Author Topic: AcesHigh FM questions... (Read 313 times)

Daff · « **Reply #15 on:** June 13, 2002, 04:57:02 AM »

ccvi, I used the Beagle Pup as an example because it's the lowest powered plane I've flown. (Well, apart from the Tiger Moth, but that's a different kettle of fish, with a heavy wooden prop).
Other planes I've flown like the Pitts, Yak52, Scottish Bulldog (All with wobbly prop), still moves around plenty when you change the throttle.
(The Pitts being at the extreme end, easily yawing 30 degrees+ if you don't counter with rudder)

Dtango, no I don't use combat trim and I'm not saying that you can't stall at 1G. I'm saying that it wont enter a spin at 1G.

Daff

John F Kennedy · « **Reply #16 on:** June 13, 2002, 08:19:07 AM »

Thanks for the civil discussion and replies!! I posted this to get some AH players pov on the discussion wich was already underway at AGW. While not one of the three 'sims' totally replicates flying a WWII fighter I'm most satisfied with the AH model. WB's has too much 'mush' otherwise it would work fine for me too. WWIIOnline feels just waay off - although I've not flown 1.64 much. Unfortunately if I'd posted this on the WWIIOnline boards (and I'd need a subscription to even try) I'd have been a simple recipient of a fan boi blanket beating party.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #17 on:** June 13, 2002, 08:24:34 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by John F Kennedy
Thanks for the civil discussion and replies!! I posted this to get some AH players pov on the discussion wich was already underway at AGW. While not one of the three 'sims' totally replicates flying a WWII fighter I'm most satisfied with the AH model. WB's has too much 'mush' otherwise it would work fine for me too. WWIIOnline feels just waay off - although I've not flown 1.64 much. Unfortunately if I'd posted this on the WWIIOnline boards (and I'd need a subscription to even try) I'd have been a simple recipient of a fan boi blanket beating party.

JFK, I admit I haven't flown WW2Online since beta, but if they haven't changed anything, it felt off to me, but what do I know? We have MANY commercial and military pilots flying AH, and as a matter of fact, the USAF Cadets use AH as a training tool for basic ACM, with 80 free accounts comped to them. Sabre is one of the instructors there. Eagl, is an ex-Top gun instructor. MiG is an ex-Military jock, Toad is a commercial pilot and owns his own PT-19, many many others I have not mentioned in AH all fly something alittle more than a Pitt. If its good enough for them, its good enough for me.

Fly what you like, like what you fly, as Toad puts it.

ergRTC · « **Reply #18 on:** June 13, 2002, 08:56:19 AM »

Not to start flames, but 1.64 didnt do a whole lot for the fm in ww2o. One thing I have noticed, and I am curious if others had noticed this, is the physics feel. ww2o fm, in all of its suckiness, really feels like your plane has mass. AH seems more lazer like, you turn and your plane follows an exact arc matching your stick movements, kinda like aw. Anybody noticed this? Also, relationship to the ground seems a little more intuitive. when you are at 500 feet you know it, and as long as you have enough ram, it is easy to avoid lawn darting no matter what the maneuver. When you are approaching a hedgerow, you can easily dip a wing and skirt between two trees. Why does AH feel so artificial in this regard? Is it the ground contours or clutter? For those that havent tried 1.64, I suggest the free download to check this out. They have cleaned up the graphics emmensely. I would be really interested in pyros impression of the 'mass' behavior.

ccvi · « **Reply #19 on:** June 13, 2002, 04:12:16 PM »

dtango, the three other prop effect don't have much effect on yaw at take off. torque doesn't have any, just by the definition of torque. p-factor effect requires airspeed and increases with speed, which is 0 at the beginning of take off (unless there's wind). gyroscopic effects require the axis of rotation to change, which happens when you pull up or push the nose down, but not by just rolling forward.

daff, ww2 military aircraft are heavy and fast. their flying characteristics are close to those of a brick. you need large forces to make a brick noticably change it's flight path

jfk, wb3's mushiness comes from a strange way they interpret readings from the joystick. wb3's virtual pilot's strength is limited, so control surfaces can't be moved arbitrarily like in ah. the virtual pilot just isn't moving his own surfaces, but the force required is compared with the player's joystick deflection. thus, if the joystick is fully deflected to one side and the virtual stick isn't yet, it already moves slower than it would if joystick and virtual joystick were be at the same deflection. this is expecially noticable when moving the joystick from full deflection to one side to the other side. while there would be no strenth required to move it to the center, it already moves slow because the joystick is at full deflection in the new direction. they failed to notice that force feedback sticks aren't strong enough to keep stick and virtual stick in sync.

Daff · « **Reply #20 on:** June 13, 2002, 04:37:33 PM »

" wb3's virtual pilot's strength is limited, so control surfaces can't be moved arbitrarily like in ah. "

Actually, AH got similar control delay on the elevator. I also suspect that AH has a similar max strength modelled (I believe it's 50lbs in WB).

Daff