Warbirds price dropping to $19.95

[Gadfly]

Hey Toad, when he was wallowing, did he have the screen zoomed?  I have noticed the effect when I am in the zoomed view, myself.

AKSwulfe, your memory must be short; every sims FM changes with updates, including this one.  That has nothing to do with the "correctness" of the FM, it just means that they were able to refine it further in some way(or fix a boo-boo).

[easymo]

Toad.  They all claim to have the most realistic FM (AH,WB,IL2).  They all point at the numbers. Yet, they are all different.  How can that be? 2x2=4 in any language. I think you have just picked out something that you like.  And are pointing for all your worth.

  I don't believe for a second that WW2 aircraft where this easy to fly.  They were the "state of the art" hot rods of their time. In leu of ALL the the stuff we don't have to bother with. And there was a lot to keeping one of these things in the air, from what I have read. IMO keeping the plane in trim is a small trade off at that.

[Kieran]

FWIW, all I did was mention trim was important in Il-2. Oh, and did I mention it was fun?

[Creamo]

Well said Easymo.

And I think it would be a nice option to micro manage realistic WWII aircraft systems, just s HTC caters to new flyers with auto take-off and CT.

Would that be well spent product development resourses? Pry not, but the core players would dig it. Maybe they could get DRip employed, and he would damn near "automate" the process.

[Elfenwolf]

Yeah well, I'm here from Air Warrior and I want photon torpedoes and warp drive. I didn't sign up to play Aces High because I wish to waste brain space on worrying about which plane can do what and in fact I don't know the difference between an aerilon or a rudder- nor do I care. All I care about is that if I pull the trigger the bad guys die. We need unlimited gas, unlimited ammo and instant aerial spawning in the MA. You realism freaks are the type of guys who spend your lifes savings on realistic 5 thousand dollar love dolls instead of a 7.99 inflatable hand. Guys, it's all fake.

[Gyro/T69]

From Flight Maneuvers Manual for Instructors and Students 1969, 1888

Trim Tab - A small auxiliary airfoil, usually attached to a movable control surface to aid in its movement, or to effect a slight displacement of it for the purpose of trimming the airplane for varying conditions of power,load or airspeed.

Elevator - The Elevators control the movement of the airplane about the lateral (pitch) axis. Raising the elevators forces tail down and raises nose and lowering elevators forces the tail up and  lowers the nose. Elevators control the angle of attack.

Toad is dead right on this one. What you have in the game is a auxiliary elevator. That is not what
trim was designed to do. Can anyone say the trim in the game does not fit the description of an elevator?

  Easymo, flying a plane out of trim is not a big deal at all. Beacuse conditions of power,load or airspeed are changing most of the time. It's necessary  to retrim the airplane if the pilot wants to fly hands free or to relieve the back pressure on the stick. Other wise it's up to him.
  When I learned to fly my instructor never touched the trim for anything other than to fly hands off. Or to help hold the plane in a given climb rate so you didn't have to use as much arm strength to holded the stick back.

We never first set the climb angle with the trim as you can in AH.

Gy

[Toad]

Not to insult, but most simply fail to understand what trim does for the pilot and where in the flight regime it does it for him. There also seems to be a mistaken idea that perfect trim at all times somehow enhances aircraft performance or capability.. like it provides a better turn radius or something. It relieves stick force and is used mostly in relatively static, unchanging conditions. That's what it does.

Now, making this a prime feature of the performance aspect of a game flight model is just  wrong. It's like making gun range a variable dependent upon whether the pilot brushed his teeth before flight.

You want more complexity? Fine, put it where it belongs however. Trim most certainly isn't it. Trim is REAL simple and does not really effect aircraft performance except possibly at the extreme edges of the envelope.

*****

As far as how difficult they were to fly, just remember that during the war young kids fresh off the farm got 9 weeks,   ~60 hours,  in Primary Trainers, 9 weeks , ~ 70 hours in Basic Trainers and 9 weeks ~ 70 in Advanced Trainers. Then they got about 2 months of Transition Training, maybe another 100 hours, after which they were generally deemed "combat ready".

