- orts/guntherrall2003/"
- target=_blank>http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/
- photoreports/guntherrall2003/</a>
-
-
- "In Russian front Rall respected most the La5FN and
- La7. He said that especially the La7 was a very
- mighty opponent and both Lai-s could outspeed his
- G-6 with ease when he tried to chase them"
-
- And these is correct in FB - La5FN and expecially
- La7 is very fast and acceleration fighter but Oleg
- besides these adventages you give La extra bonus -
- super climb rate.
-
-
-
-
-



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 02:36 PM
Yes, I read on a Finish site the story of a pilot fearing to lose his wings if he used the trim too fast to get out the dive!

Same story too for the Mustang. Very fast in dive due to its laminar wings, but you better have to be gentle with the stick during the ressource /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 02:40 PM
1. we plan to implemnt new features in a new sim for that.
2. You are wrong that Airframe breaking were rather common in WWII, if an aircraft was flown above its limits!
Let say that it is important For some of aircraft Like P-39A-D (but not later series), P-51 in some cases, very important for Bf-109F series (G-1 had new longeron design of the wing due to structural damage on F series and death of several pilots even in trainig flights)
Instead of this Russian planes had more higher standards for the G-load of airframe even with partially wooden construction, except for the dive maximal speed. Lets say that Pe-2 had 20G limit for sustained (!) G-load of the wing.
And the first modifications that was done for P-39N and up airframe (especially tail part near stabilizer) was boosted consturction due to request of Russian pilots and after trials in TSZAGI on the maximal G-Load. Bell took it all in account and did these changes even on these that was ready to sent aircraft.

And in the normal sharp turn you don't reach stryuctural limits of the not damaged aircraft wing.... Be sure.
It may happen in some cases in dive recover... That is true. And may happen with the damaged longeron of the wing in turn. But the last one thing will be modelled in a new sim BoB as wellas many other things.


CHDT wrote:
- "
- In reality radius and turn time is very relative
- thing if to do not take in account the plane itself.
- It will depends of pilot very much, even his feel of
- prestall conditions. In a sim you can't get this
- feel by your body... it isn't possible to model, so
- you, especially at more low speed may make smaller
- radius of turn. And that do not contradict the
- aerodynamics and physics."
-
-
- Perfectly right and it would be even more perfect
- with G-limitations for airframes.
-
- Would it be perhaps possible to apply the system
- used for the G calculation of the blackouts also for
- airframes breaking under high-G?
-
- This would be cool and would make impossible some
- manoeuvers impossible in real life but possible in
- FB, like inverted loops (with trim) at very high
- speed! Or hard ressource near the ground after a
- very long dive.
-
- Airframe breaking were rather common in WWII, if an
- aircraft was flown above its limits!
-
- I'd wish to see my wings leave the aircraft, if I
- fly like it like a mad monkey /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
- Cheers,
-
-



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 02:51 PM
me wonders more the behaviour of the MW50 system - but, as you said, 1.2 is BETA.
just one test:

fly a 1945 Dora9 - enable MW50 before engine start (i do that because i dodnt know till what powersetting i can enable it without engine damage) - then make a simple flight test with 100% . when you reached the max speed disable MW50 , the plane will accelarate ?!?!?!?!?!?
without MW50 the 45 Dora is around 20-30 km/h faster than with , at 100% , a powersetting in wich the MW50 system should have no influence so far i understand.
(this is my experience in 1000, 6000 and 9000m /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif )

that the K4 ist faster at 9000m without Mw50 at 110% than with - it could be a lacking high alt modell ore because the engine is above its best altitude (VOlldruckh¶he), where the MW50 system had no influence - perhaps you HAD to disable the MW50 system above that alt. and that would be than a good feature !


BUT, if, pls make a chart with the "Volldruckh¶hen" of the different engines /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.jagdgeschwader53.flugzeugwerk.net/diverses/franky.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 02:55 PM
well oleg i suggest you look online at hyperlobby ai do it too offline, can you show us a real wwii guncam clips how that is remotely similair to how planes can in fb avoid move? and its from no stick pressure that lets them do it. I would really like to see it, it wasnt common but did happen where airframes got overstressed, and theres reason they didnt perform such violent manuevers which would "overstress the airframe" Thats why i think realism seems to have went out the window, To me it feels like we are flying in no gravity ever since you increased the glide slope where plane with an engine out can glide across more the half the map and not all planes have stick pressure.

Im not trying to bash you or anything i really enjoy this sim and you deserve alot of credit for the ammount of time and work, speaking to the community. But as many people here its about realism.

Im curious what do you think of some of the manuevers with the snap stalls you dont think it looks ridiculous? Seems your so busy you need time to relax and play the sim online and notice things

<center>http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LS1.txt
Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter</center>

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 03:16 PM
Some increadible manuvers in Online is due the lag factor. It is nothing common with the stress of airframe or aerodynamics sometime. With online lag you may see some time really wird movements.

Some time you may see some too G-loaded AI maneuvers. That is true. But again these (most dive recovering) are out of aircraft damage if not the wing was damaged, but as I told this factor (continues stress especially for the damaged details) will be in use in the next sim for sure as well as many more damage factors. How do you like the idea that flying the same aircraft for a long time in campaign even after repair you may lost the wing in maneuver if the wing longeron was damaged in battle before, then repaired (all in campaign mode) and then after repair you was flying again? /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif It just a part that we plan /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif .



