Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Zigrat on August 25, 2001, 05:38:00 PM
-
its funny
i used to wonder how people could ever place so much blind faith in something and just close their minds from that point.
i was over at the simhq message board and i saw that some guys over there, who most likely are at least semi intelligent, place complete and absoluet faith in maddox games. this guy posted good evidence that the roll rates are wrong (i havent played the game yet but if teh p39 really rolls more than 180 dps thats pretty insane) and the cheerleaders jump all over him.. way worse than even the cheerleaders here!
then oleg comes and says that the me109 rolls faster than the fw190! rofl! and those guys back him up on blind faith.
it was almost reminding me of to obviously a non evil and much lesser extent of how people followed hitler and didnt care what he was actually doing.. just blind faith without using their own brains.
plz i am not saying he is like hitler in any way or anything like that, just commenting on peoples ability to stop thinking critically for themselves and become a sheep in the flock.
-
Heh, it's because the NACA reports are an evil imperialist plot.
Oh yeah, make sure you check out the rudder authority on a barely moving P-39. :rolleyes:
[ 08-25-2001: Message edited by: jihad ]
-
I find it typical that so many westerners have never even heard of TsAGI or NII VVS, yet seem to place so much importance on NACA. My money's on Russian data.
-
Yep.
I made the third post in that thread. I saw a post from RAM as well. But most were attacking the guy ruthlessly.
-
Originally posted by leonid:
I find it typical that so many westerners have never even heard of TsAGI or NII VVS, yet seem to place so much importance on NACA. My money's on Russian data.
A 109G14 rolling faster than a Fw190A? and you believe that???
I really hoped for a realistic game. I see now we will get a joke with good graphics :(
I'm glad I didnt download it....what a waste it would've been.
-
leonid if the russian data says the 109 has lighter controls than the 190, you believe it?
you're too smart to be a member of the herd, friend.
-
Of course Leonid is correct. After all, the Russians invented the Bf-109, didn't they??
:D
-
You need to remember english is not Oleg's first language.
Quote from that topic in SimHQ:
"The Roll rate of Bf-109G-2, G-6 and G-14 is HIGHER THE ANY OF FW-190s G-10 and K-4 had amost the same roll rate like FW-190A-5 with only root guns. That is COMMON MYTH in the West."
Looks like he meant 190 have better rollrate than 109s. Could be wise to read whole story and draw conclusions after that...
[ 08-25-2001: Message edited by: Staga ]
-
Whast the URL for the BBS over there?
-
http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/Forum35/HTML/001213.html (http://www.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/Forum35/HTML/001213.html)
-
-ammo-,
Here is the url for the SimHQ Il2 BB:
http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/boards/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi (http://www.simhq.com/cgi-bin/boards/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi)
[ 08-25-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ]
-
Originally posted by Staga:
You need to remember english is not Oleg's first language.
Quote from that topic in SimHQ:
"The Roll rate of Bf-109G-2, G-6 and G-14 is HIGHER THE ANY OF FW-190s G-10 and K-4 had amost the same roll rate like FW-190A-5 with only root guns. That is COMMON MYTH in the West"
Looks like he meant 190 have better rollrate than 109s. Could be wise to read whole story and draw conclusions after that...
Staga, I think that he is saying just the opposite. I have NEVER heard anyone saying that the 109 was a better roller than the 190. The "common myth" would be,then, us thinking that the 190 rolled better than the 109.
Also Oleg said this:
Maneuverability of FW-190s was far from 109 in many terms (not in all of course)...
Wich only confirms what I say above. He is saying that the 109 was more maneouverable than the 190.
I really was hoping for Il2 :( not anymore, it seems :(
[ 08-26-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
I rather like Oleg's stance. He takes the same position that HTC does. You think it's wrong? Prove it.
-
I downloaded the demo ,
Looks to me ( but wtf do I know right ? ) thats it's a updated EAW with > trims , eyecandy and advanced game controler options .
That said if any liked EAW then they should like this one .
I found taking off in the P39 kinda way to hard :( lol , crashed alot .
My fps in 1024/768 32 bit , wasn't that good but maybe I missed a check box or something ?
