What is wrong with the AH Flight Model?

[Jekyll]

Hehe Pyro's reply really hit the mark  

I know one thing for certain.  If I was EVER going to lay all my money on the line and write a WW2 flight sim, it wouldn't contain a single P51, P47, Spitfire or Fw190.

It would be full of Me 764, P22, Supermarine Hawks and Fw34 aircraft.  Never heard of them?  Well they are of course fictional aircraft.

But at least then no-one could claim they were over or under modelled  

Sometimes I read this board and I just imagine HT or Pyro sitting in Texas, reading the same threads, and just hanging their heads in despair.

No matter what you build, someone will ALWAYS complain  

------------------
C.O. Phoenix Squadron
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/phoenix
Aces High Training Corps

[skippy]

hmm ..  do 500 in a Typhoon then crank the rudder , you drop 300mph in 3 seconds. possible in RL ?  doubtful.

[Stooge]

as far as the FM goes, I think HTC did a great job. Listen, these games aren't that simple, so you can't just throw them together...you have to think like pyro or HT does: "If I change one aspect of the game, how is it going to affect another?" So saying the FM is porked is invalid until you've actually flown with a pilot's license. Another thing. Why is it that people mostly use very rude ways to get something they want changed? I mean constructive criticism is o.k., but whining isn't going to do you any good. I think this sim is the best one on the market, and will just continue to improve with the help of people willing to be patient and give HTC good suggestions...Have a good day all...I hope to see you in the skies  

[715]

 

Originally posted by skippy:
hmm ..  do 500 in a Typhoon then crank the rudder , you drop 300mph in 3 seconds. possible in RL ?  doubtful.

That seems excessive: it would be a decelerating force of 4.7 g's.

I tried it at sea level: went from 400 mph to 320 mph in 2.8 sec for a deceleration of 1.3 g's.  That corresponds to an increase in frontal drag area of about 53 ft^2 which is a yaw angle of something like 13 degrees.  Sounds normal for a hard over rudder.

715

[715]

 

Originally posted by Stooge:
Another thing. Why is it that people mostly use very rude ways to get something they want changed?

Please point out to me the "rude" part of my post.  Or do you consider anything short of "wow AH is just perfect" to be rude?

715

[Chango]

You know its no that simple!

1.   You have no idea what the coefficient of drag (k) is on the Typhoon at a given angle to its direction of flight.  
2.   There are a plethora of variables acting on that plane including the addition of power from the engine at 100%.
3.   He said 3 seconds not 2.8 seconds so you are biased!  

HTC is obviously going to do the best they can with the information provided to them for a given plane.  I would like to know what they use as reference material? Anyone?  

I have never flown Warbirds but I have flown private aircraft.  Do I know if the AH FM is porked? Nope!

My bias comes from Warbirds.  The planes in Warbirds don’t lose e on turns as fast as they do in here.  Is Warbirds correct?  I don’t know!  I just hope that 1.04 is going for realism and not playability.  I want a realistic FM! I do hope that the new FM makes it easier to enter and exit from those low level furballs that I really miss.  There are way too many 20000+ft altitude monkeys in this sim.  I think that’s mainly because of the high loss of e on turns.
I would also like to know if there is any reference material regarding how long it takes a given RL WB plane to reach vmax at its optimum altitude?  I fly the F4u and it seems to take an extremely long time for it to reach vmax.  If you climb up to 20k and level out it takes it over 5 minutes to get close to vmax.  It never actually makes it to 400 mph at military power.  How did they actually do the test?  
If you know respond if your trying to justify your investment of 30$ a month and countless hours by saying its perfect get counseling!  

Give us the late war F4u-4.  4000ft/min climb,  450 MPH,  2357 of them were made and entered combat in April of 1945.

[715]

 

Originally posted by Chango:
You know its not that simple!

1.   You have no idea what the coefficient of drag (k) is on the Typhoon at a given angle to its direction of flight.  
2.   There are a plethora of variables acting on that plane including the addition of power from the engine at 100%.
3.   He said 3 seconds not 2.8 seconds so you are biased!  

1.  We are talking about the fuselage so I used the coeff of drag for a cylinder (an approximation of the fuselage) which is near 1.0 for most Reynolds numbers.  But you are right, when you yaw part of the wings get shadowed and their lift (and induced drag) changes.

2. The engine power has nothing to do with it: that is what is overcoming the normal baseline drag of the plane and defines max velocity.  The Extra drag due to hard over rudder is what causes the plane to slow and it is that drag that I was doing a back-of-the-envelope calculation on.

3.  I was giving the numbers I measured- I can't get the Typhoon to 500 mph in a steady state (i.e. not a dive) at sea level.

So it isn't that simple but one always starts simple and sees if things are within the ball park.  In this case they did seem to be.

Re extending from furballs: I still think that in a no icon arena (which Warbirds had) that it would be (and was in WB) much easier to extend, independent of the FM.  With that neon sign the higher E or faster plane is always going to find you.

715