Turning off engine and flop/torque rolls

[bustr]

I wish there was a way to eliminate these unrealistic and lame "maneuvers".  I am seriously getting tired of dog fighting because it seems like all anyone does these days is stall and then smash stick forward left while applying maximum power.  It's an arcade maneuver.  So it starting and stopping your engine during a dog fight with no delay.

At least you can see the separate parts of the funky chicken escape maneuver. Some people only see instant snapping from side to side. When I turned off AH3 v-sync and enabled NVIDIA adaptive-sync, the funky chicken changed from snapping around instantly to the maneuvering you describe. I noticed another factor that made it impossible to hit the con during that maneuver, being 200 or closer. When I'm 300-400, a long burst usually puts an end to it. All air combat games being programs, have limitations because of computers. Compared to AW 4 DOS and subsequent AW versions, AH3 is like going from playing PacMan for 25 cents a pop to walking into a holoroom on the enterprise. Still I thought that when I got my first PII 300 Mhz upgrading from a 486DX2 66.

I bet you have a host of gripes with all your other games because computers have limits. 

[icepac]

Some people's entire bag of tricks rely on "post stall modeling" here.

[nrshida]

There are far better shots to play for than right on the six of your opponent.

[colmbo]

I don't find a problem anywhere in this game with a flight model. Instead of being upset you are being beaten try and learn it yourself

LOL.  You don't fly real life do you.

Not knocking Hitechs game, but the flight model isn't perfect and the post stall antics of some of the airplanes is silly.....Mossie and the 152 come to mind.

I like Aces High, it gives a good impression of flight.

[nrshida]

post stall antics of some of the airplanes is silly.....Mossie...

How so?

[icepac]

1.   The ability to come over the top of a loop in a TA152 at 38mph with rudder deflected and not snap into an immediate spin.

2.   Pulling stick with rudder full deflected and not snapping into an immediate spin.

3.   Planes pivoting like on a rotisserie and changing direction with no transverse G being applied.

That said, HTC can't model everything and that modeling everything hyper realistic will net an arena full of guys constantly spinning in.

Go back and fire up WB2 for something far less forgiving.

I have both on my machine here.

[cav58d]

Then so is taking off 5 seconds after you've been killed.

Okay, your reaching there.  You might as well of said we also don't need three square meals a day so it's not realistic.

And to the person who suggested learning the flop tactic, I say no thank you.  I enjoy learning and employing actual ACM used during the war.  You say that your research leads you to believe it's realistic?  I would love to see some sources that indicate "departure"/loss of controlled flight was a common defensive maneuver.

[FLS]

Based on everyone isn't Sean Tucker and they're not flying the oracle. 

I'm not saying airplanes don't depart controlled flight when they are purposely and aggressively flown well past the stall, but I would argue they should not recover as easy as they do, especially at low altitude.

This maneuver just cheapens the games and  unfortunately it's becoming more and more common.

I don't know where you would find a statistic for this outside of oral history, but I would bet the overwhelming majority of world war 2 fighter aircraft that departed controlled flight below 1,000 feet AGL resulated in the total loss of aircraft and most likely the pilots life, yet in AH just move the rudder here, move the throttle there and you're recovered.

Neil Williams learned the Lomcevak in a Tiger Moth. That's like doing it in an F2b. You don't need a modern aerobatic aircraft to do torque maneuvers, you just a need a good flight model. You can't do torque maneuvers in other flight sims because they don't create flight like the Aces High flight model does. Other sims just simulate controlled flying. Aces High creates flight with simulated aircraft in a simulated environment.  That's why the post stall gyrations match what you see with real aircraft in airshows, although with obvious differences from the different power/weight. 

[nugetx]

Are there more flight model elements which AH does that are not in other flight sims ?

[FLS]

Some people's entire bag of tricks rely on "post stall modeling" here.

There is no "post stall modeling" in the sense that it can be adjusted separately. There is only lift from numerous lift data points, thrust from the prop and from gravity, drag, and torque/slipstream with blanking. It's the same model when you're sitting on the runway, when you're flying, and when you depart controlled flight.

I'm not saying the flight model is perfectly accurate but as far as I know everybody criticizing it is simply guessing about torque maneuvers in WW2 fighters. I'm guessing inaccuracies are more likely from the generous damage model.

Are there more flight model elements which AH does that are not in other flight sims ?

Look at my youtube link airshow videos and try that in other sims.   

[nugetx]

Sir, your latest Spit 3 video should be a promotion of AH with millions of views... everyone should see how the great FM is,  change the music to something not copywrited and HTC should post it on the steam page.

[colmbo]

How so?

