Author Topic: Flight Model Wars Round 2  (Read 1396 times)

Offline Gunslayer

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« on: June 24, 2001, 05:37:00 PM »
Well I was going to post to the thread that Pyro had started but once they get that long whats the point? Well I guess i need to start this by asking what crawled up the AK guys rears and died. I mean really Deezcamp asked a legitimate question only to be flamed to no end by the 2 ak guys and many others.

I know deezcamp personally in real life. He is kind of a goof. But when it comes to airplanes he know what he is talking about. I think its rather ignorant for guys (you know who you are AK) to post  
Quote
You have never seen the source code to aces or X-plane. How could you know what they do and do not model?
Well, I have never seen the source code for Need for Speed 3 or Grand Prix Legends. But it is quite obvious which one simulates the physics of driving better. I have enough driving experience to tell (some cart racing on indy style tracks) that the physics in GPL are superb.

 Much the same way, Deez in his flight experience can tell that the Aces High flight model, while the best in the biz for WW2 combat, is not as realistic as X-plane. Does this mean deez hates Aces High? Far from it. He repeatedly states that he loves this game. That is why he would like to see the FM improved. Many real life ACM manouveres cannot be performed correctly in aces high because it doesn't simulate the physics correctly.

He asked Pyro about it in a polite non-derogatory manner . But even Pyro gets his defenses up instantly and just says deez doesn't know what he is talking about without really looking into what he has to say. All deez really wants to know is what Pyro thinks about the benefits of table based flight model like we have in aces high versus a real-time blade element theory engine such as the one in X-plane. If either Hitech or Pyro actually answered that question deez would probably shut up.

I don't think deez want anything different than any of us. He wants to see Aces High improved, which the guys at HTC are constantly doing. We all want to put out two cents in on how its improved. Lets leave deez alone and let him say his bit. HTC may take his suggestion, they may take our suggestions. But noone should be blasted for making suggestions. Even if they do it more than once

Gunslayer

Offline Naudet

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 729
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2001, 05:56:00 PM »
Gunslayer, thanks god that there are people like u that actually saw the point Deez was trying to express.

But anyway the thread was funny to read and with every new post of SW i had even more to laugh in front of my screen. Sometimes its really weird that people seems to be insulted even by the most polite post someone wrote.

Offline AKHog

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 521
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2001, 06:16:00 PM »
tards post here.

BTW deezcamp turn easy mode off (combat trim) and i bet AH will feel more like your "real life flights in a ww2 plane"

-AKhog
The journey is the destination.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2001, 06:36:00 PM »
Hey, Guns, maybe you know the answer.

I asked Deez in that other thread if he's a licensed pilot and roughly what ratings and time he had built up.

Never got an answer, do you know?

Would help in evaluating his comments.

Thanks!
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline wells

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 166
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #4 on: June 24, 2001, 09:35:00 PM »
Quote
All deez really wants to know is what Pyro thinks about the benefits of table based flight model like we have in aces high versus a real-time blade element theory engine such as the one in X-plane.

and I think Pyro's point was, 'How do you know that Aces High is a table based model?'  I've never seen that information revealed anywhere.  Do you have some kind of inside information?

Offline DeeZCamp

  • Banned
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 279
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2001, 11:38:00 PM »
Heya all, In response 1. to Toad I believe, I have approx 30 hrs of non-logged time within Various 152 aircraft, about 5 hrs of Acro time in Navy T-43 (I may be incorrect on the Idnetifier though )it was a Tri cycle setup, no tail dragger.

And a measly 6.5 Hrs logged in a Katana  ;).

For a super short summarization, I have done power on/off stalls, Dutch rolls, barrel rolls, slow flight, pattern work, general flight, x-country prep,I-mans, as well as other aerobatic manovers and general flight. Have pulled as much as 6Gs+ (hehe fun :P )


I have also flown ( simulated B-2 Stealth Bomber Trainer for the USAF.)(multimillion full motion hydro actuated setup, VR screens real nice solid wrapped screen no splits as well as realtime sgi like graphics. IT  is really nice   :D

Now based on my Flight experience, I may not know every FAR, or the applicable subset of AIM knowlege, but I do have an understanding of the underlying princepals of physical flight.  Of which this entire argument/suggestion/debate is about.

X-plane simply allows for a more fluid /dynamic representation of flight than aces. It does so by the way it calucates its flight simulation by means of blade element theory.   But whatever , for those who dont care/belive me fine try it then tell me what you think.

For the person (i cant recall right now who asked about how i know that HTC used data tables, ... Hitech said it himself in the "Flight modeling thread" I posted quite awhile ago....

A very intersting thing about that thread is that HTC said " if HTC would use blade element they for Aces flight charcteristics, it would merely be a trade off between what they use now (data) for the realtime calucualation of components" (airfoils, that make up the x-plane flight model Aircraft.

He states that "you would be merely substituting data for another set of data"

 What this tells you is that they are using tables and information to list specific flight characterisitcs and how the aircraft will react based on a cross reference to those tables.

Now in the End of that post, ... after all the debate that hitech states "Why should aces use something like blade theory",He then contradicts himself stating that "he has been using Blade element theory all the time."

Now my question is IF aces USES blade element theory than why is "ACES blade element theory" different from "X-plane Blade element theory"...

I would think that If you can equate what I have said above to a simple expression, such as Acesblade to X-planblade, you should come out with the same result, just as 2+2=4

My point is that if someone uses a way of doing something that is known and used among the two parties, then the result would be the same. In this case,... Flight simulation/representation/limitations of physical flight characteristics.

