Flight Model Suggestion

[J_A_B]

There is one thing about the AH flight model that bugs me.

Stalls.

Specifically, I wonder why AH models a "stallhorn", yet does NOT model the buffeting that a real aircraft encounters prior to a stall.  Every stall in AH is smooth as glass; besides the horn there's utterly no warning of when the plane is leaving its flight envelope until you actually start to spin.  

A real aircraft buffets when it reaches the point of stalling.  Some more than others, but they ALL do it to some extent.

My recommendation is to add some sort of visual buffeting to the AH stall model, similar to (but perhaps less pronounced than) the buffeting present when you fire your weapons or dive too fast.  This feature would be used a LOT--every time someone flies "at the edge"--and would also further improve AH's already good flight model.

If there is a reason the AH flight model lacks buffeting beyond it being a simple oversight, I would appreciate an explanation.

Thanks.

J_A_B

[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: J_A_B ]

[Sancho]

you could change your stallhorn sound to the sound of wind buffeting.  I'm sure someone out there has a sound like that.

[K West]

I'm definately interested in the answer to this one from RL (non ultra-light   ) pilots, anyone who's flown the 51's (crazy horse etc) or especially HTC themselves.

 Not having actaully ever been in a stalling plane I hear conflicting reports. Some say there should be buffeting prior. At the same time the USAAF/USN training videos at Zeno's Drive In show that most of those fighters stalled softly. I'm not sure if they mean none at all or none worthy of paying much attention to.

Good question JAB.

 Westy

[funkedup]

You can record a buffet sound and replace your stall horn with that.

I don't think the real world buffeting is visible anyways.  Any pilots care to comment?

[J_A_B]

"I don't think the real world buffeting is visible anyways. "

Visible? Probably not to an observer. But you could FEEL it inside the plane.  While I am not a pilot, feeling the plane "buffet" or "shake" or "shudder" on the edge of a stall is 100% consistent in any WW2 pilot accounts I've ever read.  How else do you think they avoided stalling the plane?  Modern aircraft with fly-by-wire controls are possibly not as effected by this occurance, but it is very real for a 1940's plane.

Besides, AH already models buffeting from shooting the guns or diving too fast, so I was curious as to why they do not model it on the verge of a stall, when IMO it would be most useful.  I don't imagine compression buffeting would be any more "visible" than stall buffeting.

Consider this from Bud Anderson's book as an example (I don't feel like digging up another dozen sources at the moment, as noted WW2 pilots are very consistent regarding the "buffet" before a stall):


"And I am extremely busy up here, hanging by my propeller, going almost straight up, full emergency power, which a Mustang could do for only so long before losing speed, shuddering, stalling, and falling back down"

"I look back, and I can see that he's shuddering, on the verge of a stall."

Perhaps, then, it WAS visible to a good eye?


While changing the sound may be one "workaround", it doesn't answer my underlying question or change my recommendaton  

J_A_B

[hitech]

1. In any plane i've stalled i've never been able to "SEE" any buffeting.

2. The buffet can be heard and definaltly felt threw the stick. On the planes that I have felt it starts as a very slight buzz in the stick, and on some planes continued on to the sound of a large flat peice of sheet metal being shaken. Or like some one slaping there hand very rapidly on the out side of a metal building.

3. The p51 gave 0 nada ziltch buffet. The only way the edge could be persived was a very slight change in the wind noise coming into the radiator intake.

The resones we don't implement a visual buffet is one, it can't be seen, to it would adversly effect a shooter while riding the edge.

We orignal tried a buffet sound for the stall horn, but after feed back we disided the current stall horn was mutch more acceptible.

The stall horn as it exist today is not trying to represent a real stall horn, but rather give you an audible que ,like a slight stick buzz would, of where the flight envolope edge is.


HiTech

[J_A_B]

Thanks for the response HiTech.

So I guess what it amounts to is it's something that simply doesn't translate well into a computer game and the lack of a visual cue is a conscious decision based on its effect on gameplay (in this case shooting).

That's exactly what I wanted to know.  Thanks!