933 P3 , 384pc600 RAM , Radeon 64MB DDR
I think HT spoiled me , or I should not have downloaded the demo yet , as it wasn't at the offical site .
Zigrat , you got it guy . They have to sell me now . I just don't buy whatever they make anymore .
I passed up B17 .
-
RAM I don't know what Oleg meant in that sentence but for me it looks like you see what you wan't to see.
Quote:
"Maneuverability of FW-190s was far from 109 in many terms (not in all of course)..."
-I can read this sentence in two different ways but bottom line is he is right in this one: Even in AH 190 maneuvres different way than 109 = far from 109. Just like Zero's manoeuvrability is far from P-51.
Speculating with this is irrelevant because at least I can't be sure what Oleg meant.
-
Staga, I really really hope that he meant what you say, but that is not what I understand from that paragraph. Is not that I want to think one thing or the another, as I said ,until yesterday I had really high expectatives put on Il2 and I really thought it was going to rock FM-wise.
But if the designer starts saying that a 109 should roll better than a 190, then my whole expectative comes down.
I know that sometimes what one says is not well understood because language. Has happened lots of times to me. As I say, I really hope its that in this case. <crosses fingers>
-
Hmm, Oleg stated too, that he is really producing a FLIGH SIMULATOR, not FLIGHT SPECULATOR, like AH is in many cases, like speculating stick forces pilot is able to pull in a dive. He knows very well the pros and cons of that.
He has stated, that all of their FM:s corresponds to the data that he has gathered from various Russian sources, like Tsagi and NVII VS. Im sure, that he has looked the NACA charts also, but Russian source should be superior to Allied, since Russia did have good amounts of same German aircraft type available for testing.
You dont start this kind of project just with reading couple of Rommels diaries.
Il-2 FM isnt based on tables, like AH is for instance, so some things, like max speed and max roll on different altitudes do not fall perfectly in chart data.
Il-2 box will have all of the flight performance data used in their sim printed. That thing alone is enough for me to buy that box, yet alone i get flight sim with best ever evinroment and unique touch of flight modeling aside. If Il-2 has somehow biased roll rates, i dont give a damn. Theres other things that AH simulates poorly in comparison, so that will bring fresh ideas in flightsim scene.
We already have AH, why do you want another copy of that?
I love both sims. Im not anyway blind fanboy of Oleg, but i very much like the fact, that he takes time listening the users complaints in BB. Also, i love the fact that this game is made by Russians, so it will be finished product, not some MS buggy crap.
Buy it or not, i will.
-
Mr Maddox just posted on the forum confirming what I thought. He still says the 109 rolled better than the 190.
What a shame :( a so beautiful sim wasted :(
-
This is what he posted:
1. IF I'm wrong - I always will try to correct myself and say to all that I was wrong. In Demo we get P-39N-1 roll rate 2,2 sec....(that is exact digit, which show program itself in our special tools) Ok. It differs from what I twice checked for that weekend. The best roll rate for that plane was 3,4 sec. Better than P-63A ! And I know why.... So in final we'll get something like that digit.
2. I will stay with my data which I own untill I will get other data from you guys (here I got something, where in some places I don't trust. For example P-47 - that one had better rollrate that posted above )
And If will had a scan from a real trial document - be sure I will correct my data with new and will make middle calculation - I WILL NEVER DO EXACTLY THE SAME as in one source . That is my principle.
....
He wrote about construction of wings and the moment of wing twisting - that is exactly what we model in our FM! Of course we do it by simplified methodics (complex pre calculation of a bit simplified 3D wing model using Autocad and own tools, then implementation of simplified function in FM. In real time to calculate that simply impossible...but we may use the result of that calculation)
Just I should notice with his example, that that is correct for Bf-109F wing, partialy correct for Bf-109G-1, G-2,G-3 and G-4 wing, but incorrect for construction of Bf-109 later models wings - they have durability of tha wing wtice increased compare to listed above models and was not worse in twist than wing of 190s I will say even more. 190, which has from mid-end 1944 year fully wooden construction of aielerons had very bad durability and use small deviation abgles on 10 % ... said enough who knows what I mean.
