Time to Neuter the 109s

[Arlo]

It is the fact that if someone has an idea that truly will make things more realistic, or more accurate, that person has to get it past a committee of people with their feet stuck in the mud. Meanwhile, the people that have seen little problems in the game are afraid to speak up on the BBS. Well, I'm not afraid.

As 'brave' as you are, that's not a 'fact' ........ either.  

[MiloMorai]

Ack-Ack you should change your nick to Barbi.

[Chalenge]

Basically your saying its wrong and the reason is because you say so. And then you wonder why there is an "gang-bang inquisition"?

No, I did my homework. I talked to 109 pilots (real ones, not virtual ones like the guys on this BBS), and stunt pilots (Pitts, Extra, Magister. . .). I fly a sailplane, so I know for a fact that the low speed, near stall condition is modeled wrong. All I needed was confirmation about the factor of torque in the mix.

The problem is that, as usual, you boys want to jump on the "you don't know because you don't fly a warbird" band wagon. Instead you should ask proper questions to determine the reality of the flight model. The fact is it's wrong. You don't need to be an aircraft designer to know it's wrong. However, it is close and all it needs is a little adjustment. You want to go against having it adjusted because it will limit your advantage in being familiar with a flight model that has been this way all along. Instead, you should want it adjusted to be more realistic, and therefore limit the criticism of your favorite game.

So, where's your warbird? How many 109 pilots have you talked to? Because all you have to do is demonstrate an AH video of all the "tricks" in our current flight model and they will tell you it's not right.

However, this thread is about the flaps. Clearly, the flaps are wrong and therefore need to be adjusted, or the risk will be that even if you have spot-on graphics you will still meet with criticism.

[Chalenge]

As 'brave' as you are, that's not a 'fact' ........ either.  

You are one of the worst of the committee. That's a fact.

[Arlo]

You are one of the worst of the committee. That's a fact.

Please stop whining. Thank you, in advance. 

[The Fugitive]

No, I did my homework. I talked to 109 pilots (real ones, not virtual ones like the guys on this BBS), and stunt pilots (Pitts, Extra, Magister. . .). I fly a sailplane, so I know for a fact that the low speed, near stall condition is modeled wrong. All I needed was confirmation about the factor of torque in the mix.

The problem is that, as usual, you boys want to jump on the "you don't know because you don't fly a warbird" band wagon. Instead you should ask proper questions to determine the reality of the flight model. The fact is it's wrong. You don't need to be an aircraft designer to know it's wrong. However, it is close and all it needs is a little adjustment. You want to go against having it adjusted because it will limit your advantage in being familiar with a flight model that has been this way all along. Instead, you should want it adjusted to be more realistic, and therefore limit the criticism of your favorite game.

So, where's your warbird? How many 109 pilots have you talked to? Because all you have to do is demonstrate an AH video of all the "tricks" in our current flight model and they will tell you it's not right.

However, this thread is about the flaps. Clearly, the flaps are wrong and therefore need to be adjusted, or the risk will be that even if you have spot-on graphics you will still meet with criticism.

There is your problem, you are trying to use "personal accounts" as facts. How a plane feels at a low speed stall to you may be described very differently by me in the same condition. How it "feels" is irrelevant as it is a very rare thing that two people will "feel" the same thing, let alone describe it the same way.

The flaps issue can be tested and debated as the film shows the time needed to move the flaps, at leisure. In the heat of battle how much flap usage was there really?  Any documentation? Did the pilot make a quick swipe or two..... much like the button press we do in the game, did he count the times he rolled it? Again all speculative, relying on 60 years old memories in most cases.

Do the 109s need to be tweak, maybe, it doesn't really matter to me. The biggest difference between this game and real life is that our "pilots" have thousands of hours of practice pushing these "planes" PAST their limits. Real pilots only have hundreds, and most no where near the limits of their planes. Say HTC adjust the planes more to your liking, these guys will just learn new tricks.  

As to everyone wanting the game to be more realistic, I doubt very much that will ever happen. Its a game and some concessions are made to make it "fun", not a chore. I don't want to mess with cowl flaps and heaters and such, I just want to have a good old knock down drag out fight with another human.

[bozon]

What proof do you have that shows flap deployment speeds for all planes are incorrect?  The P-38 only took around 7-8 seconds to deploy full flaps and 2 seconds to deploy the dive flaps on the P-38L. 

The p38 was special in having quick flaps. I did not suggest a unique value for each plane because I do not think that the data is available. Thus a flat typical value for everyone.

[Ack-Ack]

Ack-Ack you should change your nick to Barbi.

