same mentality as 60 years, again now in il2?

[R4M]

Staga, I really really hope that he meant what you say, but that is not what I understand from that paragraph. Is not that I want to think one thing or the another, as I said ,until yesterday I had really high expectatives put on Il2 and I really thought it was going to rock FM-wise.

But if the designer starts saying that a 109 should roll better than a 190, then my whole expectative comes down.

I know that sometimes what one says is not well understood because language. Has happened lots of times to me. As I say, I really hope its that in this case. <crosses fingers>

[Tuomio]

Hmm, Oleg stated too, that he is really producing a FLIGH SIMULATOR, not FLIGHT SPECULATOR, like AH is in many cases, like speculating stick forces pilot is able to pull in a dive. He knows very well the pros and cons of that.

He has stated, that all of their FM:s corresponds to the data that he has gathered from various Russian sources, like Tsagi and NVII VS. Im sure, that he has looked the NACA charts also, but Russian source should be superior to Allied, since Russia did have good amounts of same German aircraft type available for testing.
You dont start this kind of project just with reading couple of Rommels diaries.
Il-2 FM isnt based on tables, like AH is for instance, so some things, like max speed and max roll on different altitudes do not fall perfectly in chart data.
Il-2 box will have all of the flight performance data used in their sim printed. That thing alone is enough for me to buy that  box, yet alone i get flight sim with best ever evinroment and unique touch of flight modeling aside. If Il-2 has somehow biased roll rates, i dont give a damn. Theres other things that AH simulates poorly in comparison, so that will bring fresh ideas in flightsim scene.
We already have AH, why do you want another copy of that?

I love both sims. Im not anyway blind fanboy of Oleg, but i very much like the fact, that he takes time listening the users complaints in BB. Also, i love the fact that this game is made by Russians, so it will be finished product, not some MS buggy crap.

Buy it or not, i will.

[R4M]

Mr Maddox just posted on the forum confirming what I thought. He still says the 109 rolled better than the 190.

What a shame   a so beautiful sim wasted  

[Tuomio]

This is what he posted:

 

1. IF I'm wrong - I always will try to correct myself and say to all that I was wrong. In Demo we get P-39N-1 roll rate 2,2 sec....(that is exact digit, which show program itself in our special tools) Ok. It differs from what I twice checked for that weekend. The best roll rate for that plane was 3,4 sec.  Better than P-63A ! And I know why.... So in final we'll get something like that digit.
2. I will stay with my data which I own untill I will get other data from you guys (here I got something, where in some places I don't trust. For example P-47 - that one had better rollrate that posted above   )
And If will had a scan from a real trial document - be sure I will correct my data with new and will make middle calculation - I WILL NEVER DO EXACTLY THE SAME as in one source . That is my principle.

....

 

He wrote about construction of wings and the moment of wing twisting - that is exactly what we model in our FM! Of course we do it by simplified methodics (complex pre calculation of a bit simplified 3D wing model using Autocad and own tools, then implementation of simplified function in FM. In real time to calculate that simply impossible...but we may use the result of that calculation)
Just I should notice with his example, that that is correct for Bf-109F wing, partialy correct for Bf-109G-1, G-2,G-3 and G-4 wing, but incorrect for construction of Bf-109 later models wings - they have durability of tha wing wtice increased compare to listed above models and was not worse in twist than wing of 190s    I will say even more. 190, which has from mid-end 1944 year fully wooden construction of aielerons had very bad durability and use small deviation abgles on 10 % ... said enough who knows what I mean.
Ok, I'm out. I simply have not time to write answers on almost any forums, because I'm too busy with the finalising of project.
About FW-190 agains Bf-109 dogfight trials I will write on Open Forum after the release of IL-2 on the main IL-2 forum...
You guys will be very impressed why Russian aces pilots name FW-190 more easy target than Bf-109 and Why they respected more early types of FW-190 and 109G-2 (Germans also found that 109 is more situable for Russian front but 190 is more situable there for ground assault. Don't eevn argument here that they were rejected only due to the needs of Reich defence - at onec was send other modifications in Russia...    again one western myth will be a bit damaged).
Now simply not time to make translation for separate article. I hope it will be when I will be more free of job. Say closer to Christmas, perhaps, I will be able to take and coolect all quotes of trials in one account and post it in short terms as article - reference for IL-2sturmovik.com.
Sure there will be my ow column

So RAM, if you can prove your point to him, he will make according changes.
Right now hes just saying, that right now he has more reliable information on the 190 roll rates, than any of the current posts hold.

