How simulated is AH?

[thedoom26]

How Simulated is AH? would it be helpful to research aircraft, watch videos etc, to the airframe i use? Just a wondering...Ive bin watching stuff on the p47d, and Learned about the p47 ability to take damage, i heard one guy, got shot, lit on fire, was spinning out of control, then he recovered and tried to bail, but the canopy was stuck, and a german ace tried to kill him, took 3 roundsat shooting him, but he didnt go down....I forgot the dudes name but he became an future ace, SO IS THE P47D, ability to take damage good in ah2, Thanks 

[bozon]

That was Robert Johnson. Just remember that for every story like that there are 100 stories in which just a couple of hits brought the plane down - only those stories are never told because there is no one left to tell them.

The P47 was a rugged plane - statistically. It does not mean it was impossible to bring down, far from it. I t just means that it had a better chance to survive damage, and so it does in AH.

Damage modeling is perhaps the soft underbelly of AH. In flight modeling it is way ahead of anything else out there, and generally what was true in real life (after filtering for anecdotes and a few FM quirks) is quite close to how the planes perform in AH. But the damage modeling is very simplistic.

[Blooz]

Since we don't die for real when we make a mistake, all we can do is learn from it and get better over time.

[RumbleB]

That was Robert Johnson. Just remember that for every story like that there are 100 stories in which just a couple of hits brought the plane down - only those stories are never told because there is no one left to tell them.

The P47 was a rugged plane - statistically. It does not mean it was impossible to bring down, far from it. I t just means that it had a better chance to survive damage, and so it does in AH.

Damage modeling is perhaps the soft underbelly of AH. In flight modeling it is way ahead of anything else out there, and generally what was true in real life (after filtering for anecdotes and a few FM quirks) is quite close to how the planes perform in AH. But the damage modeling is very simplistic.

It's simplstic when compared to real life indeed but it's balanced between gameplay and simulation just right. Best around.

[thedoom26]

ahh i see, i still like to research aircraft and that, its a hobbie of mine, also i own a little cessna 206 and  fly around a little bit, but yea thanks for the help

[Schen]

Also having a private pilot licence as well as a glider pilot licence. i can say its a great benefit having the understand of flight controls and how to correct from stalls and spins. It will lesson the learning curve allowing you to concentrate on the game itself. Once you learn the game, the basics of acm and achieve your first air to air kill you will be hooked.

[Blagard]

I think in games like AH it is all a bit of a compromise anyway. You don't have real feedback on the controls and the absence of G makes it all a bit clinical. While damage, speed and handling are modelled differently to suit type (together with loads of other stuff), the bottom line is very very few people are around that have actually flown the warbirds in question, and even fewer in anger. So who knows.

My own full size experience is limited to hang gliders, sailplanes and light aircraft. But I reckon flying RC models is the nearest to AH! - Like AH you are stuck on the ground with visual feedback only, albeit external. I also used to do silly things in RC for the fun of it, on rare occassion having a "lawn dart" when exceeding the envelope. For a laugh I have flown AH offline using a tower view or something to fly like RC - which I will admit is actually tougher than RC as speed is more critical.

The bottom line is AH is a game for fun - It does as good a job as any in creating a little atmosphere so you can become immersed in the fights and escape the real world for a while. I would not take the accuracy as a flight sim too seriously. At least you will become aware of the differences that arise in the aircraft types in game.

[Randy1]

I can say with a bit if confidence, that a P47 is more durable to ai field and town ack than say a P51 or a P38.  Attacking non-maned ack, is a bit of a stretch in terms of a measuring system but it does have substance I believe.

[Stellaris]

AH is completely simulated.  It all happens in your computer.



It's a pretty good simulation, I think.  Sometimes you will hear people complain about how this plane or that plane could or could not do this or that thing.  However what the real planes could or could not do is actually irrelevant (and what people THINK the real planes could or could not do is even less relevant).  The planes in the game fly the way they fly, they all have their strengths and weaknesses.  Since it's a pretty good simulation, researching the real planes will be somewhat helpful, but far more important is to fly them as they exist in the game.  Fly them lots, and you will learn those strengths and weaknesses intimately AS THEY EXIST IN THE GAME, and it will not matter to you if, where or how they diverge from what the real version did. 

[Agent360]

As for as this game goes most experienced players consider the "Jug" a flying tank. In the world of AH the damage the Jug can take vs all the other planes is waaaayyyy more.

I zero will catch fire quite easily...just like in real life...a Jug will take all kinds of hits and keep on flying...just like in real life.

So the answer is that "generally" and within in the best limits of "flight modeling" the Jug is true to real life.

If you want a plane that can buzz a field and survive ack...take a Jug....if you do this in a zero your on fire the first pass. If you want a plane that can dive on a flak panzer and survive a second pass take a Jug...etc.