Ok, I'm out. I simply have not time to write answers on almost any forums, because I'm too busy with the finalising of project.
About FW-190 agains Bf-109 dogfight trials I will write on Open Forum after the release of IL-2 on the main IL-2 forum...
You guys will be very impressed why Russian aces pilots name FW-190 more easy target than Bf-109 and Why they respected more early types of FW-190 and 109G-2 (Germans also found that 109 is more situable for Russian front but 190 is more situable there for ground assault. Don't eevn argument here that they were rejected only due to the needs of Reich defence - at onec was send other modifications in Russia... again one western myth will be a bit damaged).
Now simply not time to make translation for separate article. I hope it will be when I will be more free of job. Say closer to Christmas, perhaps, I will be able to take and coolect all quotes of trials in one account and post it in short terms as article - reference for IL-2sturmovik.com.
Sure there will be my ow column
So RAM, if you can prove your point to him, he will make according changes.
Right now hes just saying, that right now he has more reliable information on the 190 roll rates, than any of the current posts hold.
You know, the Russians had much more experience in fighting against Germans than Allied. Thus they should have the best intel of their equipment.
I bet il-2 is the first sim that depends on the Russian data instead of Allied. Just a different approach, thats all.
-
What do/did the Germans say? They have the most experience.
-Puke
332nd Flying Mongrels
-
Hey, you guys do what you need to do. I like the game, I like the FM. No complaints here. Many of your complaints also have to do with conscious decisions, like stick force, and such. I've seen the same response from FM decisions that HT & Pyro have implemented. Didn't bother me as long as I knew why it was done. If it makes sense, I can live with it. Bottomline is you cannot make a game of Oleg's quality without taking a hit, networkwise. Hence, games with this level of detail won't be MMP for awhile. So, it won't appeal to many of you. Personally, I'm tired of the MMP online environment, and prefer a strictly historical flight sim now. I want a wargame in the air, not a flight sim with warbirds.
As for rollrates & 109s & 190s, if I have to choose between NII VVS and TsAGI data(as well as German data) to NACA data, I choose NII VVS/TsAGI. Sorry, guys. I know, my loss. Hey, I'm having a blast, so no biggie.
-
Back to the subject :)
Zigrat. It used to be even worse!! The IL2 "cult" on SimHQ (many of whom were kicked out or moved indginantly to a "scam" webboard where you need to "pay" some kid in England $$ to belong too) were a major reason for "Badboy" departing SimHQ.
I once thought the B17-II fanatics were outrageous but the cult that follows IL2 and Oleg is unbelievable and borders on the fanatical. Actually, the word "rabid" comes to mind.
IL2 rocks. But it has some quirks. But don't dare point any out or you'll get "attacked" - no matter where you go or write.
Westy
(lol, FM based on data not seen by Westerners eyes. rofl. it sounds so clandestine, secretive and cold war-like ;)
-
Though besides the point here,
I thought it interesting that Wells and Badboy (both probably the best informed critics I know of for flight models) both seemed to cautiously back or hold off on the subject. In fact wells had one of the best "did you really think about this" posts I have seen in awhile :)
His point being that if Oleg is modelling on plane capabilities and not pilot ones then most of the data we base comclusions on it is not going to match.
One of the nice things about TsAGI tests I like vs US ones was thier absolute paranoia about errors after they misunderstood the 109's capabilities before the war. These guys tested and retested everything and kept scrupulous records. As a brief example (that US planes will like) the tests had objects like how much pressure the pilot could maintain and for how long in various cockpits. In this case the tests for the P-47's they recieved very much show how the "50 lb" rule screwed the Jug stats on paper. They calculated the Jug could get over 250 lbs of lateral force with the pilot using his knees in addition to the arms to make the plane roll. And their test stats show the roll much better than US ones tend to.
Now with that in mind think of Widewings descriptions of the Jug in the interviews he posted awhile ago. where it was clearly stated the the jug was outrolling every opponent (190 or 109) in combat but not being capable of reversing the roll like a 190 could. Kind of sounds like the pilots were indeed achieveing full deflection at much higher forces that 50 lbs doesn't it!