They way some of these planes "hang" nose high, zero or very low airspeed and stay in that configuration.  Shouldn't happen.

[nrshida]

They way some of these planes "hang" nose high, zero or very low airspeed and stay in that configuration.  Shouldn't happen.

Have you done this in real life?    The Mosquito isn't as good as the P-38, was infering I could sense the counter rotation and I only have 2 hours in real aircraft 

3.   Planes pivoting like on a rotisserie and changing direction with no transverse G being applied.

What is the effect of transverse G on an aircraft?

You say that your research leads you to believe it's realistic?  I would love to see some sources that indicate "departure"/loss of controlled flight was a common defensive maneuver.

It was two different forum members that said learn it and it's realistic. I didn't say it was a common tactic - it doesn't have to be. As FLS explained, you could do these kind of aerobatic manoeuvres in other things apart from those dedicated aerobatic planes. The most unrealistic aspect of AH is the stick time. Some players have played for three times longer that the duration of the war, have thousands of hours in a type or enjoy pushing the flight 'model' to its limit. We also enjoy the luxury of being virtual - 'yup, that was definately too low!'.

Trouble with the realism argument is when it becomes selective it is essentially a logical fallacy.

[icepac]

Have you done this in real life?    The Mosquito isn't as good as the P-38, was infering I could sense the counter rotation and I only have 2 hours in real aircraft 

Colombo likely has..........he was a pilot for the collings foundation flying WWII iron.

What is the effect of transverse G on an aircraft?

My statement has to do with the fact that a plane can change it's direction 180 degrees faster with the rudder than in a banked turn while maintaining enough airspeed to fly.

The above statement references airspeeds above stall.

There is no "hovercraft turning" type of effect........the airplane just pivots while maintaining airspeed where a real life plane would "wash out" end up with negative airspeed..

The rudder is too effective maybe since you can knife edge a warplane here that never could do it in real life.

That said, aces high is the best sim out and I believe some softening of the penalties of flying beyond limits was necessary to retain players.

Fire up warbirds 2.77 and you will see a slightly less forgiving flight model as compared to warbirds 3 and aces high.

It was two different forum members that said learn it and it's realistic. I didn't say it was a common tactic - it doesn't have to be. As FLS explained, you could do these kind of aerobatic manoeuvres in other things apart from those dedicated aerobatic planes. The most unrealistic aspect of AH is the stick time. Some players have played for three times longer that the duration of the war, have thousands of hours in a type or enjoy pushing the flight 'model' to its limit. We also enjoy the luxury of being virtual - 'yup, that was definately too low!'.

Trouble with the realism argument is when it becomes selective it is essentially a logical fallacy.

I also have about 80 hours of aerobatic time in planes from a c150 aerobat to a citabria and later on, a super decathlon and have flown way too many planes beyond they were designed for.

This includes pointing a 150 aerobat straight up until airpseed read zero with power on, without power on, changing power settings at zero kt. and all manner of full deflection control inputs.

I feel lucky that I didn't pop rivits out of the skins or snap off wings doing what I did as a kid.

When you see "maneuvering speed" in the manual, stating full control inputs can be done at that speed or below within loading and weight and balance limits, it sure feels awfully close to the limits of the airframe and I'm not sure the manufacturer was imagining a 21 year old yanking stick or stomping rudder as hard and as fast as he could.

I fly safe now and have confidence in a plane knowning I've explored a couple corners of the envelope and that a properly maintained plane will not let me down as long as I keep up my end of the bargain.

You guys know that some guys make ATP without ever having spun a plane?

[nrshida]

Colombo likely has..........he was a pilot for the collings foundation flying WWII iron.

 

the airplane just pivots while maintaining airspeed where a real life plane would "wash out" end up with negative airspeed..

I'm not exactly sure I understand your terminology or meaning but I can definitely get negative airspeed in that situation (in a Ki-84). I also can't hammerhead properly despite hundreds of attempts (just get a tight-ish wingover). I thought a hammerhead necessitated an especially effective rudder or a lot of deflection. I can only do a proper hammerhead in some of the twins but that's a different kettle of fish altogether.


So a general comment - I'm not talking about the peculiar AH3 dolphinating-warping manoeuvre here, I believe that's some kind of combination lag issue - but these realism annoyances can easily be neutralized if you just change your philosophy a bit. AH is a game with plenty enough fidelity in the flight modelling to keep you engaged and fly facsimiles of interesting warbirds. I like the history too but through the years the ACM has become more like a sport. Shaw is often cited as the seminal reference book for ACM, but frankly I have at first seen and later assimilated techniques which are way beyond that content. AH is like the last of the active WWII-era ACM research environments. Miss out on that if you like. It's your $15 to pursue what interests you.