F6F Recall

[gpwurzel]

Any TrackIR users got an input into this - if not, I'll take a look when I get home.


<S>


Wurzel

[CAP1]

Just rid of the stupid radar, add radar vectoring every minute, give non-liberal views.

Lower shooting distance and liberal angle shooting and we are closer to a sim.

Effective shooting distances against enemy fighters RL where normally 200 yards or less, and 400 or less for 4engine bombers.
Personally my kill range is normally 400-600 as it stands today.

RL - 70% of all shot down planes did not see the enemy

i have to ask again? why do any of you compare these aircraft to r/l? this is a GAME. what is true in here is ALWAYS going to be different than r/l. it needs to be fun.
 how many of you would keep playing if you had to check mags, cycle your props, constantly cycle your fuel tanks(and in certain cases burn off certain tanks first), switch auto lean on and off, switch your weapons switches on and off, etc?

 r/l combatg pilots had a helluva workload. i imagine it was seriously unfun for them.

 in the case of the hellkitty, i flew it once the other day, like i said earlier. i can't handle the rer view for now, so i'm back to being a spit/hurri/zeke dweeb. i don't like it because to me it kind of limits my choice for now, but i'm working around it so i can have fun.

[LYNX]

I didnt fly the F6F much before but it looks an awful lot like the pilots view cant be adjusted as much as other airplanes. Im hoping it was an oversite rather then a change forthcoming for all planes.

I agree with you on the limited head position.  When the sun is in your eyes most planes allow you to "page down" so you can at least read the map.  "Page down" in the new F6 is limited in this respect.  "Page up" on the other hand works because it lowers the cockpit frame blocking the sun.

The old F6 "page down" would allow you to see the oil pressure gauge.  Not so any more.

[BMathis]

how many of you would keep playing if you had to check mags, cycle your props, constantly cycle your fuel tanks(and in certain cases burn off certain tanks first), switch auto lean on and off, switch your weapons switches on and off, etc?

Raises hand.



Though the cockpit would need to be interactive.

[CHECKERS]

 I have sat in 2 F6 cockpits , one at Kingman Airport last October at The Kingman Auto Air Show and I also have sat in one at Chino Airport in California . IMO the rear views in the new F6 in AcesHigh are way-wrong !
 I agree with Widewing's drawings ...

 Bob/CHECKERS

 

[Shifty]

Any TrackIR users got an input into this - if not, I'll take a look when I get home.


<S>


Wurzel

For me the TrackIR six view is worse than the normal six view in it.

[Kweassa]

have to ask again? why do any of you compare these aircraft to r/l? this is a GAME. what is true in here is ALWAYS going to be different than r/l. it needs to be fun.

A very selective line of reasoning, if I must point out.

If this is a mere game with no ties to reality whatsoever, then why bother with realistic FM in the first place? A less accurate, but overall better looking eye-candy of a game could have drawn in more people including all kinds of light/casual gamers who don't know much of flightsims at all. Why do people ask for fixes when they find something's wrong with the FM? When something's a little off in graphics to the real thing? Why should some people have such a hard time getting used to realistic flight dynamics, when they could have simply made it a game with "PowerUps" and easy handling and external views?

how many of you would keep playing if you had to check mags, cycle your props, constantly cycle your fuel tanks(and in certain cases burn off certain tanks first), switch auto lean on and off, switch your weapons switches on and off, etc?

The guy's asking for a more strict restriction in views, and some changes to the radar dynamics, and a few improvements in some components which may effect the average gunnery distances.

Your torch totin', pitchfork & noose reaction which seems to want to sell off every aspect of 'realism' you personally hate, as the same thing as being a 'realism junkie', is totally uncalled for.

[Wolfie]

For me the TrackIR six view is worse than the normal six view in it.

Same here.

 

[SPIKER]

I didn't mean to start such a fuss.

  I don't think that the US Navy would have put the F6F in service if it could not hold up to a hard impact on a carrier deck.  It is the tail wheel shocks that are the problem.

<S>
Spiker

[Baumer]

SPIKER,
 It looks like HTC agrees with you and the tail will be fixed in the next patch.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,247680.msg3038322.html#msg3038322

[WarTooth]

Hey All,

Facts lead to truth and it seems the best facts we have been presented here so far is that the blind spot was 20 degrees (not 45 as the upgrade would have us believe).

We all have opinions but can anyone offer any real stats to the otherwise?

There is an F6 at Bradley Field in CT.  Perhaps we can obtain more facts from them to confirm.  Perhaps take pictures while sitting in the cockpit etc.

WT

[CAP1]

Hey All,

Facts lead to truth and it seems the best facts we have been presented here so far is that the blind spot was 20 degrees (not 45 as the upgrade would have us believe).

We all have opinions but can anyone offer any real stats to the otherwise?

There is an F6 at Bradley Field in CT.  Perhaps we can obtain more facts from them to confirm.  Perhaps take pictures while sitting in the cockpit etc.

WT

SIT in your car, and forget about the mirrors, look back out your drivers side window. if you have to, get right up against the glass. this i think should get somewhat close to what the blind spot might be?

[Rich46yo]

In my opinion a great airplane was reduced to a marginal one, or at least a lesser one. So why would it be called an "upgrade" anyways? I cant even look back and see if the CV is turning anymore. Tellya the truth I was very happy with the old one.

Facts have been presented and I hope AH changes the views to historically correct ones. Widewing does not post less he knows what hes talking about. The rest of the update? Wonderful! Im crazy about the new IL-2 and the T34/85 is a great, great tank. As it was in real life.

Fix the new Hellcats views. Please.

[Fruda]

How do you know that it's historically correct? What's your source?

The fact is that you don't know. Neither does Fruda or MjTalon. However, that doesn't appear to prevent them from appointing themselves experts.

I have had the opportunity to sit in and ride the brakes on an F6F-5 we were towing and I could see to the rear much better than I can in this new graphic modeling. Head movement is far too restrictive in the new reworked model. There's only about 6" of lateral head movement to each side, about 1/2 that of the F4Us. You cannot get anywhere near the glass on either side, whereas you can with the F4U. Indeed, the rearward view from the F6F wasn't great, but it was "adequate" according to those who flew it in combat. In our case, rear vision is virtually nil, with about a 45 degree blind area, as opposed to the real Hellcat's actual 20 degree blind area (10 degrees to either side).

Rear vision suffers because you cannot lean far enough to the sides to see around the armor plate. This is a problem that needs to be fixed.

My regards,

Widewing

I agree with this. I'm just saying that you shouldn't be able to turn your head all the way back and see directly behind you.

[Speed55]

I agree with this. I'm just saying that you shouldn't be able to turn your head all the way back and see directly behind you.

I agree, but we don't have rear view mirrors. I'm not sure which aircraft did or didn't, but i always thought that the ability to swivel your head around was to make up for this.