v2.30 patch 1 released, lots of fixes

[Charge]

"What is the bug on the 410?"

1. Crappy low speed performance despite optimized wing profile for high lift in slow speed
2. Crappy acceleration. 2x 1800hp and small wing should give you something in return. I just fell like it, but it seems that is sometimes enough to warrant a change.
3. Poor combat resiliency. If it weights so much so why does it break up and shed wings so easily? You'd think that a plane designed partly for dive bombing would have wings that want to stay with the plane. 410 in a fight always gets killed first because it is so easy meat. Its damage endurance is nothing like that of A20 for example.
4. Peculiar stall behavior. Considering that is has slats and a huge rudder it departs controlled flight very easily. I'd like 410 to have same miracle fix the Mossie got so that it could too fly without any vertical stabilizers whatsoever.
5. Rear guns could shoot to the center of the sight and not a mil below. Its OK if you remember it but in a heat of the moment I tend to forget and keep missing. And in 410 you DO NOT have many chances to hit with the rear guns...
6. Compression. Why does it compress to begin with? Because it is a Messerschmitt?

-C+

[Karnak]

Do you have any documentation on its proper flight handling?  You'll need more than just inferences and "common sense" to get changes to it.

[ink]

megatard ....

[Charge]

"Do you have any documentation on its proper flight handling?" 

No, who does? The majority of Aces High planes are modeled without this information so they can practically model them anyway they like except for weight, power, wingloading and wingprofile and resulting figures for speed, climbrate and approximation of turn performance. There is no information on rollrate, controller responsiveness, control harmony, acceleration, stability and compression effects or combat/damage endurance. Of course eg. the weight of the aircraft is a clue for certain unseen values if the manufacturer has not chosen to weight the plane down with blocks of iron, nobody did to my knowledge.

The "fine tuning" is just a best guess if anything as there is no such detailed information of majority of these planes. 

***

"You'll need more than just inferences and "common sense" to get changes to it."

What information did people have when Mossie got its stability "fixed" to a state that it can be flown even without its vertical flight surfaces? A plane that IRL had to have its engine nacelles made longer and bigger to assist in directional stability, and it does not even have slats to assist in keeping the airflow steady on its thin (13%) wingprofile. Yet it is in every way more benign than 410. To me it doesn't add up.

I'd just like to see the same generosity for Me410. Pretty please.

-C+

[Karnak]

"Do you have any documentation on its proper flight handling?" 

No, who does? The majority of Aces High planes are modeled without this information so they can practically model them anyway they like except for weight, power, wingloading and wingprofile and resulting figures for speed, climbrate and approximation of turn performance. There is no information on rollrate, controller responsiveness, control harmony, acceleration, stability and compression effects or combat/damage endurance. Of course eg. the weight of the aircraft is a clue for certain unseen values if the manufacturer has not chosen to weight the plane down with blocks of iron, nobody did to my knowledge.

The "fine tuning" is just a best guess if anything as there is no such detailed information of majority of these planes. 

***

"You'll need more than just inferences and "common sense" to get changes to it."

What information did people have when Mossie got its stability "fixed" to a state that it can be flown even without its vertical flight surfaces? A plane that IRL had to have its engine nacelles made longer and bigger to assist in directional stability, and it does not even have slats to assist in keeping the airflow steady on its thin (13%) wingprofile. Yet it is in every way more benign than 410. To me it doesn't add up.

I'd just like to see the same generosity for Me410. Pretty please.

-C+

There is a lot of that info out there actually.  Not always precise numbers, but we know, for example, that the Ki-84's elevators got heavy and at what speed.

Don't fool yourself into thinking all of this stuff is just guesses.

[Lusche]

1. Crappy low speed performance despite optimized wing profile for high lift in slow speed

No, who does? The majority of Aces High planes are modeled without this information so they can practically model them anyway they like except for weight, power, wingloading and wingprofile and resulting figures for speed, climbrate and approximation of turn performance.

Just one example of the many original data available. Speed charts for the Me 410




Compare that to our 410. The top speed given at "Kampfleistung" matches our top speed at full military power.