So 300 hour "boy" pilots were more than capable of handling these complex systems.

I think you'll find, if you care to ask the old vets, that by the time they had 500 hours under their belt the flying part was second nature to them and didn't require much of their attention. 500 hours isn't that much.

You really should go for a ride in a T-6 or something. It has all the basic systems that the fighter does. You'll be amazed at how easily it is to manage the systems in flight once you know a bit about them and become familiar with them. The perception that a WW2 pilot was constantly flying about the cockpit switching this and adjusting that is simply....... incorrect. But don't take my word for it... buy yourself a nice birthday present and go see for yourself.

[Creamo]

Toad, trim in AH makes a stable plane, and gun platform. I use it exclusive. My Saitek throttle fwd hat switch is used constant, so much I can fly the plane with it if needed.

CT trim in AH makes you lose a edge, as manual up trim on the elevator turns you better.

How this effects the real planes comparison, I dunno.

As for the 300 hour “boys” , they pry just ruined engines, and then died before the mtx crew could beat the toejam out em. Any Private Pilot course instructs to manage the engine. You don’t just gun it, drop alt at a whim cooling it off, rinse, repeat. The cylinders warp outta the block. Again, I just laugh at the guys that quote WEP test stand documents. WWII high performance aircraft would keep you managing the engine more than navigation. IL-2 models it.

Would you have a workload in AH even in a trainer like a T6 Texan?

No.

I’d like AH to be modeled after a real 2000hp WWII fighter though. Wouldn’t you?

(At least skill selectable, much like the perks ideal)



--------

[Gyro/T69]

As for the 300 hour “boys” , they pry just ruined engines, and then died

  Well, my father was one of the thoses 300 hour "boys" and in his log book had 270.6 hours after moving out of advance training. I can assure you that anyone that ruined engines "washed out" of flight training in big hurry.

Gy

[Toad]

Originally posted by Creamo
Toad, trim in AH makes a stable plane, and gun platform.

Agree. But it shouldn't. Trim really doesn't affect whether an aircraft is a "stable gun platform" or not. Aircraft design does that. Trim just relieves stick pressure, that's all it does. You work on 'em.. you know what it's supposed to do.

 

Originally posted by Creamo
I use it exclusive. My Saitek throttle fwd hat switch is used constant, so much I can fly the plane with it if needed.

Again, this shouldn't be necessary; that's the point.

Originally posted by Creamo
CT trim in AH makes you lose a edge, as manual up trim on the elevator turns you better.

Agree again. However, it SHOULD NOT have that effect. (Except possibly, in a very few aircraft, at the extreme edges of the flight envelope.)

Originally posted by Creamo
How this effects the real planes comparison, I dunno.

It's bogus. Now you know.  

Originally posted by Creamo
As for the 300 hour “boys” , they pry just ruined engines,

No, they didn't. They went to war and did their jobs. They dropped bombs and shot down fighters. Some died in the learning process, some became aces or Bomb Group leaders. By and large they became well skilled in their trade. These were young men with what we would now consider little training.

Originally posted by Creamo
Would you have a workload in AH even in a trainer like a T6 Texan?

I've got some time in the T-6 and quite a bit more in the very similar BT-13. I don't find them any harder to fly than AH. It's just different, not necessarily "harder". Some aspects of AH are WAY harder than flying one of these. Some things in AH are way easier. But overall, neither one is problem to fly; it's just different.

There's another misconception amongst many that do not fly about "workload".

It isn't constant. You don't take off and have this big, constant workload. Not then in the T-6 or P-51 or B-25 or now in a F-16 or B2.

Work load is not low before takeoff and then high all during flight and low again after landing.

Work load varies. It's high in pre-flight (lots to do), low in taxi, high in takeoff, lower after cleanup and during climbout, very low in cruise, rises as you prepare to execute particular maneuvers or prepare for combat and then reduced again as you actually do the maneuvers or fly combat, low in cruise again, rises a small amount on descent,... well, you get the idea. It varies.

Originally posted by Creamo
I’d like AH to be modeled after a real 2000hp WWII fighter though. Wouldn’t you?