J_A_B

[bolillo_loco]

The de-militarized mustangs of today do not have the same flight characteristics of the ww2 era due to lack of self sealing tanks, armor guns, ammo etc.

I have read that the civilian mustangs of today are more docile than the ones of ww 2. the center of gravity is restored to its design limit and also so has the weight of the a/c.

[lemur]

Having flow a few dozen planes (2 Acrobatic, a Citabria & a Marchetti) I can safely say every plane stalls differently.

The acrobatic planes (specifically the Marchetti) give very strong feedback when you're approaching a control stall at higher airspeeds (lotsa kick from the stick). At slow airspeeds the buffet is still there, but incredibly 'mushy'.

And this is a plane where the wing tends to stall all at once. Very quick spins when you stall it (but very quick recovery too)

Other planes offered almost no kick when you approach a stall. Especially high wing planes where the tail is well outside the turbulent air from the wings.

Generally, you'd expect some sort of kicking feedback from any ww2 fighter.

So the real question is this: How do you model what the pilot would feel visually?

I'm all for a bit of cockpit shake, and now that the gunsight is projected 'at infinity' a little bit of shake in the cockpit shouldn't interfere with aim.

My dos pesos.

~Lemur

[J_A_B]

Ya know, Lemur has a point there--with the gunsight having been re-worked, a slight "shake" would no longer interfere with aim.  I hadn't thought of that!

And come to think of it, would the plane shaking from the weapons firing really be any more visually noticable than any shaking from the edge of a stall?  Or compressability, for that matter?

Note:  I am NOT being "selfish" with this issue.  As HT noted, the plane I fly most in AH was known for not giving a whole lot of feedback (although Anderson and Carson disagreed that there was NO warning as HiTech's experience was).  I simply think it'd make AH feel a bit more "real"

BTW, I am all for keeping the "stall buzzer" too.  Having both would be best IMO.

J_A_B

[lemur]

The stall buzzer is nice, although I'd prefer a stall 'horn' (gets louder and louder until it's really wailing)

Also I'm sure if it's clear in my post or not, but the buffeting in a high speed control stall is a LOT more forcefull than a slow speed stall.

At slow speeds most of the buffet is coming from the propwash hitting the wing, becoming turbulent and then hitting the tail.

At high speeds the buffet is coming from the wind itsself.

And a power-off, low-speed stall produces almost no buffet.

Ya wanna model that HT? (Visions of turbulence... one of the hardest things to calculate, dance in lemur's head   )

I guess that raises a new question: Does AH model control stalls if you yank back too hard on the stick? Or does it instead just say "You don't have the muscle to pull that hard." and limit the amount of deflection allowed?

I honestly don't know since I'm pretty ginger with the controls  

~Lemur

[Durr]

The bottom line is that every plane is completely different in the way that it behaves in a stall situation.  The only plane that I have a lot of experience with as far as stalls is the T-34C which is however, rather similar to a WW2 type fighter.  It doesnt seem to me that it buffets much other than the stick shaking.  It does have mechanical rudder shakers and a stall horn though, so it may be that Im not hearing the wind buffeting or whatever.

[ergRTC]

Have you tried a Force Feedback stick J_A_B?  

HTC seems to have tried to emulate the stick vibrations of a progressive stall.  They work well, but my logitech was a little too "loose" the rest of the time for my taste.

fyi: My grandfather taught fighter pilots during ww2 and flew those trainers (same plane they used in tora tora tora to replace the zero).  He was deathly afraid of the bigger planes because of the little notice you got heading into a stall when in combat (something about inertia I guess).  Had him fly aw once, asked him to try the f6f and he was not sure he could even take off.  He had no problem in full realism, taking off on a short field, never having touched a computer sim or joystick in his long life!


I think these models are getting closer.

[J_A_B]

"Have you tried a Force Feedback stick"

Actually yes, I use a borrowed one for AH but with the FF disabled.  It's a Logitech stick.  I utterly hate it.  It's idea of "feedback" is making a ton of noise and losing all pressure--NOT a good thing on the edge of a stall    IMO Force Feedback has potential, but isn't yet a mature technology.

J_A_B

[Citabria]

snefens buffet stall sound is very good and much more immersive