LeadSpitter_ wrote:
- well oleg i suggest you look online at hyperlobby ai
- do it too offline, can you show us a real wwii
- guncam clips how that is remotely similair to how
- planes can in fb avoid move? and its from no stick
- pressure that lets them do it. I would really like
- to see it, it wasnt common but did happen where
- airframes got overstressed, and theres reason they
- didnt perform such violent manuevers which would
- "overstress the airframe" Thats why i think realism
- seems to have went out the window, To me it feels
- like we are flying in no gravity ever since you
- increased the glide slope where plane with an engine
- out can glide across more the half the map and not
- all planes have stick pressure.
-
- Im not trying to bash you or anything i really enjoy
- this sim and you deserve alot of credit for the
- ammount of time and work, speaking to the community.
- But as many people here its about realism.
-
- Im curious what do you think of some of the
- manuevers with the snap stalls you dont think it
- looks ridiculous? Seems your so busy you need time
- to relax and play the sim online and notice things
-
- <center><img
- src="http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LS1.t
- xt">
- Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't.
- (c) Leadspitter</center>



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 03:16 PM
"1. we plan to implemnt new features in a new sim for that."

Great news!!!!! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


For the airframe breakings, I can only speak for the Mustang. I've in fact a very detailed accident investigation report after the crash of a Swiss airforce Mustang and it's shown clearly that the wing may break at 10,7g.

And I think it was rather common for aircrafts of that era and even for later aircrafts. I'm thinking of the Banshee for instance which was a great turner at high altitude, but was limited because of a rear fuselage being able to break at more than 8g's.

Ok, here's the chart, I will send you more scans of this report, which is full of very interesting other charts concerning these limits.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-8/338967/P51wingbreakchart.jpg


Just some words about the crash of this peculiar Swiss Mustang, the J-2008: the pilot in fact flew fast in a dive and came near the ground much too fast. To avoid the crash, he moved the stick too strong with a too much hard trimming. And the left wing broke near the fuselage and jumped on the cockpit, probably killing or wounding the pilot, even before the Mustang touched the ground!!!!

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 03:16 PM
Firstly thanks Oleg M. for yours replays. I glad to see you speak with us about FB http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I must say that I'm not Luftwhiner I like to fly all planes in FB ( maby except bombers http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) I would be happy if FB was close to reality as possible. If some plane has any bug (over- , under- moddeled) i wish if it be corrected. I play I2 and FB since was relased( i miss stall/spin character of I-16 and P-39 in I2 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ) They are the better sim of WW2 has already done. It would be nice if it were even better patch after patch etc.

If we speak about La7 climb time i will do some tracks how i get it to 5000 m in about 3,5 minut on WEP mode (2500 RPM). I make track with normal power (100%) too - but i don't know how time it be. Where I could send my tacks?

I never said that La7 outclimbs K-4 besause there isn't. K-4 is the best climber as it should be (with Mw-50 of course)

- "Intersting why anybody still do not say that some German planes in 1.2b has greater than should speeds with MW50..." - sorry i haven't test mac speed yet but is something is incoorect please fix it before final 1.2


Best regards!

Sorry for my english http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 03:20 PM
"How do you like the idea that flying the same aircraft for a long time in campaign even after repair you may lost the wing in maneuver if the wing longeron was damaged in battle before, then repaired (all in campaign mode) and then after repair you was flying again? It just a part that we plan . "


That's simply GREAT. If this feature is also available in online dogfights, it would be UEBERGREAT. This way, there would be a "plus" for flying an aircraft cleverly /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Cheers,

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 03:33 PM
It will be very useful for the next sim
So my email is mado@1c.ru
(to others please don't sent me any non-important messages to this account. I simply can't read more than 200 messages per day /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif )

CHDT wrote:
- "1. we plan to implemnt new features in a new sim
- for that."
-
- Great news!!!!! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
-
- For the airframe breakings, I can only speak for the
- Mustang. I've in fact a very detailed accident
- investigation report after the crash of a Swiss
- airforce Mustang and it's shown clearly that the
- wing may break at 10,7g.
-
- And I think it was rather common for aircrafts of
- that era and even for later aircrafts. I'm thinking
- of the Banshee for instance which was a great turner
- at high altitude, but was limited because of a rear
- fuselage being able to break at more than 8g's.
-
- Ok, here's the chart, I will send you more scans of
- this report, which is full of very interesting other
- charts concerning these limits.
-
<img
- src="http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-8/338967/
- P51wingbreakchart.jpg">
-
-
- Just some words about the crash of this peculiar
- Swiss Mustang, the J-2008: the pilot in fact flew
- fast in a dive and came near the ground much too
- fast. To avoid the crash, he moved the stick too
- strong with a too much hard trimming. And the left
- wing broke near the fuselage and jumped on the
- cockpit, probably killing or wounding the pilot,
- even before the Mustang touched the ground!!!!
-
- Cheers,
-
-
-
-



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 03:42 PM
Email is il2beta@1c.ru
(to others please don't sent me any non-important messages to this account. I simply can't read more than 200 messages per day )



Kwiatos wrote:
- Firstly thanks Oleg M. for yours replays. I glad to
- see you speak with us about FB /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif
-
- I must say that I'm not Luftwhiner I like to fly
- all planes in FB ( maby except bombers /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif ) I would
- be happy if FB was close to reality as possible. If
- some plane has any bug (over- , under- moddeled) i
- wish if it be corrected. I play I2 and FB since was
- relased( i miss stall/spin character of I-16 and
- P-39 in I2 /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif ) They are the better sim of WW2 has
- already done. It would be nice if it were even
- better patch after patch etc.
-
- If we speak about La7 climb time i will do some
- tracks how i get it to 5000 m in about 3,5 minut on
- WEP mode (2500 RPM). I make track with normal power
- (100%) too - but i don't know how time it be. Where
- I could send my tacks?
-
- I never said that La7 outclimbs K-4 besause there
- isn't. K-4 is the best climber as it should be (with
- Mw-50 of course)
-
-- "Intersting why anybody still do not say that some German planes in 1.2b has greater than should speeds with MW50..." - sorry i haven't test mac speed yet but is something is incoorect please fix it before final 1.2
-
-
- Best regards!
-
- Sorry for my english /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 03:45 PM
I'll send these docs in the next days. You'll see there are many great infos in these charts for instance showing strong differences with different trim settings or fuel tanks capacities! Looking at these charts I understand why it was not advised to make aerobatics with a fully-tanked Mustang /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Cheers,

