IL2 calls it flutter............

[Rude]

Well, I was being silly, but if you think Il2 resembles RL flight better than AH, then I would disagree.

The comment about being on a rail leads me to ask the following...would any ww2 fighter at 300 indicated tend to feel like it was on a rail or would it perhaps feel like a C-172?

[Dago]

would any ww2 fighter at 300 indicated tend to feel like it was on a rail or would it perhaps feel like a C-172?

I would think it would feel like it is a dump truck heading in one direction and resisting a change, requiring heavy stick forces.
Just my guess anyway, I will ask a friend of mine who has flown and logged a fair amount of time in most every type of warbird, and see what he says.

dago

[SKurj]

Hmm hasn't Oleg admitted the stall/spin model in IL2 is porked?

Andy Bush has commented in the past that fighter aircraft SHOULD feel closer to being on rails...



SKurj

[akak]

Originally posted by jbroey3
Il2 simulates realistic flight better then Aces High does.

Aces high does feel as if planes are riding a predetermined path (Rails) in contrast to Il2 wich is more fluid (as in reality).

Being a real life pilot, although with not with 1000's of hours but a hundred+ as well as having the opportunity to fly in wwii/early 50's fighter trainers, Il2 handles far more aspects of the flight envelope clearer with much more prescison.

The Spins/Stall/Slow flight region for Aces High is somewhat lacking compared to that of Il2. Dont get me wrong Aces High is a good game.. but To refute "Rude".. I think you have it the other way around.  Il2 is the more (true simulation) compared to that of Aces High of wich is moreso the (game).  

Both programs do a good job in differing aspects, Aces has the obvious networking portion complete with a server based on networking software. Il2 has the graphics quality as well as edge on Flight physics. Both are GOOD programs.

They both fall short of a level D sim or X-plane in the flight modeling department however.

In my squad we have quite a few RL pilots, one of them being a stunt aerobatic pilot and they all pretty much agree that AH, while not perfect, 'feels' right more than any combat 'sim'.

Ack-Ack

[brendo]

I dont have any real dramas regarding AH controls.

In IL2, I have a LOT of trouble when attempting precise rudder movements when correcting gun fire. I get a wobbly occilation and I cant get the right feedback via my Thrustmaster Pedals to make the correct adjuctments.

I REALLY need force feedback rudder pedals for accurate rudder control. When I a mbuzzing around the sky, I have pressure on my feet, directly related to airflow over the rudder.

[vorticon]

errr there both just games.

ah has really good graphics considering its a 38 mb download not a several hundred megabyte "game in a box"

im pretty sure il-2 has bitmap based graphics thus they are better.(as in you can find all the planes in a folder with little bitmap pictures that have every detail.)


they are both the best in there class. il2 being in the game in a box flight sim with a mission based design.

aces high is for the massivly multiplayer people who normally cant stand mission.

il2 has way to many gamey aspects for my taste. i just want to up have a good df and NOT have t oworry if my plane is getting bounced about to much by air turbulence.

[Kweassa]

As Wotan said and Wlfgng concurred, I mention again that the "oscillation" and "wobbliness" in IL-2 is mostly due to problems in stick scaling. IL-2 is the most finickiest game I've ever played when it comes to stick sensitivity - one wrong setting and the whole thing goes cosmo. It took me months to figure out the setting I would use and even now, I check and alter some of the scales from time to time.

 Find the correct settings for your stick and you will soon realize the feeling of "flight" in IL-2 is pretty much simular to AH. I'll bet the feeling of flight is more simular  between IL-2 and AH, than AH and WB, or AH and AW.

 Also, another thing that has to do with this is the trims. The trim effects flight way too much in IL-2.. Whereas it is only a secondary flight control, in IL-2, it's virtually a primary control. If you're trimmed wrong, aiming at a target becomes a nightmare.

 At first I was skeptical, but now when I see IL-2, I have to admit the semi-automatic combat trims in AH makes more sense.

[Karnak]

I don't know about you guys, but I'll take the word of the Spitfire ace who tried AH over guys who fly Cesnnas.

He said that the Spitfire in AH wasn't as precise as the real one.  This is precisely the opposite direction of what some of you guys are saying.  He was saying that AH was mushier than reality.

Of course, he also saud thet the stick forces were nothing like strong enough.  Our joysticks are much too light in the resistance department.

[Fancy]

Originally posted by Karnak
I don't know about you guys, but I'll take the word of the Spitfire ace who tried AH over guys who fly Cesnnas.

He said that the Spitfire in AH wasn't as precise as the real one.  This is precisely the opposite direction of what some of you guys are saying.  He was saying that AH was mushier than reality.

Of course, he also saud thet the stick forces were nothing like strong enough.  Our joysticks are much too light in the resistance department.

No offense, but this post is asinine.  Nobody here is trying to argue that AH is EXACTLY like RL flying.  With all due respect to the aforementioned pilot NOTHING will ever precisely reproduce WWII fighter combat except WWII fighter combat and, well, most of us have missed the boat there.  We're also assuming this fact as self-evident, but I guess sometimes it needs to be reasserted.

Your haughty attitude doesn't help either.

[funkedup]

But dude, does it have blade element theory???????????????????????????

[Toad]

Ah, Karnak, they won't believe him either.

Everyone knows that RL aircraft jump around so much in flight that you can barely read the instruments.

I mean, how many times have you been cruising at FL290 and had the olive jump clear out of your martini and into the wine glass of the cute chick across the isle, right?

We've all had that experience, even on the smoothest of flying days.

[Hristo]

Control response in Il-2 is very important and needs a lot of tweaking.

In my experience, curves between linear and quadratic for sliders give the cotrol response very close to the one in AH. For 190, that is. It will fly exactly as in AH, no bouncing whatsoever.

roll sliders - AH 100% all the way, Il-2 linear
pitch - AH linear, Il-2 linear or quadratic
yaw - AH linear, IL-2 linear

linear - 10,20,30,40,50...
quadratic - 1,4,9,16,25...


Still, it is very different from plane to plane and each type requires different slider setup, again, from my experience.

IMO, Il-2 offers many options with which you can tweak the game - from "arcade" to "too hard".

[GRUNHERZ]

I don't like the flight feel of IL2 FM. I have never flown a real plane but somehow the IL2 way doesnt make sense when you consider how unstable and jittery in yaw multiple thousand pound airplanes with small rudders are at very high speeds. My 55inch wingspan 5lb RC plane with a huge rudder is much more stable and tracks much better in rudder manovers, and yes you can tell even if you arent in the cockpit.

[Hristo]

Yup, I might agree to it. But where is the end then ? WB ?

[straffo]

Joystick setting are fonction of your stick and your personnal preferences
I've set my X36  this way in IL2 :

pitch
1X=0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 100 0
roll
1Y=0 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 95 100 100 0
rudder
1RZ=0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0

Just to be curious what stick do you have Hristo ?