biggest changes to AH FM/gunnery modeling since beta opinions...

[Karnak]

So, you see  that something is not correct.  Take a closer look at Hurricane. In real life this plane was diving very poor due to big air drag. In AH it dives pretty well. Is something wrong with air drag/E-burning calculations?

If you've read the books written by russian pilots  who were unlucky enough to fly Hurricanes (all rearmed with cannons btw)  in 1942 and early 1943 they all were dreaming about getting Yak-7 or P-39 instead.
Now check the stats of HurriIIC vs Yak7 or P39s - you can see straight away Hurri IIC owns Yak7B, P39D and P39Q all together(!) in total number of kills and much more effective in K/D . Does it sound right ?

I am pretty sure that is 95-100% due to its quad Hispano armament. 

[-aper-]

I am pretty sure that is 95-100% due to its quad Hispano armament. 

So what is wrong if it makes it good in AH (better than Yak-7 and P-39s), but did not make it good enough in real life?

[Karnak]

So what is wrong if it makes it good in AH (better than Yak-7 and P-39s), but did not make it good enough in real life?

I have long held that the Hurricane (and Bf110) are more agile in AH than they were historically.  My posting history on the subject backs that up (search for the phrase "Hurricane Mk XIV" or "Bf110K-4"), but that said in an actual organized event I suspect that the P-39 and Yak-7 would prove to be the better fighters due to speed and climb.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I have long held that the Hurricane (and Bf110) are more agile in AH than they were historically.  My posting history on the subject backs that up (search for the phrase "Hurricane Mk XIV" or "Bf110K-4"), but that said in an actual organized event I suspect that the P-39 and Yak-7 would prove to be the better fighters due to speed and climb.

I have posted this before but here goes: The FAF aces who flew against soviet hurricanes gave out a war time training manual which described the hurricane as 'extremely clumsy and slow with tendency to burn the pilot on first hit, best advised to engage immediately in turn fight with it and aim the fuselage fuel tank'.

The FAF also flew several captured hurricanes themselves so they had first hand knowledge.

Doesn't sound much like the hurri here.

[Toad]

I do love the coulda/woulda/shoulda arguments here on X vs Y aircraft.

Just to toss some gas on the fire,  http://www.aviationclassics.co.uk/news/issue-6-battle-of-britain-spitfire-or-hurricane

Enjoy. The writer is a Brit fighter pilot that flew both the Spit and Hurri while a former Officer Commanding the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight.

A good read in any event.

[-aper-]

I have long held that the Hurricane (and Bf110) are more agile in AH than they were historically.  My posting history on the subject backs that up (search for the phrase "Hurricane Mk XIV" or "Bf110K-4"), but that said in an actual organized event I suspect that the P-39 and Yak-7 would prove to be the better fighters due to speed and climb.

It's good that we came to the same conclusion about Hurricane's performance completely independently.
There is a very detailed report based on the speed/stall/dive tests of HurricaneIIC made in 1943 in NII VVS (Russia).
http://www.airpages.ru/book/hurricane_00.shtml

To sum it up:
The max speed reached in dive at full throttle (at 70-80 degree angle) was 640 km/h ias. It was in good accordance with manufacturer data (390mph)
(In AH the plane quickly reaches 500+ mph ias starting to disintegrate.)

Stall/spin tests showed that the plane falls into left spin quickly and without warning and it takes additional time/alt to recover from spin due to delay in response on controls while spinning.

(In AH Hurricane always gives a long stall warning and it is possible to recover control of the plane immediately if stall happened.)

It is obvious that Hurricane is modeled way too wrong in AH. 

[Nath[BDP]]

It baffles the mind how some FMs have changed since beta.  190A8 still bleeds E like its AH1.  Brewster holds E over high G turns like it has 2x the power to weight ratio.

[icepac]

I think the changes to flight modeling that diverged from reality were done for player retention but I also believe that they should be reviewed from time to time concerning which players they are trying to retain.........new or old players and strike a balance.

Sounds like a very difficult tightrope to walk for HTC but they seem to have done a great job.

[Karnak]

I think the changes to flight modeling that diverged from reality were done for player retention but I also believe that they should be reviewed from time to time concerning which players they are trying to retain.........new or old players and strike a balance.

Sounds like a very difficult tightrope to walk for HTC but they seem to have done a great job.

Would you care to support that?

Which flight models were changed to intentionally diverge from reality?

[hitech]

I think the changes to flight modeling that diverged from reality were done for player retention but I also believe that they should be reviewed from time to time concerning which players they are trying to retain.........new or old players and strike a balance.

Sounds like a very difficult tightrope to walk for HTC but they seem to have done a great job.

We have never intentionally diverged any flight models from reality.

HiTech

[USRanger]

We have never intentionally diverged any flight models from reality.

HiTech

I call BS!!!  I think the Claw is 10 mph faster than it should be!

[Toad]

Excuse me guys but I sorta have to laugh when I read this stuff.

I have a very good friend that works at a high level for the company that operates the world’s largest fleet of advanced full flight simulators. These are, for example, the latest corporate jets from well known manufacturers. This company may spend $20 million on a single simulator and the software. They have access to the test data from and co-operate with the corporations that build the actual aircraft in order to program the simulators for maximum reality.

You know what the typical comment is from the customers that fly these simulators? It's that they "don't fly like the airplane".

Yet here we are, pointing out that our AH airplanes "don't fly like the airplane" when

1. There's not really much available data on these aircraft
2. The companies that built them are either out of business or have no interest in helping build a fully realistic flight model
3. It would take a HUGE multi-million dollar company to build such flight models for the number of aircraft in here if the data were available

For myself, I am simply amazed that HTC can get as close as it does considering for the mere pittance we spend on a computer and $15/month.

[icepac]

since you asked......

spins

In real life, pulling hard G's in uncoordinated flight will snap you into a pretty instantaneous spin and even a cessna 150 with rudder full deflection in a power on stall will snap you into a spin vicious enough that the first half turn is usually upside down.

It all got more gentle with warbirds 3 as WB2.77 still had a pretty vicious snap into spin thing going on and it seems "soft" here as well.

My spin observation probably doesn't fit the topic as I never flew any version other than the current version of aces high but I believe what I said about spins being harder to induce here.

[Yeager]

Fifteen years in and people are still contemplating step one.  HTC, you have succeeded.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

For myself, I am simply amazed that HTC can get as close as it does considering for the mere pittance we spend on a computer and $15/month.

The REAL problem is that AFAIK 99,9% of AH players have never flown a centimeter in the planes that we're talking about here. Everyone is talking about their own opinion on how plane (x) should fly according to the stuff they've read.