Now imagine a Jug modelled like that! :) :D
This is anecdotal of course, but my point is really that TsAGI tests are actually really reliable, and tend to be incredibly comprehensive to figure why they may not equate what you expect. Too often in dealing with US tests or British ones you find too many bizarre oddities buried in fine print. Sometimes quite amazing ones like spit's running at under full boost or planes running at HP not usually available. Honestly, lets see what shows up when we start seeing more TsAGI tests translated before we start accusing them of being wrong.
Sorrow
-
"my point is really that TsAGI tests are actually really reliable"
btw, I never even intended to imply they are not. In fact, they ALL are to one degree or more.
I was more or less commenting (sarcastic humour wise) on the recently use of "long lost manuscripts that reveal the secrets of the ancients" type of atmosphere the IL2 FM has around it due to several official comments and typical cultboy build up.
-Westy
-
Originally posted by Westy MOL:
"my point is really that TsAGI tests are actually really reliable"
btw, I never even intended to imply they are not. In fact, they ALL are to one degree or more.
I was more or less commenting (sarcastic humour wise) on the recently use of "long lost manuscripts that reveal the secrets of the ancients" type of atmosphere the IL2 FM has around it due to several official comments and typical cultboy build up.
-Westy
"Long lost manuscripts" in the form of data and sources that Oleg now states will not be made public. It seems like a silly attempt to distort history to suit their porked flight model.
Dweeb
-
...And you know this because... ?
-
Originally posted by leonid:
I find it typical that so many westerners have never even heard of TsAGI or NII VVS, yet seem to place so much importance on NACA. My money's on Russian data.
That may be because the above institutions were operating behind the Iron Curtain in the autoritarian police state where you could not buy a usable map (road, tourist, etc.) of an area in your own country and simplistic city plans were intentionally distorted?
In my 25 years in Soviet union I've never heard of them and would not go asking questions even if I did.
miko
Oh, toejam...
I just looked at Oleg's reply to RWORDWAY:
1. NACA TEST above IS FOR P-39D-1. I also don't see at which G side loads it was tested.
2. I also don't see AT WHICH ALTITUDE THAT TEST WAS DONE.
1. At which G do you perform roll tests? Let me guess... 0G!
2. My only knowlege of aerodynamics is from reading a few books but they all agree that at subsonic speeds it's the Indicated Airspeed that is important and determines the forces affecting the aircraft. So the initial roll acceletarion should not be noticeably affected.
Of course when we consider rolling motion separately, the resistance of the air to the rolling should decrease with alt and sustained roll rate should increase.
If soviet test was conducted practically at sea level (200m - 600 ft), then the NACA test was either the same alt or higher.
If the NACA test showing 4.8sec/360 roll rate was conducted at higher alt then 600ft, then the roll rate should have been even lower at 600 ft where russian test shows 2 sec/360 - 2.5 times difference.
So any altitude above 600 feet in NACA's test makes RWORDWAY's case stronger, not Oleg's.
They may be drastic roll-rate difference between P-39D-1 and P-39N-1 due to changes in airplane construction and if Oleg know about them, he should just say so.
But I would not expect the above two remarks from a person considered knowlegeable in aerodynamics/flying. Yet obviously Oleg must know a lot.
Paradox...
[ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: miko2d ]
-
We all have our 'cults', and the AH one is a prime example of such. So, il2 has one as well. So what? Or, are you just implying that players in AH are more knowledgable, more experienced in aviation? Why would that be? What makes the il2 following a 'cult of worshipers'? I have TsAGI data, I've read a lot of books and docs on the VVS and that war in general. I'm also an American. Nothing secretive about getting information on the Soviet-German War, you just have to go out there and get it. The stuff isn't just going to fall in your lap.
-
So what about maskirovka? It was done for possible purposes of war. Much of what was done in that area was done to maintain 'generalities' about Soviet 'inferiorness' which the Germans claimed to the USA in WWII. By making NATO think Soviets were untrained masses with guns, a possible war could have maybe tragic consequences for the West. This is how they beat Germany in WWII - by taking advantage of Nazi arrogance and deceiving them over and over again. Maskirovka.