ZG77_Nagual
11-04-2003, 04:02 PM
Oleg - if you think it is an issue I can send tracks of k-84s taking multiple large calibre hits at solid angles without major damage. I know it is a leaked beta - so no big deal. But this is an extremely sturdy aircraft - in addition to it's other strengths /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Last night I was able to see them consistently keep fight after 3-5 mk108 hits at right angles - likewise the cobras 37mm - unless you hit dead-on amidships. They even appear to bounce off the front glass. Certainly fine with me if it really was that tough - I'll just fly it /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 04:31 PM
its not lag, not warps from the net, lan game, online, offline you can do the same movements which look so silly. I didnt mean to say no planes have 0 stick pressure but seems they dont have much, I just wonder if you notice these things. Btw thanks for responding but its definatly not from lag, I will send you a track from offline and show you how manipulating the snap stall looks from the rear and countering it with opposite snap and very little E bleed

<center>http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LS1.txt
Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter</center>

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 05:35 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- Willey, you are worng that they tested on WEP
- (Forsaz)
-
- If you take the German test of crashed "La-5FN" then
- take in account, that:
-
-- They had La-5F, it is easy visible just when you look for airintake for carburater that FN hadn't the same... That means that the engine there is ASh-82F without direct injection of fuel that became available on ASh-82FN
- as a copy of BMW-801 automatc injection control
- system.

Interesting... I always wondered about that speed. A La-5F is a tad slower than La-5FN, and with some aerodynamic errors + no boost, 520 looks quite right on ground level.

They called it La-5 with M-82FNV.

Don't know, but is it this plane?

http://www.luftarchiv.de/beute/russ2.jpg

http://www.luftarchiv.de/beute/russ7.jpg


^^that one looks like a La-5FN. If they had it, why didn't they test it (and a 5F instead)?

Very vague stuff /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif .

-- They wasn't able to use forsaz (boost of engine for maximal performance or by other words - WEP, where really Forsaz doesn't means WEP in exact western terms!) Instead of this they tryed to use only second stage of supercharger on low altitude. I think it isn't the way they need to test /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif

Hmm about that 2nd charger gear. I already read somewhere that the russians used this as a boost for takeoff for ~30seconds (IIRC, could be longer).... If I try that in FB, I get less power than on 1st gear /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif .

-- There was missed cowlings of gear (slowly on 15 km/h already) and they didn't recovered it for the test.
-- They used the German fuel with low octan and quality. Be sure that minimal Octan digit for ASh-82F and FN engines was 86. In VVS troops for these planes used Octan 96 in 1943 and 98-100 in 1944. That really add about 20% more power and stability of engine work.

I didn't read the english translation, but I have the german test... quite unreadable that scan though, bad resolution. Did they use B4 86 Octan for the test?? There's also C3 93 Octan...

-- they used quickly restored from a crashed aircraft. That tells almost everything.

Right... that opposed to the Russians using brand new Doras and that K-4 (which did 725km/h at 6000m, ~610-620 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif on the deck according to TsAGI chart, with DB-605DC) is quite a difference.

They had just
- experimental ASh-82FNV where:
- "F" - forsirovanny, means added more power comparing
- to M-82 (renamed in ASh-82 when the new version was
- build).
- "N" - Neposredstvenny vprysk, means direct fuel
- injection system.
- "V" - "Visotnuy", means for high altitude

Interesting... thx for that info /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif . So then the La-5 '42 shouldn't have boost (Forsazh, W key in FB /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif ) at all /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif . Always wondered why it wasn't like the later ones. They activate it just by going above 100% throttle, up to 110%. But the '42 La-5 just has 100%, but pressing W activates Forsazh, giving it a performance which is even a tad better than the La-5F's one. So Forsazh is just for La-5F, 5FN and 7 + later models. And N is for La-5FN and La-7.

-
- German tests of some Russian planes is something....
- They even hadn't right designations for the planes
- in LW high command docs till end of the war!....And
- "La" there everywhere named as "LaGG".....

Maybe they just didn't get that Gorbunov and Gudkov weren't in the team anymore /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif . I also wondered what a LaGG-5 was... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif as I saw this defination somewhere.

But in
- general they
- hadn't so great opportunity to grab working Soviet
- aircraft except beginning of the war.... There was
- sepcial order of Stalin for that....(Do not land on
- evemy territory and if its happend - you may die but
- destroy aircraft). And this crashed La-5F is the
- only one case when they get relatively new type of
- Russian aircraft for tests.... Please take it in
- account - just one test of crashed and not fully
- restored aircraft.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif .

And what about the climb times/rates now? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 05:46 PM
Don't forget those guys like RBJ /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif that fly with full up trim. Someone calculated the G load at 700km/h there, and it was well over 20G already. But ppl do those turns at 900 or even more...

