Author Topic: F4u4"C" (Read 2530 times)

Krusty · « **Reply #30 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:28:48 PM »

Speeds like that, even with airbags, can knock people unconscious. Only in Aces High it's perfectly controllable, no problems come up, and you're in control 100% of the time. I want to see you red out for 35 seconds (like a perma-blackout) if you pull this move in the corsair.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #31 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:30:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Give me definitive proof they're modeled accurately.

Hell these planes couldn't fly upside down for more than 15-30 seconds before the engines seized, due to lack of oil. In this game they can fly endlessly. We also have hardly any of the other engine-related woes of the real life aircraft.

Are you going to tell me the F4u we have in Aces High is NOT the product of many many many compromises between reality and game? And since we KNOW that this plane is a compromise, are you going to tell me you think it's 100% accurate? If so we have nothing else to discuss, and you cannot be helped.

"WE" know? No, YOU THINK YOU know.

YOU made the claim that the model for the F4U was horribly inaccurate. It is YOUR claim, YOU provide proof of it.

Krusty · « **Reply #32 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:33:06 PM »

Yes, **WE** know that this game is not realistic.

If you don't agree then, again, nobody can help you.

It is a game. Some attempt has been made to make certain parts of the game match up to historical records.

Some parts of this game are entirely made up and designed solely for the reason of gameplay.

These two statements are obvious. We KNOW this is a game of compromises.

If you disagree you're simply being argumentative and trying to pick a fight.

P.S. I said "over-modeled", not your somewhat inflamatory "horribly inaccurate"

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #33 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:33:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Speeds like that, even with airbags, can knock people unconscious. Only in Aces High it's perfectly controllable, no problems come up, and you're in control 100% of the time. I want to see you red out for 35 seconds (like a perma-blackout) if you pull this move in the corsair.

I suppose now you'll tell us that every carrier pilot completely loses control and consciousness when he catches the hook. Because the decel from landing on a carrier, especially when you include the front of the plane slamming onto the deck, is at least as bad as you describe.

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #34 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:36:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Yes, **WE** know that this game is not realistic.

If you don't agree then, again, nobody can help you.

It is a game. Some attempt has been made to make certain parts of the game match up to historical records.

Some parts of this game are entirely made up and designed solely for the reason of gameplay.

These two statements are obvious. We KNOW this is a game of compromises.

If you disagree you're simply being argumentative and trying to pick a fight.

LOL, I'm trying to pick a fight. Do you ever read what you post?

The game is reasonably realistic.

Now, back to your original claim, provide proof the F4U flight model is horribly wrong.

Or continue to spin about madly, while the rest of us look on for the entertainment value alone.

Krusty · « **Reply #35 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:39:25 PM »

When your gear are on the deck of a CV the only way you can fly is forward (the CV pushes up). The hook keeps you in place, and so you don't need to be in control, unless the hook fails to catch and then you gently nose back up.

In a corsair in this game you can pop flaps, gear, full rudder side slip and aileron to compensate and decelerate JUST as fast, only while maintaining perfect control on 3 sets of controls (ailerons elevators and rudder) when in fact if you TRIED to hold your arms to your chest you probably couldn't. Car crash test show that even light items cannot be held in even 20mph accidents. They fly out of your hands. If you were trying to hold onto the control stick at this time your hands would still be pulled forward (thus pushing the stick forward, thus nosing you down uncontrollably until you had fully decelerated), and forget trying to hold the stick to a point where you could control the side-slip rudder at the same time as decelerating.

Ever try the ... whattaya call it? Tilt-a-whirl? You're inside being held to the wall by centrifugal force. You literally cannot extend your head, arm, or legs away from you. Same (in reverse) for this f4u situation. You could not keep your arms coordinated and in control even if you wanted. And while they're being pulled if you're holding onto the stick, the stick is going to follow them (and they're going "forward").

Krusty · « **Reply #36 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:42:01 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
LOL, I'm trying to pick a fight. Do you ever read what you post?

The game is reasonably realistic.

Now, back to your original claim, provide proof the F4U flight model is horribly wrong.

Or continue to spin about madly, while the rest of us look on for the entertainment value alone.

Reasonably? The engine modeling is pathetic. Bombers fly at 2x cruise speeds nonstop. Select people regularly gripe about fighters never overheating at full throttle. The ord situation, the E6B, the instruments, the base locations, the terrains themselves, the weather, the atmosphere, everything is unrealistic. I still enjoy it as a game but I realize it's NOT realistic.

Secondly, *YOU* are the one putting words in my mouth. I said it was "over-modeled"

And yes, you do seem to be trying to pick a fight. As of my last post I've made my point. To hell with your replies trying to change the subject or put words in my mouth.

Bronk · « **Reply #37 on:** January 31, 2007, 05:58:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Give definitive proof that they could go from 450mph clean to flaps-full, gear down, 110mph with no stall problems, inside of 15 seconds.

Film please.

Bronk

Edit: With combat trim off preferably.