[ 08-27-2001: Message edited by: leonid ]
-
Originally posted by leonid:
As for rollrates & 109s & 190s, if I have to choose between NII VVS and TsAGI data(as well as German data) to NACA data, I choose NII VVS/TsAGI. Sorry, guys. I know, my loss. Hey, I'm having a blast, so no biggie.
And what of the hundreds, if not thousands, of pilots, US, German and Russian, that all agree that the 190 outrolled the 109? Disregard them too for blind faith?
-
i used to wonder how people could ever place so much blind faith in something and just close their minds from that point.
Back to the topic :)
As leonid said above, you dont have to look far to find this behaviour, its right here...
I myself buried the ICI shrine along time ago, whoever makes the best game/sim gets my money...
Regards.
-
russians have always been known for freedom of information.
-
Originally posted by zapkin:
russians have always been known for freedom of information.
Yes, they have..."Give us information, and you will get your freedom (In Siberia)"
-
Yawn. Same old boring Western propaganda again.
The most interesting thing is that Soviets had completely different opinions on many planes during WWII. Just look at the P-39's results in USAAF and VVS. Also remember what Soviet test-pilots said about Thunderbolts. And about FW-190 in Eastern front.
Looks like Soviet test routins were much different from Western. To judge we need to have complete descriptions of test conditions and timings, like fuel loads etc. I think that Oleg's data are reliable enough.
In Russian forums he said that the demo in based on Beta 01, while the current beta is 04, and it's code is 70% incompatible with demo.
-
Heh if game I've been playing now with pleasure is beta01 I wonder what kind of show-stopper final production will be :)
-
Originally posted by Tuomio:
Il-2 FM isnt based on tables, like AH is for instance,...
Deez...is that you?!?! :rolleyes:
-
No :D Im just very exited about the new possibilities that i have with il-2. You have lots of control over your plane if you want. Like the radiator closing for instance, it gives you very visible speed gain. But no gain without pain.. ;)
And no stall horns, only the sweet sings of your favorable plane. You really cant ride on the edge without knowing the limits well. Pull too much at your own risk. Spinning will make you sweat. Overheat? Well, open radiators and ease throttle or else you face consequences. Both more or less gets you killed.
Im really looking forward for quality online games with this, the learning curve will be huge as its in AH too.
-
Well, I haven't tried it yet, but I must say I have to have stall horns, because:
A) This is a sim, not real life, I have no other information provided to me that the A/C will stall other than the horn.
B) In RL A/C, you have many things warning you of a stall, shaking of the stick, the aircraft frame, the motion your body makes within the seat. In a sim, you might have a shaking screen, but that will not give you enough info on how far you can push it like real life does. thus, the stall horn is very good with me. Adds about 5 other senses that I lack while flying in real aircraft.
-
IMO stall horn gives you the "feel" of the aircraft that most of the offline sims don't have.
-
Il-2 warns you of a stall coming. Planes stutters and you can hear bumpy wind noise (sorry, my English is poor).
And it is one hell of a sim. You better try it, it might burst some bubbles ;)
-
Here's my point:
In AH you can turn it off or turn it on.
In IL2, you don't have choices. :)
-
I'm sorry, but I have direct quotes from three Luftwaffe veterans who served with operational units flying both the Bf-109 (E, F and G), and either served or extensively flown FW-109A4 and A5. All three unanimously agree that Bf-109 outrolled FW-190.
One is a JG7 Leutnant Alfred Ambs. Another veteran's name will be released with the IL-2 manual; he finished the war in a Me-262 with quite a few kills. The third veteran is one the highest scoring Luftwaffe aces of all time.
-
Rip you'll be fine without stall-horn in Il-2.
-
Rgr that Staga, still cracking up about the 109 outrolling the 190..hehehe!
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Rgr that Staga, still cracking up about the 109 outrolling the 190..hehehe!
Ripsnort i know,you know it better than real German Bf109 Pilots there fly over 500 Hours in a Bf109 and FW190 :rolleyes:
-
Would be nice to see those charts from that Russian institute. Right now its nothing else than just a rumour that 109 rolls faster than 190.
