place your vote... fix the turn rates in AH?

[Citabria]

I tested these numbers posted on IL2 forum in AH.

I noticed that Aces High comes up with exact numbers for those by using an initial turn from level speed pulling through a full 360 with the buzzer going.

best circle time of 20 sec left for g2      

even at sustained 3g pull I get 22 seconds almost every time

perhaps there in lies the interpretation by AH designers interpreting these AHT numbers as initial 360 best circle times from level speed?

btw the individual turn rates and radius is not plugged into the FM if I remember right. it is all a product of the horizontal component of lift, weight etc.
by the way at sea level ground effect could have been a factor in turn rate on those tests.

AH has no ground effect.

[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 06-02-2000).]

[fats]

--- Funked: ---
IMHO 10-20% is pretty damn close. Considering how much variability we have seen in historical and sim flight test data, I don't think it's worth arguing about, and certainly not worth starting a player revolt.
--- end ---

I think Shaw said something that a 10% difference in a performance gategory ( hmm well I mean speed and such ) makes two aircraft distinct enough to call one having an advantage. Now this doesn't apply directly perhaps to the sittuation at hand, if all a/c are off 10% to the same direction, their relative performance will still be off by that 10%. Now if one was minus 10% and the other plus 10% it's a different story.

OTOH, something that causes a plane to turn 20% less, could it make the plane loop 20% less or could it affect looping even more - say 30%? What I am getting at, that something that has one effect on one type of move might have different effect for some other move. If a plane needs that move more than the other planes - then in sense it is penalized more than the others because of this error.

Oh and the above paragraph is a real nice on for any sorta conspiracy theory too.


//fats
FWIW, historical note: WB P-51's top speed was off by 7mph and caused perhaps the most posted thread in flite-sim usenet group, thread that was about CK/WB anyhow.

[Hangtime]

Sisu..

Your point is valid.. but it sidesteps the question:

"So; the real question is "Are the RELATIVE performance charteristics for the planes in this sim good enuff to emulate their real life counterparts??"

And I have NOT seen as of yet any FM is this sim that is out of place relative to it's counterparts.

<S!>

Hang

[Karnak]

Hangtime,

The problem is that if all aircraft have the correct speed, acceleration, climb and dive characteristics (I'm not saying they do, but lets say they do for the sake of the arguement) but turn worse than they should, that is not a neutral difference.  Its not neutral because some planes, particularly the upcoming Zero, rely completely on turning, whereas some other aircraft rely completely on speed and climb.  If the turn is not correct but the speed and climb are correct the Zero is adversely affected whereas the F4U is not.

That is why this would be a problem.  I don't know if there is an error with turning or not, but I'd like it to be looked into in order to verify that it is correct, or in order to pinpoint the problem and fix it.  Its not so much the matter of how a Spitfire turns with a Fw190, but rather is the Spitfire's turning/speed ratio correct as it stands alone.  The same goes for every other plane.

BTW, Sisu is my sign off.  It is a Finnish word that translates, roughly as "What must be done, will be done, regardless of the cost".  Karnak is my handle and what I fly under.    

Sisu

[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 06-02-2000).]

[funked]

Fats, sure 10% is enough to make a difference.  But if you consider the variation in flight test data of this sort (look at Wells' comments about stall speeds) as well as the variation in the flight test data from users (look at my results vs. those of Lazs and Hoolgn), 10% is nothing.  You can model the plane perfectly and still see this 10% difference due to measurement variation!

Like I said before, if someone comes up with data showing that all the planes are off, and off by a large amount, then I might get interested.


[This message has been edited by funked (edited 06-02-2000).]

[Citabria]

hey funked I tested circle times of the P-38L...


25% fuel light ammo load: 20sec 360 riding deep into stall horn w flaps (18 deg/sec)
100% fuel full ammo load: 22sec 360 riding the stall horn with flaps ( 16.4 deg/sec)

and the p51d left turn...
25% fuel 4 guns: 23 seconds 360 w flaps (15.6 deg/sec)
75% fuel(aux empty) 6 guns: 26 seconds 360 w flaps (13.8 deg/sec)

and the n1k2j left turn...
25% fuel: 17sec! w flaps (21.2 deg/sec)
100% fuel: 20 seconds with flaps (18 deg/sec)
     

I achieved these times by riding the stall as hard as possible (slowest controlable speed)and recorded the third turn after 2 complete 360's at sea level. e was blown completely... these were the sustained turn times. the initial 360 turn times with E were FASTER! than  these sustained 360 turn times  

after killing so many of you guys I just dont think your pulling hard enough with those 28 sec 360 turn rates  


[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 06-02-2000).]

[Citabria]

zero turn performance: A6m2b

 

Revolution
[Radius(m)/(sec)]
usual=186/9.33
quick=341/5.62

I dont understand that exactly but I believe the top figure is sustained and the bottom is initial 360 with speed time judging from the radii.
if I'm reading it right it looks like the spitfire is gonna be in deep cocka.    
 http://home.interlink.or.jp/~katoh00/

[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 06-02-2000).]

[funked]

Citabria, thanks for the tests of the other planes.  

About the A6M2:  To do a 341 meter circle in 5.62 seconds requires a speed of 858 mph pulling 43g!  

[Citabria]

ROFL!!

I knew those numbers looked funny but I still think the zeke will be king of T&b and unseat that dang spitfire  

[funked]

Yeah it should be great.  And don't forget that A6M5 initial climb is about 3600 fpm which is better than the Spit V!

[Citabria]

anyways.. back to the topic... I did a further comparison of the time it took for a bf109f4 from AH and a bf109 from wb to complete a full 360 riding the edge of a stall. here is what I found

Warbirds Bf109f4:
25% fuel 360 w flaps: 16 sec
50% fuel 360 w flaps: 17 sec
100% fuel 360 w flaps: 17 sec

Aces High Bf109F4:
25% fuel 360 w flaps: 19 sec
50% fuel bf109 w flaps: 20 sec
100% fuel bf109 w flaps: 23 sec


this comparison was done by timing the aircraft after the 3 consecutive 360s and then timing every other 360 for a couple turns with each different fuel loading thus giving a good indication of the turn ability in a classic 1v1 dogfight after all E has been blown. as always initial 360turn rates from level speed were faster. the results were quite consistant except for 1 360 in the AH 109 w 50% fuel which timed at 19 seconds while the others were hitting 20 seconds.

[This message has been edited by Citabria (edited 06-02-2000).]

[Citabria]

someone asked me about the spit 5 sustained turn so I did one with only 50% fuel... here it is.

spitV 50% fuel: 19sec


I waited until 3 full circles before I began timing every other one. I hit 19sec 3 times in a row before I gave up trying to get a better circle from it. however speed was about 85-90mph... very small radius if anyone wants to calculate it out

[funked]

Hmm looks like for Bf 109F at least, WB overestimates turn rate.  AH seems to be right on the VVS figures.  Must be part of the vast Luftwaffe conspiracy behind all WB flight models.  Let's go to AGW and start a "fix the turn rates" campaign.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 06-02-2000).]

[easymo]

 Lets go to AGW? I dont think so. They have enough grief over there.

 I will admit the erge to post pyro,s screenshot over there almost got the best of me (pays to advertise), but out of respect for the mac guys I fought it back.

[This message has been edited by easymo (edited 06-03-2000).]

[SnakeEyes]

Where did the AGW part become relevant Funked?  Lazs plays AH as much as WB these days you know.

It's stuff like that which drives the growing animosity (even when it's joking) between the communities.

------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=