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 06:00 PM
ZG77_Nagual wrote:
- Oleg - if you think it is an issue I can send tracks
- of k-84s taking multiple large calibre hits at solid
- angles without major damage. I know it is a leaked
- beta - so no big deal. But this is an extremely
- sturdy aircraft - in addition to it's other
- strengths /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Last night I was able to see
- them consistently keep fight after 3-5 mk108 hits at
- right angles - likewise the cobras 37mm - unless you
- hit dead-on amidships. They even appear to bounce
- off the front glass. Certainly fine with me if it
- really was that tough - I'll just fly it /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
<img
- src="http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.
- jpg">
-


Rgr that Nagual. I noticed the same thing. Not with high calibre weapons, but with 50s. Now, I heard ppl saying the KI-84 would burst in flames with a short burst or something (in game), but that's not what I saw. At first, I thought the Mustang 50cals were undermodelled (similar to the Jug 50s compared to those of the P-40, probably cause of high dispersion), because the first Mustang rides I took were against KI-84s on the Pacific map, and them KI-84 seemed quite tough to inflict fatal damage to (so, no boring leaks http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif, but fire for example). But then, when I first flew missions in the P-51 against 109s and even 190s, I noticed they are a lot more effective than they seem to be against the KI-84.

@Lead: Well, I know what you mean. But on the other hand, you got the other extreme, Warbirds from iEN. I can't comment much on Warbirds 3, but in Warbirds 2 versions, all the a/c seemed very "mushy" on the controlls. It felt like you were in fact flying them "under water", but not in the air. They even had an artificial inertia to all control inputs, higher than it might have been iRL, to reduce "microwarping", which was neccessary back then for a massive multiplayer online flightsim with an older netcode. I don't think this was ideal. It went as far as downsizing magnificent roll advantages some a/c had over others (190 comes to mind). But I guess you mean to correct those planes left here which seem to have no stick pressure, like MiGs and 190 in 1.11. I don't know about 1.2, since I have not flown those particular planes yet.

I wouldn't rely too much on guncam or RL footage though. Since iRL, you have something which is completely ignored in flightsims: The "stomach factor" http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I'm sure, would there be a possibility to connect the players stomach sensations to the flightsim, you would see a lot more smooth flying! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.Yanking the stick around to its maximum limits, left side, right side, within a second, up, down, and pull high Gs again and again and very aprupt, then negG, high G right after - would render most, but the best, RL pilots dazzling and vomiting all over the pit I think. Maybe this was also an advantage of some aces, to have a somewhat higher body tolerance then the next guy. I know a flightsim which plans to model "pilot fatique" in the future. The more and the more long lasting hard maneuvers you pull, the lower goes your G tolerance and ability to apply stick force after a while. Or something like that.

Regards
heartc


=38=OIAE

47|FC=-

Message Edited on 11/04/0305:02PM by Heart_C

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 06:04 PM
Hi!

I make 4 test of climb time La7 and La5FN:

I make 4 tracks:

1 - La7 with 110% (WEP) - climb to 5000m in 3 min.:30 sek., to 6000m in 4:21sek.

2 - La7 with 100% power - climb to 5000m in 3:50 sek, to 6000m in 4:38 sek.

3 - La5FN with 110%(WEP) - climb to 5000m in 4:07 sek, to 6000m in 4:38 sek

4 - La5FN with 100% power - climb to 5000m in 4:26 sek, to 6000m in 5:33 sek.

If someone want i could send these tracks but probably tommorow i will put it on ftp server http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Hmm La5FN climb in FB better in La7 in real http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


"The truth is out there"

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 06:11 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:

- Looking for this my answer above, I will correct
- La-7 if I will receive track with the climb on
- NOMINAL power (that are on the tables that you
- posted) that will be better than 4,5 min to 5.000 m.
-
-
- Then I would glad to receive track that will show
- the climb with the time less than 4.0 min on 5.000
- on Forsaz working all the time.



I send to Oleg Maddox my tracks. I hope in final 1.2 that will be correct http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Cheers

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 06:25 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- Some increadible manuvers in Online is due the lag
- factor. It is nothing common with the stress of
- airframe or aerodynamics sometime. With online lag
- you may see some time really wird movements.
-
- Some time you may see some too G-loaded AI
- maneuvers. That is true. But again these (most dive
- recovering) are out of aircraft damage if not the
- wing was damaged, but as I told this factor
- (continues stress especially for the damaged
- details) will be in use in the next sim for sure as
- well as many more damage factors. How do you like
- the idea that flying the same aircraft for a long
- time in campaign even after repair you may lost the
- wing in maneuver if the wing longeron was damaged in
- battle before, then repaired (all in campaign mode)
- and then after repair you was flying again?

Aircraft with individual character would be incredible. Certainly a first for a sim.

By the way, I hope these discussions do not frustrate you. I enjoy reading them very much and learn a lot from your responses.

--AKD

http://www.flyingpug.com/pugline2.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 06:55 PM
I ll take you by the word Oleg, and if you really do i will never "whine" again.

II/JG54_Zent


Oleg_Maddox wrote:

- Looking for this my answer above, I will correct
- La-7 if I will receive track with the climb on
- NOMINAL power (that are on the tables that you
- posted) that will be better than 4,5 min to 5.000 m.
-
-
- Then I would glad to receive track that will show
- the climb with the time less than 4.0 min on 5.000
- on Forsaz working all the time.

Kwiatos wrote:

Hi!

I make 4 test of climb time La7 and La5FN:

I make 4 tracks:

1 - La7 with 110% (WEP) - climb to 5000m in 3 min.:30 sek., to 6000m in 4:21sek.

2 - La7 with 100% power - climb to 5000m in 3:50 sek, to 6000m in 4:38 sek.

3 - La5FN with 110%(WEP) - climb to 5000m in 4:07 sek, to 6000m in 4:38 sek

4 - La5FN with 100% power - climb to 5000m in 4:26 sek, to 6000m in 5:33 sek.

