FA Flight Model

[Poony]

Well looks like it's time to delete my AH account for FA3.

Bye-Bye!!  

[mrsid2]

You could give the game the benefit of a doubt.

I tried it at full realism and it wasn't all THAT bad. I'm sure people will have loads of fun with it too, but I don't see it as a threat to AH.

The basic approach of the game (FM defaults to arcade and switches it back to arcade after each change) shows that in the end it's directed towards the beginner shoot-em-up flightsim crowd. When they learn a little, hear news about AH, then compare it to FA empty full realism arena, where do you think they'll send thier $ to? I have a pretty good guess

[K West]

"it's directed towards the beginner shoot-em-up flightsim crowd."

 Exactly. It's when some come here  and try to tell us cifferently is when folks here can get agitated and response unkindly.
 
 Westy


(padlock... ! how about auto-maneuvering, computer operated firing control and power ups too?  )

[mrsid2]

We have padlock in AH too

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by mrsid2
We have padlock in AH too

Well, yes and no.  Yes, it padlocks the icon above the A/C, but it breaks lock when that icon/aircraft passes through any part of your canopy frame.  In other words, for those used to FA padlock, its useless.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Zigrat
that game allows superman view right? ill never play any game when i know my opponent is flying aroud like superman.

This view is not an option in full realism.

Originally posted by Montezuma
Does FA still have the magic padlock view that finds the nearest enemy for you?

No. They have fixed it. It will even break padlock if the target goes through the clouds.

FWIW, I don't fly FA. I have a friend at work that has been into it for years. He's quite knowledgeable of the planes and the capabilities. He chooses FA as a matter of taste. We don't fly the same sim, but we can speak the same lanquage. Also... he mentioned that he thought posting FA news on an AH board by an non-AH flyer was in bad taste.

[Sunchaser]

Hey Sikboy, just because Habu registered or perhaps reregistered recently and has three posts you assume he knows nothing about AH but is just here to spam for FA?

Could it be that he is just a flight sim/game enthusiast who is just passing imformation to other flight sim/game enthusiasts?

I have on occasion mentioned AH on the IL2 forum and others and IL2 on this one and others, I forgot to check with you first though, guess I need a bashing.

[Maniac]

Udie,

That argument that HT has flown an real P51 really sux...

How come we had the pre 1.03 flight model FOR SO LONG TIME until they discovered it was wrong? hey HT has flown an real P51 so he should have noticed something was wrong from the beggining

I will say it for you, gameplay concession. or rather caving in for the massess...

[Zippatuh]

When FA3 is finished, I’ll probably give it a try just to see what’s changed.  I started in FA2.5 so sure, I’m interested in what they did to 3.  The preponderance of the fliers to frequent the RR rooms I imagine has not, and will not change.  The advanced room I imagine may give some good feedback, but like now it will be hardly used.

When I was there the most I ever saw in the advanced room were 10-15 people.  I doubt that will change with FA3.  So the “superman” view comment is valid.  As well as the 9g turns, not to mention an absolute stall in a vertical to near 0 MPH with no problems in control.

Saying a new flyer should use FA because it is easier doesn’t really hold with me.  All it does is teach them bad habits.  If a new flyer started out with the most difficult setting in realism I really don’t think it would take them any longer to figure it out then it does RR; especially if everyone else is coping with the same model.

FA will stay in business because of its arcade options and will draw people who want that kind of setup.  To me it’s like saying “Hey, all you BMW lovers out there.  Did you hear?  The Gremlin is back and better than ever!”  Hell, everyone would have to check out the new Gremlin, but I’m not sure there will be many buyers.

Zippatuh

[Sikboy]

Hey now Sunchaser,

I never said that Habu didn't know anything about AH. I had the impression (and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong Habu) that he was not an AH player. Yes this was based on his recent appearence on the boards, and his first shot out of the gate being an endorsement of FA. I don't think that my assumtion is at all unfair.

I have on occasion mentioned AH on the IL2 forum and others and IL2 on this one and others, I forgot to check with you first though, guess I need a bashing.

Why would you check with me? I don't play IL2, so I don't post on their forums. See the connection there?


-Sikboy

[AKSWulfe]

Maniac, it was acknowledged there was a bug with the 1.03 energy retention.

I notice you fly WB too, did they cave into the masses? Guess not, HT wrote that flight model too-  about 8 years ago.
-SW

[Maniac]

Maniac, it was acknowledged there was a bug with the 1.03 energy retention.

Yes thats exactly what im talking about, How come HT didnt notice it before then? afterall he did fly an real p51 once

Are you trying to teach ME about the history of Warbirds and who did what? boy you better vise up...

[AKSWulfe]

Are you trying to get smart with me? Boy, you best not.
-SW

[miko2d]

Thanks for update, Habu.

 I have to caution you and everyone else about the validity of experience of the "real stick time" in P-51

 I bet that P-51 had the same engine in top condition but no pilot armor, armament and ammunition installed.

 Try to guess how much all that stuff weights and how it translates into wingloading, maximum speed, critical AOA and stall characteristics.

 I am sure that empty demilitarised P-51 would outturn a Zero.

 As for the people who flew real P-51s in combat, the opinions run the whole scale from "most nimble angle fighter" to "unwieldy squeak".

 Modelling physics is the only way to reproduce the correct flight model.

 Whether the absolutely accurate flight model is essential to enjoying the sim is a different matter altogether.
 AH in it's 1.03 version with excessive energy loss was actually more enjoyable for many - more like a "chess in the sky" then "yank the stick" feel.

 miko

[K West]

"Try to guess how much all that stuff weights and how it translates into wingloading, maximum speed, critical AOA and stall characteristics."

 Of course the flight dynamics change but not as much as some of you who say a modern day P-51 bears little (re: flight chracteristics) resemblance to a 1944-45 P-51. I've heard that line of reasoning many times over the past couple of years and just because some there's been removal of combat gear doesn't mean the P-51's still flying handle like docile Cessna's.  Especially when you consider some of that weight is gained back having two poeple and also any modern gear being installed for FAA and/or safety regs in it.

 Just the same, having "flown" the plane once or even twice does not an expert make. But I'd respect the opinion of those who've been behind the actual stick and in flight than one who's only handled thge stick bolted to the desk and sitting next to a bookcase of manuals, pubs and stories.

 As for 1.03 - 1.04 change?  It was HTC that found problem(s?) after several learned and well spoken people persistantly posted about what they felt were FM errors.   Given the very fast evolution of AH at the time it was no surprise to me that something could be accidently missed.  Especially something that wasn't glaringly obvious to find and as Pyro stated the search for any possible FM errors set them back an development period. But it was the AH community that hyped the AH fm.  I don't think it's fair to even insinuate that HTC did that nor make it appear that they ended up swallowing those words with 1.04.


  Westy