Show me the money.
-
Staga,
I will hopefully compile ALL charts that were used for one fighter's flight model in IL-2 - most likely it will be the FW-190A4. Not only TsAGI charts were used of course. In addition, FW factory specs, LW Reichlin test reports and some reports from other Axis countries that used FW's were all used and compiled together. So, no single source is the basis of IL-2's FM, but rather an average compiled from a variety of the sources form countries which had most exposure to the FW-190.
I'm hoping to sprinkle the article with specific interviews from living Luftwaffe veterans, and make it available sometime around IL-2's release. :)
-
Yes Possi, 109 can outroll a 190.
Riiiiiiiiight...
(btw, those german pilots you mention, almost all agreed that the 190 was the best german fighter, and the best rollrate)
-
Originally posted by Animal:
Yes Possi, 109 can outroll a 190.
Riiiiiiiiight...
(btw, those german pilots you mention, almost all agreed that the 190 was the best german fighter, and the best rollrate)
That differentiated is you got the Info from books/Tests and we got this from German WW2Pilots! :eek:
The German Pilots dont mean with this only the Rollrate you can make more Rollmaneuvers, i cant tell you that so good ,becouse my Englisch is toejam,sorry...
AND I DON`T SAY THE BF109 CAN OUTROLL THE FW190.THE 190 DONT ROLL BETTER THAN A 109 AND THIS CORRECT!
A BF109G HAVE ROLLRATE FROM 3 SEC.IN 300km/h!
The Fw190 is heavier than a Bf109! ;)
[ 08-28-2001: Message edited by: Possi ]
-
Why would I trust to NACA instead of TsAGI or other way around ?
Please, enlighten me
-
Don't argue with Possi, he's confused.
I don't understand how one or two live pilots anecdotes are anymore correct/accurate than the ones that died fighting.
Many German LuftWaffe indicated the 190 rolled much quicker than the 109, why is it different now?
-SW
-
Originally posted by SWulfe:
Don't argue with Possi, he's confused.
I don't understand how one or two live pilots anecdotes are anymore correct/accurate than the ones that died fighting.
Many German LuftWaffe indicated the 190 rolled much quicker than the 109, why is it different now?
-SW
Thx for Confused!Not in my Books and i have a lot!
-
Originally posted by SWulfe:
Many German LuftWaffe indicated the 190 rolled much quicker than the 109, why is it different now?
-SW
name one, please
-
Funked, where are ya, how come your so quiet on this "rolling debate", or are you still spilling soda outta your mouth on the monitor?
NOt that it won't prevent me from buying the game, every sim I've ever owned has had flaws, but it just cracks me up to see folks try to change not only raw history, but actual physics, statistics, and thousands of documents from many different nationalities on the 190 vs 109 roll rate....
-
"Why would I trust to NACA ..."
Certainly not me!!!
I do not believe anything from the US governmetn during WWII. Everyone knows how that murdering megalomaniac Roosevelt and his war criminal henchmen H. Hoover and H. Arnold would have had the NACA engineers kidnapped during a midnight raid, sent off to the Arizona desert where once there they would have been shot, tortured, shot again, made to work hard labor, shot dead once more and then hung from the end of a hemp rope as an example to all the other people in other US government and agencies and the armed forces. Therefore they forged and falsified the documents, at the threat of death and dismemberment, to make the LW planes 'go bad,' and the US planes 'go good.'
Westy
[transmission from Bay of Fundy Archipelago ended]
-
You still haven't answered my question. Or are you implying that USSR engineers made enemy planes look better than real. For what purpose would they do that ?
You say that there was no Western propaganda in WW2 ? Grow up.
Too much arrogance on this board, that's for sure.
I couldn't care less if 109 outrolled 190 or not, I fly them both - with slight preferance to 190.
A sim of Il-2 calibre wouldn't mess up its FM just like that. A lower quality sim like AH, hmmmm.
[ 08-28-2001: Message edited by: Hristo ]
-
Originally posted by Westy MOL:
"Why would I trust to NACA ..."
