I have just started work on an article that may have some bearing on recent threads regarding the fidelity of the Aces High flight model. Attracted to Aces High by what is clearly superior flight dynamics modeling, I began an analysis of the individual aircraft. It was soon apparent that while most of the aircraft match the real world numbers in some respects, there are significant discrepancies in others. That of course brings me in conflict with my normal policy when writing about almost any flight simulation, that is to highlight those points that are good, while ignoring those that aren't. That policy has always served me well, because I generally preach to the converted, and almost never write reviews! Not to mention that highlighting weaknesses in some ones favorite flight sim' almost never goes down well.
However, in this case I can make an exception for two very good reasons. Firstly and most importantly, I'm not going to be telling anyone anything they didn't already know, I'll merely be quantifying a few issues. Secondly, those issues are known and scheduled for remedial action, so to be fair, I can publish the article after the adjustments in the flight model data have been made and duly accounted for in my analysis. So what will the article be about?
In a nutshell, aircraft performance comparisons for dissimilar air combat, one of my favorite topics. During the coming months I intend to give some attention to the aircraft of Aces High and provide some comparisons of many of the more interesting match ups. However, I'm just a tad excited about my next article because I'm doing a couple of things I haven't done before. Normally, I restrict my comparisons to aircraft within the simulation, simply because that's what the folk who fly competitively within it need. Hard accurate information about how the performance of one aircraft compares with another, presented in the form of energy maneuverability diagram overlays. However, the new twist to this is that now I can also compare the simulated aircraft with their real world counterparts, and taking that to its logical conclusion, comparing one simulation with another.
So, to be more specific, my next article will compare four different P-51Ds, the real P-51D, and those from Aces High, Air Warrior, and MCFS. I'll include a description of the issues related to the data used to drive the flight models, along with any factors related to the models themselves, and an insight into some of the detective work involved in the analysis of the real world aircraft. But of course, all this, only after the next version of Aces High, with any flight model adjustments.
Meanwhile here is a taste of what lies ahead. Here is an EM diagram overlay for the real world P-51D, shown in blue, and the P-51D as currently modeled in Aces High, shown in red. Notice that the real P-51D could sustain a maximum of 3.5g, and could sustain its best turn at just a little over 3g giving 22.4 degrees per second (dps) and a 600ft turn radius. In comparison, the current Aces High P-51D has a best-sustained turn of 13.6dps at just over 2g and 1080ft radius, a significant disparity. It appears as though Top speeds are as close to the mark as we could hope for. However, the low Ps = 0 curve for the Aces High P-51 indicates poor energy retention in the turns and reduced sustained turning ability, with respect to its real world counterpart. That is why the article will remain in abeyance until after the next patch, and also of course, because I don't want to analyze too many of the Aces High aircraft while changes are imminent.
That may all sound rather negative… On the contrary, Aces High has impressed me with its flight model, there appears to be some minor glitches in the data being used, but as those are corrected, as I understand they will be, what we have now is destined to evolve into the best online flight sim' available... I'm sure it is going to be a pleasure to write about it!!
Badboy