Anyway, I still have not seen a reply to all this from Pyro, so Idunno where he stands or thinks with all this.  :confused:

For all the bashers and people that are very quick to make a decision that I have not a clue as to what I speak, or that I am in someway trying to be a jerk, I really think you need to stop, look at your self and really ask yourself why you have a need to be an attacker to any who asks a question. Is it fear of change? or a personal ignorance that you feel, because you may not know/comprehend what the topic or the context of the argument is.  :rolleyes:
 
Anyway ... As ive stated before X-plane is like apples and oranges compared to Aces in the sense that they have to differing roles... one is an IFR/VFR type sim/trainer,engineering tool.  The other is a WWII air combat Game.

Point of all this... I would like to see realtime calulation based on the shapes of the aircraft used here with the given data of weight and engine specs to be the determined flight characteristics.


oh yeah , I have not  been using combat trim Hog, just ta let ya know. (using it is unrealistic as well as limiting to the perfommance to what you can get out of your aircraft. IMO

Id like to say lastly that I feel that Aces is an awesome Online sim, best ive ever seen ever known, and really enjoy the updates, and differnt planes  :) I would just like some response on the FM stuff.  


Anyway...   -Deez out..

"gettin ready for the flames to begin"
 
   :p       :D      :rolleyes:

Offline AKHog

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 521
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #6 on: June 25, 2001, 12:30:00 AM »
LMFAO

Now THAT is some funny chit.

-AKHog
The journey is the destination.

Offline DeeZCamp

  • Banned
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 279
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #7 on: June 25, 2001, 12:33:00 AM »
Got your cheerleader gear on Hog?  :rolleyes:

Offline SOB

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10138
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #8 on: June 25, 2001, 04:05:00 AM »
Quote
Point of all this... I would like to see realtime calulation based on the shapes of the aircraft used here with the given data of weight and engine specs to be the determined flight characteristics.

In AH, if you lose the wingtip off of your aircraft, the flight characteristics of your aircraft change.  From what I've read here, losing the wingtip from an F4U will actually allow you to fly faster, since removing the part lowers the overall drag on the aircraft. (and the additional rudder input to stabalize you doesn't replace all the lost drag)

My "don't know toejam about airplanes" question:

Doesn't this suggest that they do take into account the shape of the aircraft?


SOB
Three Times One Minus One.  Dayum!

Offline Gunslayer

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 28
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #9 on: June 25, 2001, 06:08:00 AM »
Actually SOB, and I may be on crack, but wouldn't an airplane that lost part of its wing fly slower? From what I can tell, the engine here is doing something like this:

If wing = damaged
Add 50 to clockwise roll
Subtract 25 drag from flight table

This is just a pseudo version of the many lines of code that would actually represent this function. But it seems to be more of a predetermined effect than a real time modeling of wing damage. And the wing damage always has the same effect. If the wing shape were being used in real time then the engine could simulate different effects for varying levels of wing damage.

Offline niklas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #10 on: June 25, 2001, 06:13:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslayer:
Well, I have never seen the source code for Need for Speed 3 or Grand Prix Legends. But it is quite obvious which one simulates the physics of driving better. I have enough driving experience to tell (some cart racing on indy style tracks) that the physics in GPL are superb.

Lol, the physics of gpl are nice, but far from being realistic.

niklas

Offline SOB

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10138
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #11 on: June 25, 2001, 06:56:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Gunslayer:
Actually SOB, and I may be on crack, but wouldn't an airplane that lost part of its wing fly slower?

Remember... "Don't know toejam about airplanes"  Quit asking me questions!  ;)

 
Quote
This is just a pseudo version of the many lines of code that would actually represent this function. But it seems to be more of a predetermined effect than a real time modeling of wing damage. And the wing damage always has the same effect.

Probably true, but this concerns AH's damage model, not the whatchamacallit modelling that Deez is talking about.  You've only got 4 parts (affecting flight) to loose on the average wing in AH - Flap, Aileron, Wing Tip, Wing.  You either have them on your plane or you don't...at least I think it still works that way!   :)

 
Quote
If the wing shape were being used in real time then the engine could simulate different effects for varying levels of wing damage

Add more parts to loose and consequences to loosing them, and you have these effects.  I would think the current engine, however it does things, could do this just like any other engine.


SOB
Three Times One Minus One.  Dayum!

Offline AKSWulfe

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3812
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #12 on: June 25, 2001, 07:21:00 AM »
Gunslayer, he's guesstimating on what X-Plane models vs what AH models.

I dunno HOW many times I have to repeat it, but guesstimating on something you do NOT know about is not wise! I've read 3 versions of code all written differently that do the exact same freaking thing.. some are just more efficient. He's going by feel, saying that "X-Plane feels better"... great some people say WW2Ol feels better than AH or WB feels better than AH.. it's all about perception not actual formulas.

That's what crawled up my butt, I hate it when people that do not know what's going on behind the scenes pretend like they do.
-SW

Offline DeeZCamp

  • Banned
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 279
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #13 on: June 25, 2001, 07:58:00 AM »
hehe Wulf go look for your self to see the contradiction HTC himself posted. duh   :rolleyes:    :p

Offline AKSWulfe

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3812
Flight Model Wars Round 2
« Reply #14 on: June 25, 2001, 08:17:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by DeeZCamp:
hehe Wulf go look for your self to see the contradiction HTC himself posted.

Uh where? HTC is not a himself, HTC is a business. Three letter abbreviation for HiTech Creations, Inc.

So, where's this contradiction?
-SW