You know, the Russians had much more experience in fighting against Germans than Allied. Thus they should have the best intel of their equipment.
I bet il-2 is the first sim that depends on the Russian data instead of Allied. Just a different approach, thats all.

[Steven]

What do/did the Germans say?  They have the most experience.

-Puke
332nd Flying Mongrels

[leonid]

Hey, you guys do what you need to do.  I like the game, I like the FM.  No complaints here.  Many of your complaints also have to do with conscious decisions, like stick force, and such.  I've seen the same response from FM decisions that HT & Pyro have implemented.  Didn't bother me as long as I knew why it was done.  If it makes sense, I can live with it.  Bottomline is you cannot make a game of Oleg's quality without taking a hit, networkwise.  Hence, games with this level of detail won't be MMP for awhile.  So, it won't appeal to many of you.  Personally, I'm tired of the MMP online environment, and prefer a strictly historical flight sim now.  I want a wargame in the air, not a flight sim with warbirds.

As for rollrates & 109s & 190s, if I have to choose between NII VVS and TsAGI data(as well as German data) to NACA data, I choose NII VVS/TsAGI.  Sorry, guys.  I know, my loss.  Hey, I'm having a blast, so no biggie.

[Westy MOL]

Back to the subject  

 Zigrat. It used to be even worse!! The IL2 "cult" on SimHQ (many of whom were kicked out or moved indginantly to a "scam" webboard where you need to "pay" some kid in England $$ to belong too) were a major reason for "Badboy" departing SimHQ.  
 I once thought the B17-II fanatics were outrageous but the cult that follows IL2 and Oleg is unbelievable and borders on the fanatical. Actually, the word "rabid" comes to mind.

 IL2 rocks. But it has some quirks. But don't dare point any out or you'll get "attacked" - no matter where you go or write.

  Westy


(lol, FM based on data not seen by Westerners eyes. rofl. it sounds so clandestine, secretive and cold war-like  

[Sorrow[S=A]]

Though besides the point here,

I thought it interesting that Wells and Badboy (both probably the best informed critics I know of for flight models) both seemed to cautiously back or hold off on the subject. In fact wells had one of the best "did you really think about this" posts I have seen in awhile  

His point being that if Oleg is modelling on plane capabilities and not pilot ones then most of the data we base comclusions on it  is not going to match.
One of the nice things about TsAGI tests I like vs US ones was thier absolute paranoia about errors after they misunderstood the 109's capabilities before the war. These guys tested and retested everything and kept scrupulous records. As a brief example (that US planes will like) the tests had objects like how much pressure the pilot could maintain and for how long in various cockpits. In this case the tests for the P-47's they recieved very much show how the "50 lb" rule screwed the Jug stats on paper. They calculated the Jug could get over 250 lbs of lateral force with the pilot using his knees in addition to the arms to make the plane roll. And their test stats show the roll much better than US ones tend to.

Now with that in mind think of Widewings descriptions of the Jug in the interviews he posted awhile ago. where it was clearly stated the the jug was outrolling every opponent (190 or 109) in combat but not being capable of reversing the roll like a 190 could. Kind of sounds like the pilots were indeed achieveing full deflection at much higher forces that 50 lbs doesn't it!
Now imagine a Jug modelled like that!    

This is anecdotal of course, but my point is really that TsAGI tests are actually really reliable, and tend to be incredibly comprehensive to figure why they may not equate what you expect. Too often in dealing with US tests or British ones you find too many bizarre oddities buried in fine print. Sometimes quite amazing ones like spit's running at under full boost or planes running at HP not usually available. Honestly, lets see what shows up when we start seeing more TsAGI tests translated before we start accusing them of being wrong.