Widewing · « **Reply #38 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:33:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Speeds like that, even with airbags, can knock people unconscious. Only in Aces High it's perfectly controllable, no problems come up, and you're in control 100% of the time. I want to see you red out for 35 seconds (like a perma-blackout) if you pull this move in the corsair.

Krusty, STOP!!!! Geez!

Even if the F4U-4 could decelerate from 450 to 110 mph in 15 seconds (it cannot), that's a deceleration rate of 33 ft/sec, which is slightly faster than a Toyota Camry decelerates under braking in a panic stop (30 ft/sec).

So, you're saying that an airplane somehow brakes faster in flight than a car on a perfect road surface? LOLOL

If you decelerated at 1 G, the rate would be 32.2 ft/sec. No one will be knocked out at 1 G. Formula One cars decelerate at 3 G, and I'm not aware of any drivers passing out.

Krusty, if you ever want anyone to take anything you say seriously, you have to stop shoveling horse hockey like a stable boy.

My regards,

Widewing

Krusty · « **Reply #39 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:40:37 PM »

it takes 20 seconds, it would have taken less only I didn't hit the gear first thing.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/858_1170290200_f4u4_decel.zip

That's 340mph in 20 seconds. I probably could have got it to 15 if I pushed it.

EDIT: meant to type this:
340mph in 20 seconds is 17mph decel per second. In a car doing 0-60 in 4 seconds you're only doing 15mph accel. If I got this f4u4 to decel in 15 seconds you're talking 22mph/sec. That's more than "emergency braking" in a toyota.

Even the fastest cars can barely go 0 to 60 in 4 seconds, so imagine facing backwards in a Ferrari as it rockets off, pushing you face-first into the restraints and seats. You're going to tell me you'll be able to do anything under that?

Like I said, if you were holding something you wouldn't be able to control it. Most stearing wheels are fixed to the frame. Most flight sticks float free. You'd jam it full forward without meaning to.

EDIT2: If I knew more about the calculations of physics I'd try a few of 'em, to compute the force this is doing on the human body, and then check how much damage that similar amounts of force do to the human body, but I don't know so I can't.

Krusty · « **Reply #40 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:50:21 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
If you decelerated at 1 G, the rate would be 32.2 ft/sec. No one will be knocked out at 1 G. Formula One cars decelerate at 3 G, and I'm not aware of any drivers passing out.

I don't buy that. What math did you use? I mean what did you do to get 32.2feet/sec? As near as I can tell it's not a straight deceleration as there's sidslip and drag slowing it down, not a ground or surface. How do you get distance? (the feet/sec part I mean)

EDIT: By this I mean I'll admit I'm wrong if I'm wrong, but I'm not seeing how you got from A to B

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #41 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:55:16 PM »

No, actually, the fastest cars go from zero to 330MPH in 4.45 seconds.

Some of the slower cars go zero to 210MPH in less than 7 seconds, and they shift four times manually while doing it.

They put harnesses in fighter planes so you don't flop around the cockpit like a fish.

And 15 to 20 seconds is a LONG time.

Krusty · « **Reply #42 on:** January 31, 2007, 07:00:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts

They put harnesses in fighter planes so you don't flop around the cockpit like a fish.

Yes, very true. Very good point. Only harnesses and seats are designed to support acceleration in the direction that pushes the occupant further into the seat. They can support a lot more force the other way, such as restraints holding the occupant in place when the car hits a wall, but they don't always absorb the force very well.

Not to mention holding onto a control flight stick, cross-controlling ailerons and rudder, popping gear, and hitting the "flaps down" key nonstop. I was quite busy while decelerating in the film, but in complete control. If I'm wrong, perhaps they wouldn't "red out" -- but they probably won't have such perfect manual dexterity and control as to cross control and play with switches in the cockpit.

I would like to know what WW used on his math, just to know how he got from A to B (like I said).

Captain Virgil Hilts · « **Reply #43 on:** January 31, 2007, 07:05:46 PM »

I don't have my math cheat sheets handy, but I'd bet he meant 32 feet per second per second. Any speed can be converted to feet per second, and acceleration (negative or positive) is therefore converted to feet per second per second.

And drag cars exceed 3G negative when the chute deploys, and you still have to steer and otherwise manage them.

Also remember that inertia applies, so that even when decelerating rapidly, the object still wants to continue in a relative straight line until that inertia is spent.

Krusty · « **Reply #44 on:** January 31, 2007, 07:11:40 PM »

Like I mentioned I don't know many physics calculations (I was interested but never pursued it) so I don't know how you get to 32feet per sec/per sec.

A drag racer's a totally different beast, I'd think. It barely steers in the first place. Slowing down you can put your hands on the wheel and it's bolted in place (and will support your hands/arms' weight). What if it were a free-floating wheel? What if you controlled the drag racer with an X-Box controller on a loose stick? Would you be able to hold onto it while trying to control it?

Unfortunately the G-meter in AH doesn't read too well in mostly-level flight. It was all over the place in my tests when I checked the film viewer. Sometimes it was positive 5, sometimes it was negative 1, and sometimes it just bounced between 0 and 2. I guess it's meant for lift/dive only.

EDIT: I mention this last bit because I went back to check, after WW mentioned 1G.