If someone want i could send these tracks but probably tommorow i will put it on ftp server http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Hmm La5FN climb in FB better in La7 in real http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


"The truth is out there"

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 07:30 PM
and anyone, what are the recommended climb test procedures ? Do i need to measure from takeoff ? Engine running,? Or do i go sealevel 100 % and then up ? 100 % fuel i assume ? Standard weapons or clean plane ?
and finally, we should test 1.11 or 1.2 beta ? (Which i havent yet)

Sorry if those are noobish questions, but i never bothered to do exact measurements, actually online side by side comparing was sufficient to me until now...

Ty in advance,

II/JG54_Zent

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 07:56 PM
Go full fuel, full ammo. Take off, remain as low as you can. When you reach best climbspeed, climb start the timer and maintain the speed. Do the test over water if you can, it give you more precise altitude readings./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Best climb speed varies for every airplane. The Fw 190's best climbspeed is 280km/h, well in RL anyways. For the La-7 I think 270km/h would be better. 270km/h is also the best climbspeed for the Bf-109.

<center>


http://members.chello.se/unni/rote3.JPG



'When it comes to aircombat, I'd rather be lucky than good any day!'

</center>

Message Edited on 11/04/0307:00PM by robban75

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 08:07 PM
Zentaurus wrote:
- and anyone, what are the recommended climb test
- procedures ? Do i need to measure from takeoff ?
- Engine running,? Or do i go sealevel 100 % and then
- up ? 100 % fuel i assume ? Standard weapons or clean
- plane ?
- and finally, we should test 1.11 or 1.2 beta ?
- (Which i havent yet)
-
- Sorry if those are noobish questions, but i never
- bothered to do exact measurements, actually online
- side by side comparing was sufficient to me until
- now...

Wind & Turbulences off, <s>no overheating</s>, CEM on, 100% fuel, default loadout.
Take off, then fly ~260 IAS very low. Then power up, start climbing and stopwatch the times, best is no get all 1000m steps. That's 5 values then for 5000m climb.
You can also watch the climbrate gauge in Lavochkins and get the actual climb rates at every 1000m there.
Alternative procedure may be Take off, and then start stopwatching it as soon as you lift off. But that doesn't really matter because you can accerelate quite well on ground up to 260 or even more, then lift off and you've the same thing as above. If you lift off at 140 it's different, but then you'll have a higher AoA, therefore less acceleration. It's better to run on ground up to 250 at least. So start in midair, but very low.

BTW you'll have to find out where exactly you have to switch to gear 2 on charger. You'll get best results with highest rpm. If it drops, take the other gear. Mix 80% all the time, that's enough and doesn't affect power. Just more heat.

EDIT: overheat has to be on http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I mixed that up with speed tests where I switch it off. (8x time, alt stab, trim for corrections... overheating messes it up there http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.). A climb to 5k takes never more than 8mins in most planes, and they can stand that.

Message Edited on 11/05/0306:16PM by Willey

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 08:34 PM
I do them in this way:
All Full Real but Speedbar and external view enabled,wind off (also no Cockpit is needed at speedtest)
Overheating should be allways on,because some Planes cant climb to 7000m without engine dead.

100%Fuel
Starting from Airfield at Smolenskmap (at 50m heigh)
accelerate at ground to 210km/h and begin to count time at liftoff.

I take time at 3050/5050/7050m

Time for La7 i got in first test was 3:45min (no Change with patchs)

K4----3:06min/5000m

G10---3:45min/5000m

P51---4:13min/5000m

Ki84--4:22min/5000m





-------
Anyone who STATES that .50 cal is puny should STAY IN FRONT of a Browning M2 when it fires.
THEN HE SHOULD TALK !

.50 cals were armament of planes which WON THE WAR ! PERIOD !!

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 08:57 PM
Thx all for test procedure recommendations, i think i will measure from takeoff then.It seems most precise because the speed i have when starting to climb will of course affect climbtime to 5000..if i go 450km/h at sealevel, start timecounter and zoom up then its different compared to if i start climbing with 270...Also its really from 0 to 5000 then, midair 50 m is 50 m...
still i would like to hear from oleg or betatester which is the "official" test method, as i dont want to waste my time only to hear..."well, you would have had to do it so and so in order to be acceptable".

I do really want to take Oleg by his word of adjusting the LA7 if we can proove incredulous climb rate. I wonder though that the cracks at 1:C cant acheive the stated numbers...it seems almost difficult not to get better climb rates then indicated, so i need to know the "rigth" and ultimate procedure.

I wait....

Yours
II/JG54_Zent

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 11:00 PM
I read the thread from over on the Aces high board and it seems very clear that the Germans captured and tested not one but two different La-5's. The first had crashed and was restored, an La-5F, but the second was flown to Reichlen (spelling?) directly after capture with no repairs needed and was reported to be in very good condition by the pilot.
Could photos of one be confused with tests of the other if the other was not known of? The other was reported to be an La-5FN in good condition but whether it was metal winged or wood wings and which plant it was made at (the bad one?) is unsure. The climbs match La-5FN data but top speed was much less, or at least at sea level.
They have people translating the books from German to clear up mistakes in the English translated versions of the same book. It does seem very probable that the evidence exists at least unless it was all just a cook-up to make money?
Perhaps it would be good to check into? The book name and author (the test pilot himself, first person so more accurate yes?) are given in the thread. I have never seen mention of this when the photos of or words about the crashed La-5F are mentioned so I have to think that this other source is unknown to 1C?


Neal

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 11:24 PM
This is GREAT news. Finding a standard method to test.

Overheat or no Overheat? That is the Question.