Why? Is asking to see some sort of data that backs up his speculation that there is a problem with the flight model?  I'm not claiming the flight model is perfect, I am just suspect of people that claim the flight model is incorrect but yet do not show any evidence of it being so other than they think it's incorrect.

ack-ack

[asterix]

No, I did my homework. I talked to 109 pilots (real ones, not virtual ones like the guys on this BBS), and stunt pilots (Pitts, Extra, Magister. . .). I fly a sailplane, so I know for a fact that the low speed, near stall condition is modeled wrong. All I needed was confirmation about the factor of torque in the mix.

The problem is that, as usual, you boys want to jump on the "you don't know because you don't fly a warbird" band wagon. Instead you should ask proper questions to determine the reality of the flight model. The fact is it's wrong. You don't need to be an aircraft designer to know it's wrong. However, it is close and all it needs is a little adjustment. You want to go against having it adjusted because it will limit your advantage in being familiar with a flight model that has been this way all along. Instead, you should want it adjusted to be more realistic, and therefore limit the criticism of your favorite game.

So, where's your warbird? How many 109 pilots have you talked to? Because all you have to do is demonstrate an AH video of all the "tricks" in our current flight model and they will tell you it's not right.

However, this thread is about the flaps. Clearly, the flaps are wrong and therefore need to be adjusted, or the risk will be that even if you have spot-on graphics you will still meet with criticism.

What a silly thread this has become. Saying that you fly a sailplane and have talked to 109 pilots gives you little credibility in my eyes. And this comes from a former powered aircraft pilot. Who were those 109 pilots, did they fly in real combat and did they have to actuate their flaps like their life depended on it? Who is going to say how many seconds exactly does it take to deploy flaps in a 109 and for all other aircraft we have in the game? Why should the planes be corrected one at a time? I say tweak all the flap speeds to the exact values at the same time. Of course flight model feels different and it is probably incorrect, but what is correct?

Quote: "I fly a sailplane, so I know for a fact that the low speed, near stall condition is modeled wrong. All I needed was confirmation about the factor of torque in the mix." Do you even realise how this sounds? Different types of the same aircraft behave differently near stall speeds (small dents in the wing etc), let alone different aircraft.

[lyric1]

My varied background tells me the guy in the video wasn't demonstrating typical air combat flaps deployment speed which limits his usefulness as a reference.

Well using the video lets say the guy was just landing with a non combat situation then?

[Chalenge]

What a silly thread this has become. 

Therein lies the entire problem with this community. There's no saving it now! All we can do is enjoy it while we can.

[Chalenge]

I "Chalenge" any one of you to build a cockpit and prove that it is possible to fly combat and use flaps like you do in AH. Put your money where you mouth is.

[Serenity]

For the very reason that the gang-bang inquisition is yet another example of why customers are leaving. On the BBS there are plenty of people pointing at the HTC team and claiming they are to blame why ignoring their own involvement. This is one of them, and I already told you all you need to know.

This response in and of itself has completely removed you as a respectable individual in my eyes. You've elevated yourself to the level of tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists who think that they know the universe. Who the hell are you to tell me what I need to know?

I point this out, because I really do enjoy realism. I love the DCS games because they model it right down to the tedious little things that are almost so insignificant in a game that they drive you crazy, but they're there in real life. I want the AH models to be as accurate as possible, even if it makes the game more work, because, darnit, that's what I enjoy.

But when you come in here screaming that YOU know better, because YOU KNOW, without any data, without any source, and when questioned, get this pretentious attitude as if you're some kind of genius who cannot be bothered to explain to mere mortals, you kill the debate. By being a joke and something of a avacado, YOU are the biggest obstacle to change, because god forbid you're right, and HTC DOES side with you, they now have to accept that it appears that your attitude is what inspired the change, and now they get to breed a whole forum of people acting JUST like this.

If there is an error with the flight model, you bet I want it corrected, even if it makes the plane much more difficult and much less effective, I want these aircraft as realistic as they can be, and I will support any push to achieve that. But don't come in thumping your chest about how you just "know". Bring data, bring references. As bad as personal stories are at conveying the real behavior of the aircraft, if you're gonna say you "talked to pilots", name the damn pilots, and tell us why we should believe them. You and I have the same cause, but you're alienating everyone who would probably be helping you in your approach.

[Randy1]

What is needed is a quote from an interview of a WW2 109 pilot describing the usefulness or lack there of the manual flaps in combat.

[Arlo]

Therein lies the entire problem with this community. There's no saving it now! All we can do is enjoy it while we can.

Your thread doesn't fly so now it's a community problem? Meh.  

1. A good argument does not require 'repeating until everyone agrees with you.'

2. You're posting more about how 'the community is doomed and life is unfair' and less in support of your premise now.

Just saying.

*Pride is one of those 'seven deadly sins' dude.