Sorrow

[Westy MOL]

"my point is really that TsAGI tests are actually really reliable"

 btw, I never even intended to imply they are not. In fact, they ALL are to one degree or more.
 I was more or less commenting (sarcastic humour wise) on the recently use of "long lost manuscripts that reveal the secrets of the ancients" type of atmosphere the IL2 FM has around it due to several official comments and typical cultboy build up.

 -Westy

[Dweeb]

Originally posted by Westy MOL:
"my point is really that TsAGI tests are actually really reliable"

 btw, I never even intended to imply they are not. In fact, they ALL are to one degree or more.
 I was more or less commenting (sarcastic humour wise) on the recently use of "long lost manuscripts that reveal the secrets of the ancients" type of atmosphere the IL2 FM has around it due to several official comments and typical cultboy build up.

 -Westy

"Long lost manuscripts" in the form of data and sources that Oleg now states will not be made public. It seems like a silly attempt to distort history to suit their porked flight model.

Dweeb

[Staga]

...And you know this because... ?

[miko2d]

Originally posted by leonid:
I find it typical that so many westerners have never even heard of TsAGI or NII VVS, yet seem to place so much importance on NACA.  My money's on Russian data.

 That may be because the above institutions were operating behind the Iron Curtain in the autoritarian police state where you could not buy a usable map (road, tourist, etc.) of an area in your own country and simplistic city plans were intentionally distorted?
 In my 25 years in Soviet union I've never heard of them and would not go asking questions even if I did.

 miko

 Oh, toejam...
 I just looked at Oleg's reply to RWORDWAY:
 

1. NACA TEST above IS FOR P-39D-1. I also don't see at which G side loads it was tested.
2. I also don't see AT WHICH ALTITUDE THAT TEST WAS DONE.

 1. At which G do you perform roll tests? Let me guess... 0G!

 2. My only knowlege of aerodynamics is from reading a few books but they all agree that at subsonic speeds it's the Indicated Airspeed that is important and determines the  forces affecting the aircraft. So the initial roll acceletarion should not be noticeably affected.
 Of course when we consider rolling motion separately, the resistance of the air to the rolling should  decrease with alt and sustained roll rate should increase.
 If soviet test was conducted practically at sea level (200m - 600 ft), then the NACA test was either the same alt or higher.
 If the NACA test showing 4.8sec/360 roll rate was conducted at higher alt then 600ft, then the roll rate should have been even lower at 600 ft where russian test shows 2 sec/360 - 2.5 times difference.
 So any altitude above 600 feet in NACA's test makes RWORDWAY's case stronger, not Oleg's.

 They may be drastic roll-rate difference between P-39D-1 and P-39N-1 due to changes in airplane construction and if Oleg know about them, he should just say so.
 But I would not expect the above two remarks from a person considered knowlegeable in aerodynamics/flying. Yet obviously Oleg must know a lot.
 Paradox...

[ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: miko2d ]

[leonid]

We all have our 'cults', and the AH one is a prime example of such.  So, il2 has one as well.  So what?  Or, are you just implying that players in AH are more knowledgable, more experienced in aviation?  Why would that be?  What makes the il2 following a 'cult of worshipers'?  I have TsAGI data, I've read a lot of books and docs on the VVS and that war in general.  I'm also an American.  Nothing secretive about getting information on the Soviet-German War, you just have to go out there and get it.  The stuff isn't just going to fall in your lap.

[leonid]

So what about maskirovka?  It was done for possible purposes of war.  Much of what was done in that area was done to maintain 'generalities' about Soviet 'inferiorness' which the Germans claimed to the USA in WWII.  By making NATO think Soviets were untrained masses with guns, a possible war could have maybe tragic consequences for the West.  This is how they beat Germany in WWII - by taking advantage of Nazi arrogance and deceiving them over and over again.  Maskirovka.

[ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: leonid ]

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by leonid:

As for rollrates & 109s & 190s, if I have to choose between NII VVS and TsAGI data(as well as German data) to NACA data, I choose NII VVS/TsAGI.  Sorry, guys.  I know, my loss.  Hey, I'm having a blast, so no biggie.

And what of the hundreds, if not thousands, of pilots, US, German and Russian, that all agree that the 190 outrolled the 109?  Disregard them too for blind faith?