Also, prop pitch 100%? Mix at 80% always? I think I~16 belches brown smoke with 80% mix at 5km. Not sure though. I can't remember, I am new to the militant radical CEM culture.

I have been using stick to keep climb speed. What about elevator trim--except for planes that have none?

Summer or Winter maps? Time of Day? Does it make a difference?

I would bet turning tests are a Bear compared to climb and speed tests. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Most fun experimental lab to work in is Oleg's cockpits. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-04-2003, 11:50 PM
No overheating?

I am sure they turned that "option" off during the test trails as well just to make it look good on paper so they wouls sell more planes for the war effort.

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 02:01 AM
Ok Mr. Maddox,

i made a track flying with LA7, climbing to 5000 m in about 4:20 with nominal power (100%) from takeoff !!
Settings: everything normal, except no wind, Leningrad map.
That means the track count was started from the motionless engine on ground up to 5000m, it actually falsifies the pure climbing performance because the time to rev up the engine and to accelerate until takeoff is included, still its 4:20.....
I sent the track to you, i call it ZentsLa7to5000nominal.

Are you going to change something as promised ?

Yours,
II/JG54_Zent

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 12:19 PM
HI!

These is link to my track with climb time on La 5FN and La7

http://www.dami.pl/~mazak/records.rar


Nice show!

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 12:43 PM
Ok you win with La-7, becasue you are not pilots you make the climb as it should not buy rules.... But I know that it is possible in a sim comparing to real life more easy...

We did correction for climb time of La-5FN amd La-7. However due to some approximations of the FM we were need to add more weight to the aircraft (by other way destroys much more than makes corect). So also turn time was increased a bit as a following thing of that additional weight... Some 100 kg was added. Its a compromise solution that to do not destroy too much the behaviour of aircraft in principle.


We also decreased durability of I-16 and FW-190. Because these planes were really concrete and we missed it in the past.

We also found another bug - too great reduce of speed due to radiator open drag. It wasn't tuned withe the other tunes. We simply forgot to check it in the past (it possible to forgot something whn you are making hundreds things at once, sorry)

We increased dive speeds for Yak-9U, some of BF-109s, Yak-3, La-7 (La-7 had by mistake the dive limit of speed from LaGG-3 FM....).


I even can't list what we tuned for the final release of version 1.2. It simply increadible work.


Up to release of Expansion pack as separate title we will stay with 1.2 final version and will look for the needs of users.



Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 01:06 PM
Great reply Oleg.

This is the sort of weekly update I like http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Skies Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://www.forgottenskies.com
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 01:20 PM
HI!

Thank you Oleg Maddox. I glad to hear that FM and DM for more planes (not olny La) will be corrected in future patch http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I think that many of us will be happy if FB became more and more realistic with every new patch. For people who love flying in real or in virtual sky FM is very important thing as for me. I belive Oleg and your team will do great work. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Good Luck!!!

"The truth is out there"


Kwiatos

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 01:38 PM
Well, that's just great.

If you ask me ALL planes can climb faster then they should if you don't follow the "rules" of climbing in this game.

So you better add 100kg to all planes to fix it.

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 02:01 PM
Hi Oleg. Thank you for the post.

You said you changed DM for FW190 and I16. Did you change the LaGG DM too? I tried to some things and this plane seems to have some strange DM things. One the one hand It's engine and tail seem to be invulnerable to MG and 15/20mm hits, on the other hand i found out that it explodes at once when you shoot one 20mm straight through the Laggs radiator.

2 things we need in FB:
The 110 and the desert!!!
http://exn.ca/news/images/1999/04/23/19990423-Me110coloursideMAIN.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 02:19 PM
LaGG damage was changed in 1.11. We don't plan to touch this plane anymore.

Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 03:33 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- Ok you win with La-7, becasue you are not pilots you
- make the climb as it should not buy rules.... But I
- know that it is possible in a sim comparing to real
- life more easy...
-
- We did correction for climb time of La-5FN amd La-7.
- However due to some approximations of the FM we were
- need to add more weight to the aircraft (by other
- way destroys much more than makes corect). So also
- turn time was increased a bit as a following thing
- of that additional weight... Some 100 kg was added.
- Its a compromise solution that to do not destroy too
- much the behaviour of aircraft in principle.
-
-
- We also decreased durability of I-16 and FW-190.
- Because these planes were really concrete and we
- missed it in the past.
-
- We also found another bug - too great reduce of
- speed due to radiator open drag. It wasn't tuned
- withe the other tunes. We simply forgot to check it
- in the past (it possible to forgot something whn you
- are making hundreds things at once, sorry)
-
- We increased dive speeds for Yak-9U, some of
- BF-109s, Yak-3, La-7 (La-7 had by mistake the dive
- limit of speed from LaGG-3 FM....).
-
-
- I even can't list what we tuned for the final
- release of version 1.2. It simply increadible work.
-
-
- Up to release of Expansion pack as separate title we
- will stay with 1.2 final version and will look for
- the needs of users.
-
-
-
-
- Oleg Maddox
- 1C:Maddox Games
-

But how about adjusting FW190 max dive speed. It seems to start to break in 900km/h in reality it could go at least 1000km/h before breaking apart!

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 03:42 PM
You don't have to go too far up before 1000kph is over mach 1. You want to say that any prop plane could exceed the sound barrier?


Neal

ZG77_Nagual
11-05-2003, 04:03 PM
Great reply Oleg - and excellent work.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 04:12 PM
ok. i see. thank you for the reply Oleg.