Sure! It'd help my score I think.

Seriously, I think what many folks perceive a P-51 to be like in terms of "difficulty" is a far cry from what they would actually experience if they went to Stallion 51 and flew one. Ask HT how well his PC flying skills from games transferred over to flying at Stallion 51.

The workload isn't nearly as high as some would like to believe and it isn't maxed out when it's time to do the actual fighting. Think about it. They designed the planes to kill other planes. If they intended to win, would they try to make that task overly complex or as easy as possible?

Trim, however, is simply a means to reduce stick pressure, primarly in routine non-maneuvering flight.  

Become one with the Cosmic Trim Tab; the truth will set you free.

Nite all!

[Creamo]

Agreed, agreed, agreed, blah...

I've got some time in the T-6 and quite a bit more in the very similar BT-13. I don't find them any harder to fly than AH

roadkill. 90% of the AH players couldn't start a WWII fighter, I'd like the F4.0 model approach. Plus the views are liberal as Sandman is gay and wants to kiss death row killers.

And AH is a game.

They got the FM down to a point, lets get some systems models.

[easymo]

Combat Trim.
The first facts you must understand about trim is that there is no way possible to
Make it work like a real plane. The joystick interaction with the controls is a complete different
Mechanical setup.

In a real plane you would be holding the stick back to maintain level flight.
You would then turn the trim knob to relieve any pressure on the stick, with out the stick moving.
With a computer joystick this simply isn't possible. When you let go of the stick it will always go back to center.
Even force feedback sticks do not have the ability of adjusting stick spring center. -----

HiTech



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  If we are just going to make it up.  Lets make it something that at least requires conscious thought.

easymo

[Creamo]

That's 2 in a row.

[Toad]

Easy you can see there were compromises made just to add trim.

It doesn't work like it would in RL. It became another way of controlling the aircraft and actually improves aircraft performance instead of just a means of relieving stick pressure.

BTW, you know the autopilot simply "flies" (works through) the trim model right?

In any event, the importance of trim is mis-modeled (overmodeled) in most sims. Mistrimming a plane isn't the end of the world, merely an inconvenience.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Creamo
roadkill. 90% of the AH players couldn't start a WWII fighter

Neither could the cadets in 1942 when they first showed up on the flight line. But it probably took all of 10 minutes to show them how. After that they had it.

AH players would learn even faster. It's a simple internal combustion engine for Pete's sake!

I'll make a wager beyond that. Give me someone who's played this game for a while and I'll have him doing decent patterns and landings in a WW2 trainer in an hour. Toughest thing to teach is the landing "picture" and most vets around here would figure it out toot sweet.

Some people like to make out that flying WW2 aircraft requires a degree in quantum physics or something. It takes far more judgement than anything else.

27 weeks from Cadet to rated pilot in WW2. How long you been playing PC flight sims? A lot of it transfers.

Originally posted by Creamo
Plus the views are liberal as

Too bad you weren't at the Con. Robert Shaw discussed icons and views and RL visual cues very briefly. He summed it up real well. I don't think he'd agree with you. I think they filmed his whole talk; maybe you can get it from HT. Or maybe somebody else that was there will tell you what he said.  

Originally posted by Creamo
They got the FM down to a point, lets get some systems models.  

Systems? Sure, why not? We could model having to raise the gear. Let's see, that's moving a little lever up a few inches with one hand. We could maybe substitute a keypress or something. That the type of stuff you have in mind?

You want complexity? Have them model the old "coffee grinder" radio tuners. There's a pain!

Prop Controls and Mixture aren't complex. They're just two levers on the throttle quadrant. After you use them a few times, they're as second nature as putting in and letting out the clutch when you shift gears in a manual shift car. It isn't rocket science.

Hey, how about this for complexity... to make a turn you have to hold down the "q" and "m" keys at the same time (no stick mapping now!) while moving the stick left or right and using your nose to continuously tap the space bar.

That'd be complex, right? Wouldn't have anything to do with flying, but it'd be complex at least. Heck, it'd be like the trim models we see in the current games.