Landings

[SgtPappy]

For now, I doubt it's important at all, but I'd love to see improved landings implemented.

For example, it'd probably be much more likely to bounce up and down on the ground if your landing was too fast. A nose-over would be common with too much application of the breaks. I'd hate to compare this game to IL-2, but the only thing that IL-2 had better other than graphics compared to Aces was landing/ground modeling (?). It felt much more realistic to land in that game as you'd hit the ground, bounce and whatnot.

Carrier landings, too, were much more realistic. You'd bounce up and down and the cable would pull you back, but it would stretch immensely, such as in real life. These kinds of landings necessitated that the pilot make touchdown RIGHT when he stalled. Our cables are practically unstretchable and the ground seems to be magnetically charged as we barely bounce at all, and almost never nose-over. Having more realistic CV landings would show the F4U doubters just how hard it is to keep a Corsair under control right before landing on a CV deck. It should be a world of difference from making high speed landings on ground bases.

here's a bit of CV landings in IL-2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC8CwL0v-n4 Landings start at 40 seconds with a incorrectly-labeled F4F Wildcat. The last landing at 3:56 is a keeper.

[The Fugitive]

Its a cute film, but maybe the guy just sucks at landing ?  You may land very smooth, but if I bring a plane back I bounce them down the runway a lot. I have a screen shot of my F6 standing on its nose after a landing. The cable on the CVs works well. The rapid deceleration is there. About half of the crashes in that film would not have happened as they did. If you catch a wire, you're going to stop. I had the "pleasure" of doing one carrier landing in real life being retruned to my ship. There was not a lot of bouncing around, one big slam, a very quick stop, then it was over.

[Treize69]

I have no faith in the landing model of Il2, I've made textbook approaches and touchdowns countless times to have it either nose over or groundloop almost every time. If aircraft were as hard to land as they make it seem in Il2/PF, nobody would have survived training, let alone combat.

[Lukanian-7]

I Think The Admiral Would've Shat His Pants If He Saw A Wing Scrape Like That

[macleod01]

Its strange, Almost all of those landings in that video are the opposite of most of the WW2 films of carrier landings Ive seen. It seems they catch the wire and stop. End of. In that IL2 video the wire seems like elastic!

[SgtPappy]

Yes, I had an amazing CV landing footage of VF-17 in WWII, but I can't find it. They are actually a little more elastic in the WWII footage than our game, but less elastic than the IL-2 modeling.

Even so, it's so difficult to nose-over the planes in our game. I suppose the bouncy-bouncy seems over-exaggerated, but the nose-overs seem so real compared to our game. I never seem to able to nose-over most planes... they just runs on the front wheels until they stop and then the tail falls to the ground. There's no way the cable just *stops* you without budging like in our game. The WWII footage (which I wish i could find right now) shows the cable stretching at least 1/4 the length of an F4U.

The pilots in WWII flew in so that they caught a trap RIGHT when they stalled. In Aces, we can come in at 100 something IAS and trap without hesitation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gpCLeWqY0w&feature=related

For this one, watch from 3:30 mins. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b7gwn1oooA