You said you'll model such things like wings falling off after being repaired too often and things like that in BoB. will you model random engine failures or jammed guns too? I mean not only when someone shoots at you but all the time. So it might happen that you fly around and all of a sudden you lose oil or so. That'd be funny. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

2 things we need in FB:
The 110 and the desert!!!
http://exn.ca/news/images/1999/04/23/19990423-Me110coloursideMAIN.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 04:19 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- LaGG damage was changed in 1.11. We don't plan to
- touch this plane anymore.
-
- Oleg Maddox
- 1C:Maddox Games
-

- We also decreased durability of I-16 and FW-190.
- Because these planes were really concrete and
- we missed it in the past.



Are you sure about that? I have posted tracks to this forum where I make 6 I-16s explode only with MGs of one BF-109 F-2 (http://home.arcor.de/rayluck/sturmovik/MG_only-BF109F2-I16-6_burn.zip), and another Track where I pump all the MG ammo of a BF-109 F-2 into one LaGG without any effect (http://home.arcor.de/rayluck/sturmovik/MG_only-BF109F2-LaGG341-useless.zip). All in FB 1.11.

I-16 damage model certainly was changed already after 1.0 -- it was concrete in 1.0 like LaGG is still in 1.11. Can't imagine that LaGG was changed in 1.11. Maybe already done earlier for 1.2?




---------------
http://home.arcor.de/rayluck/sturmovik/stulogo-banner.jpg (http://home.arcor.de/rayluck/sturmovik/)

Kampagne für IL-2 1.2: I-16 - Kampf im Kaukasus (Deutsch) (http://home.arcor.de/rayluck/sturmovik/kampagne.html)

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 06:23 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- Ok you win with La-7, becasue you are not pilots you
- make the climb as it should not buy rules.... But I
- know that it is possible in a sim comparing to real
- life more easy...
-
- We did correction for climb time of La-5FN amd La-7.
- However due to some approximations of the FM we were
- need to add more weight to the aircraft (by other
- way destroys much more than makes corect). So also
- turn time was increased a bit as a following thing
- of that additional weight... Some 100 kg was added.
- Its a compromise solution that to do not destroy too
- much the behaviour of aircraft in principle.
-
-
- We also decreased durability of I-16 and FW-190.
- Because these planes were really concrete and we
- missed it in the past.
-
- We also found another bug - too great reduce of
- speed due to radiator open drag. It wasn't tuned
- withe the other tunes. We simply forgot to check it
- in the past (it possible to forgot something whn you
- are making hundreds things at once, sorry)
-
- We increased dive speeds for Yak-9U, some of
- BF-109s, Yak-3, La-7 (La-7 had by mistake the dive
- limit of speed from LaGG-3 FM....).
-
-
- I even can't list what we tuned for the final
- release of version 1.2. It simply increadible work.
-
-
- Up to release of Expansion pack as separate title we
- will stay with 1.2 final version and will look for
- the needs of users.

That's quite a development update! For moste ppl more valuable than just screen shots /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif . Great news BTW. And don't forget La-5 and La-5F, not that they'll climb better than 5FN and 7 then /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif . Also that radiator thing is a great heads up /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif . Nice to hear the Yak-9U can dive faster again... it could do over 900 IAS in 1.0, but all Yak-9 series could do so. The 9U should be better because of metal construction. That's the weak point of wooden planes.

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 06:32 PM
Reozil wrote:
-
- But how about adjusting FW190 max dive speed. It
- seems to start to break in 900km/h in reality it
- could go at least 1000km/h before breaking apart!

TAS / IAS /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif . Over 1000km/h is possible... try reaching 900 IAS in Dora at higher altitudes...

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 06:35 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- Second, the dive of last Yaks and La-7 is done worse
- than real due to such type of demands. Yes due to
- such type of demands..... Need even more worse?
- Really?
-
- Oleg Maddox
- 1C:Maddox Games


Hi Oleg!

I think this is the most important thing you say here. And many people will agree.

I am disappointed that you move away from reality due to demands.

Do you really mean this?

The biggest strength of Il-2 and FB has been that you try to simulate reality and not just make "playability".

This will be very sad for me if you really mean it. It will be like the shattering of a dream... I know we can never REACH perfection, but at least it is important to try...

Please reply to this important point.

(And if you have changed "reality" due to demands, PLEASE don't do it again ever!!)

Freycinet
<center>
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/delfin/SD/2001/flight/spitbf109/ellehammer-crop-for-il2-forum-reduced.jpg</center>
<center>My Il-2 web-site:</center><center><BIG>"Za Rodinu!"</BIG> (http://perso.wanadoo.fr/delfin/SD/2001/flight/il-2/index.htm)</center>

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 06:51 PM
Hooray !! Hooray !! Hooray !! I will like the LA+100 kg more ! More plane and less UFO..
So, you dont need any more tracks...hum ? I just got the hang of making tests...

ok, no more whining...promised...fair deal...


Yours,
II/JG54_Zent

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 07:21 PM
Hi,

Thank you Oleg and good tester like Kwiatos

Now I feel IL2FB will become simulation closer and closer


I hope after 1.2 patch release number of friends in HL will hit 1,000 at hot time http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
and this credit will support to BOB project too


and ladies at home will be mad.. LOL

S!

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 07:45 PM
Thanks for the insight on the update and magnificent work on IL2 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Can't wait until 1.2 comes officially out, but wouln't mind waiting longer if it will be better. Just don't overcook it... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Jeroen

================

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/JeroentjeNt/r90S.jpg

--== The Fw-190s 801 engine ain't the only BMW that flies!==--

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 08:23 PM
Well I am glad that all foreign planes get best performance in this game.

Once the Spitfires arrive not many people will like to fly the medium performance crippled Russian planes.

Then we will have the English and American planes to do some serious hun hunting, until they start to whine about the other Allied planes being too good for their taste......oh wait, they already whine about them as well.

