Aces High vs Targetware

[moot]

How do you know that it's the flight model not matching the graphics as opposed to being broken in this specific situation?

[mtnman]

How do you know that it's the flight model not matching the graphics as opposed to being broken in this specific situation?

I guess I'd hesitate to fault the FM for that, especially since AH shows damaged/missing control surfaces that still effect flight control as if they were still there (missing flap).  The "other" version may have the same effect (a frozen surface), with a different graphic.

I guess I'd fault the DM or the graphic rendering of it, before I'd claim the FM was nerfed.  I've never had the desire to try the other one, so I'm speculating.

[Die Hard]

How do you know that it's the flight model not matching the graphics as opposed to being broken in this specific situation?

Why do you think the FM of a what... 8 year old game being continuously updated... is wrong in such a fundamental way? Oleg and gang made "real" flight simulators for the Russian air force before turning to games in the 1990s. I don't think they would have made such an error. You may think differently of course.

[moot]

Same reason they screwed other stuff up.  Some stuff that's wrong with theirs or others' FMs could be (is probably) simply because of consumer hardware constraints.  I think differently inasmuch as I think both are plausible till some way is found to figure out which is right.  I'm just curious if you know that an absent vstab can e.g. mean it's past a certain surface area threshold, or if it really does mean the vstab area is truly gone but for those little beams.

Simplest way for you to see what I mean is to try for yourself.  The ones I experienced myself were C205 and 152H.  I didn't get to test the 152H, but did stay in flight with the 205 for a while and could do some rudimentary maneuvering.  It appeared to have enough stability to pull off some useful maneuvering, with enough practice.  And then there's the P-63 occurence which I described.

[Anaxogoras]

The P-63 is a bit of an anomaly.  It seems to take a lot more punishment than many medium bombers.  I've also had the experience of multiple 30mm hits on P-63s without downing the target.

[Die Hard]

I'm afraid I don't play that game anymore, though I didn't notice the problem you're describing when I did play.

[moot]

Anax I dunno if it's just the P-63. Like I said, the C205 will fly straight without it too.  You reach a really slippery departure but can bring it back from pretty significant sideslip if you control it just right with power on.

[jdbecks]

Why do you think the FM of a what... 8 year old game being continuously updated... is wrong in such a fundamental way? Oleg and gang made "real" flight simulators for the Russian air force before turning to games in the 1990s. I don't think they would have made such an error. You may think differently of course.

deos not mean they know everything and that its perfect, people are still human and will still make mistakes. Also you do not know if they tweek the FM to please the fan base etc..I dont know


as far as the FM geos for IL2, all the planes feel exactly the same to me..be it a 190 or P38, its a shame as I did enjoy the graphics and damage model, It was the FM that was my biggest gripe, as it just felt like I was flying the same plane just a different skin. I dont know why or what gives it that impression. But what I like about AH2 is that there is a very clear difference when flying different aircrafts.  Its not that I was use to playing AH2, as when I purchased IL2 I was still in my Trial period..and when I got ROF a little while back..that too gave me the feeling I was flying a different plane.

[Ack-Ack]

On those aerobatic planes a lot of care goes into designing them so that the rudder gives a more "pure" yaw effect (without as much, if any, roll and/or pitch effect) which makes the knife-edge-type maneuvers much more controllable and sustainable.  CG and power/weight ratio also play a pretty significant role.

I'd be real surprised if any WW2 planes could fly a true, sustained, knife-edge for more than a few seconds, although I've seen aerobatic R/C planes transition from knife-edge to vertical by increasing rudder deflection.

I also believe aerobatic planes also have a pretty good power to weight ratio which is a key component to knife-edge flight, which is why its easy to do in a RC plane. 


ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

Because I see a difference between being able to "make it back", and "maneuver effectively in combat" with a missing vertical stabilizer.  

If the "stub" is enough to create a weather-vane effect, I could see the possibility with careful use of throttle and a gentle hand on the stick to limp back home, and possibly even get it on the runway.

Active maneuvering, like moot describes?  Nope, I don't see it...  

The vertical stab isn't optional, and it isn't designed to be big enough to do its job as long as a small portion of it is still there.  It's designed to do its job with a minimum of materials, weight.  Once part of it is gone, it's below that "minimum" and shouldn't be able to still perform like it was there.  It isn't like the designer says "well, he's gonna need this much, but we'd better triple the size of it so if he has 2/3 of it shot away he can still finish the fight".

In active maneuvering, at relatively high AoA and slow speeds, I'd expect adverse yaw effect to be more than enough to wreck your day.  Throw some torque in, and well, no, I don't see it...

The damage in that film was neat, and in some of those instances I could see "possibly getting home, but not fighting.  It's not like they didn't ignore some effects either.  That F4U on fire for example, has fabric elevators and rudder, but they withstand the flames just fine...  Obviously, AH still doesn't model the full burning effects either.  But at the end of the day it's just another "artists interpretation", and I personally don't see the end result being any better than what we have in AH.  Graphically, maybe more impressive.  But then, that may be what I'm seeing too.  A "more impressive looking" amount of damage, who's effects aren't modeled in the FM as intensly as they're modeled in the graphics.

In game, if the P-38 losses both of its vertical stabilizers it can still fly and fight, although at a serious disadvantage because the rudders are gone but then just transition to BnZ/Energy fighting and all is well.  Even with only 1 vertical stabilizer its still able to fly and fight without any serious handicap.  Losing the horizontal stabilizer in the P-38 is an entirely different matter and no one in game has been able to recover from that kind of loss.

I've never seen a single engine plane in the game being able to fly missing their vertical stabilizer which is one of the main reasons why I regularly aim for the tail section.  Just remove the vertical stabilizer and the fight is over.


ack-ack

[moot]

AKAK any idea how that compares with non-contra-propped twins?

[Ack-Ack]

AKAK any idea how that compares with non-contra-propped twins?

Not really.  The only other twin engine/twin vertical stabilizer planes I have experience in is the B-25H and I've never lost both stabilizers in that aircraft.  I've lost one of the stablizers and still managed to keep the plane in the fight, just needed to input a little bit more rudder to compensate for the missing one. 

I have shot off both stabilizers on a B-25 and seen them go into a flat counter-clockwise spin and never recover.  Seen this happen to the Bf 110s as well after removing both vertical stabilizers.  I've always contributed the flat counter-clockwise spin to their engine torque.  Maybe the lack of engine torque on the P-38 is was enables to to remain flyable after losing both of the vertical stabilizers and the relative ease of flying one after losing just one vertical stabilizer.


ack-ack

[Delirium]

I have never ever seen both vertical stabs gone on my 38.

[Raptor]

In game, if the P-38 losses both of its vertical stabilizers it can still fly and fight, although at a serious disadvantage because the rudders are gone but then just transition to BnZ/Energy fighting and all is well.

I haven't had the same experience with this. Most of the time when the P38's tail is hit, I lose my horizontal stabilizer if not more, then go nose up.
However there have been a couple times I have lost both of my vertical stabilizers, maybe it is one of those things where it doesn't happen frequently enough for me to get use to the handling of it, but I had difficulty controlling the plane. I was able to maintain level flight by adjusting individual engine throttle (I was putting all of my attention into flying the plane at this point) as well as aileron input. But I would not fly for long because at this point I was a sitting duck for whoever shot them off to begin with.

[Ack-Ack]

I have never ever seen both vertical stabs gone on my 38.

I've gotten it a few times while doing vertical reversals on a bogie when I was a tad slow starting the attempt and gave a fleeting snap shot on the tail. 

ack-ack