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 08:28 PM
the medium performance crippled russian planes?

mmmmh.... why don't you go read some books about ww2 planes? always better to gather some infos before posting such statements....



<center><img src=http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/sighoar.jpg></center>

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 08:34 PM
Why don't you read Oleg's posts first?

He clearly said that they Model ALL Russian aircraft with field data and medium performance data and the rest of the planes with BEST performance data, but somehow it's still not good enough for the luftwhiners.

So yes, I can make this statement without reading books about it first.

So the other Allied planes will also be modelled with best performance data as well. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

ZG77_Nagual
11-05-2003, 08:42 PM
Oleg has mentioned la7 and yak9u dive is being increased - while climb is slightly reduced - this will make these planes MORE competitive - not less. I agree not to undermodel because of complaining. Maybe everyone should stop complaining without facts?

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/whiner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 09:35 PM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:

- We also decreased durability of I-16 and FW-190.
- Because these planes were really concrete and we
- missed it in the past.


Thanks Oleg!! The durability of the I-16 is an issue that has always been bugging me. Those I-16 are hard to bring down! I'm glad that you're looking into this.

Thanks for taking the time and posting here. It is good to hear your oppinion and to know what is on the make for the next add ons and the new sim.


GATO_LOCO

XyZspineZyX
11-05-2003, 09:43 PM
GREAT posts oleg, thanks ! i was skeptical when IL-2 first came out but now its FABULOUS! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif and the new beta is the best one yet! thanks for the new planes

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of the 11 time Champions Team AFJ. 6 Years Flying. Semper Invictus! <img src ="http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_120_1065509047.jpg">

XyZspineZyX
11-06-2003, 01:43 AM
Its good to see that many people here want more and more realism in FB http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif That would be nice if Oleg M. see these fact too.

I think that 1.2b is much better than 1.11. I hope 1.2 final will be much better than 1.2b http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I still miss to stall/spin character of P-39 and I-16 like was in I2. Now in FB I could fly Cobra with combat flaps like the hell don't care to much about stall/spin. I must much more carefully fly in P-40 than P-39. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
Even A. Pokryszkin said that when fly in P-39 you must be much carefully in high acrobation expecialy deep turnes, the top of the loop and combat reverse because if you dont be carefully P-39 get spin and sometimes flat spin.

I-16 as i read was difficult plane to fly and Russian pilot said: if you can fly I-16 you can fly everything http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Of course both P-39 and I-16 was good plane and very dangerous in the hand of experience pilot but needed carefully in flight combat acrobation.

Oleg if i'm wrong please correct me.


"The truth is out there"


Salute!

XyZspineZyX
11-06-2003, 05:22 AM
Cappadocian_317 wrote:
- Well I am glad that all foreign planes get best
- performance in this game.
-
- Once the Spitfires arrive not many people will like
- to fly the medium performance crippled Russian
- planes.
-
- Then we will have the English and American planes to
- do some serious hun hunting, until they start to
- whine about the other Allied planes being too good
- for their taste......oh wait, they already whine
- about them as well.
-

He also said that if people sent him tracks of La7's climbing to 5km in less than 4 1/2 mins then he would consider slowing the climb. They did. He is saying they don't fly the same way as real pilots do but okay he made the change. Since this is a SIM and not REAL then getting performance in not exactly the way as was real is to be expected.

Perhaps all planes should be checked the same way? Oh! Now I think about BuzzSaws climb tests that "proved" the 109's are okay (it was 109's wasn't it?) and the 109's will not be changed even though by correct procedures they climb way too slow... what was your problem?

I've seen post after post about La7 sustained 360 turns being way too fast at is it 15 seconds? Now a bit slower. Is that crippling the Russian plane or bringing it closer to real?

Dive speed and control... the La7 has been weak there and it hurts the use of good tactics. Now 100kg heavier and it is again maybe closer to real by being BETTER and more believable.

Same for the La5FN.

Mustang will be reined in some too. Some people are getting too good speed and send the tracks in.

All planes except Russian go by the BEST numbers? I HOPE NOT! I'm sure there's people here who can pull charts or tables out that Oleg would never even consider! I know about the two FW models from a year 1/2 ago and I hope that's not the rule of how it is. Good numbers from good tests backed up with full documents I can see when Oleg approves but the BEST numbers? ANYWHERE? Please no! Leave that to Micro$oft and the fanboy modders!
I'm sorry but I don't believe all that you imply in that post!


Neal

XyZspineZyX
11-06-2003, 09:30 AM
P-51D is too fast, ok, if that is true then the FW190A5 is too fast as well since it's faster then the P-51D at high alt.

If I recall correctly the P-51D was faster then the FW190A5.

XyZspineZyX
11-06-2003, 11:09 AM
i don`t know about the A5 but the p51 really is too fast in 1.2b.. just check out all the explaining threads about some myths of the p51d...

well.. let`s see the outcome in the 1.2 final...

XyZspineZyX
11-06-2003, 11:21 AM
ZenemyZ wrote:
- i don`t know about the A5 but the p51 really is too
- fast in 1.2b.. just check out all the explaining
- threads about some myths of the p51d...
-
- well.. let`s see the outcome in the 1.2 final...

Read it, and that very same thread also states that the P-51D was faster then the FW190A5 at altitude.

XyZspineZyX
11-06-2003, 01:31 PM
Can you get the FW190-A5 up to, no, over 760kph TAS? Because that's the claim with tracks for the P-51D.


Neal

XyZspineZyX
11-06-2003, 02:58 PM
They must teach me that trick then because I can only reach 672km/h TAS out of the P-51D.

And it's pretty difficult keeping it level without airelon trim, which should be on the P-51D btw.