Certainly not me!!!
I do not believe anything from the US governmetn during WWII. Everyone knows how that murdering megalomaniac Roosevelt and his war criminal henchmen H. Hoover and H. Arnold would have had the NACA engineers kidnapped during a midnight raid, sent off to the Arizona desert where once there they would have been shot, tortured, shot again, made to work hard labor, shot dead once more and then hung from the end of a hemp rope as an example to all the other people in other US government and agencies and the armed forces. Therefore they forged and falsified the documents, at the threat of death and dismemberment, to make the LW planes 'go bad,' and the US planes 'go good.'
Westy
[transmission from Bay of Fundy Archipelago ended]
:D
-
Did Galland or any of the other great german aviators ever address the difference in roll between 190 and 109 series to any useful extent?
I would be obliged to give actual combat pilots more say than any lab technician or game developer.
Western data appears to have long supported the assertion that the 190 series had exceptional and superior roll. I have never heard it said that the 109 series outclassed the 190s in this regard but it is as possible as anything I suppose.
However, this recent stink about a possible reversal of the long held allied standard from a modern day russian game developer will need more than old soviet data to replace the western perception with any result. It will need to be back up from a multitude of national sources and actual german aviators having flown both types extensively.
Having said all that. IL-2 is a game designed by Russians. It will have good solid data intertwined with some common ideas and beliefs held in Russian history and records.
All in all, the idea that soviets of the era held the 109 in higher regard than the 190, as far as roll is concerned, really is intriguing.
-
Rip I'm stil SWOMing. :)
Russian programmer found some Russian data that is different from the rest of the world. Of course he is going to use it. Because "my country's scientists are the best" blah blah blah just like we Yanks would do. :)
And with most sims these days there are a bunch of sheep/cheerleaders who will believe anything the cult-leader/programmer tells them.
And that's what we have here.
Enjoy!
-
Some things to think about
When Alexander Pokryshkin was asked why did he prefer P-39 over La-7 he simply answered that P-39 had much more comfortable cockpit and he could go inside the cockpit like inside the car.
When american test pilots were asked about 109 and 190 they always answered:
109 was a poor plane with small cockpit
and 190 was a good plane with much better cockpit
Looks like tendency :)
-
Russian programmer found some Russian data that is different from the rest of the world. Of course he is going to use it. Because "my country's scientists are the best" blah blah blah just like we Yanks would do.
Now.. all he needs is to come up with a reason to not show anyone else this data.
AKDejaVu
-
I completly dont understand this all hipe over this FM thing...
My country is that, and his country is that... My sience is good - yours sucks.... my data is right and yours are off....
I am not gonna talk about TsAGI, Messershmit or NACA test's. This all disscussion as I believe has grew out of FM data issue... and at some points are getting really ugly for no reason at all...
So here is quote by Tom Cofield:
As for the 'honesty' of Oleg's work-well, we are talking about a game gentlemen. He has access to old Soviet test data and has used it. Whether is it correct or has been modified for Soviet propaganda I guess can be debated but the gentleman has done his research and has made a simulation based upon that research
-
deleted. not going to argue with people who couldn't care less anyway ;)
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: leonid ]
-
Originally posted by Steven:
What do/did the Germans say? They have the most experience.
-Puke
332nd Flying Mongrels
Germans EXACTLY confirm all I said. Be sure I spoke to some of them and my friends (including real pilots) from Germany did special phone calls that to ask many things I was need to confirm...
Please wait:
1. Relase
2. I wil have special board column on www.il2sturmovik.com (http://www.il2sturmovik.com) and we can discuss all things. I will be able to answer for all your questions.
3. If IL-2 FM differs to all other sims FM that not means that it is incorrect. You like other - it is your decision. Why not?
4. In IL-2 manual will be quotes of WWII veterans... WHO PLAY SIMS FOR SOME YEARS AND KNOW WHAT THEY SAY IN THAT QUOTES ABOUT IL-2.
5. Beta tested with large amount of real pilots - about 40. The result of work - final release FM.
I'm sorry, I have poor English that to spend at the moment my time to explane for someone where they wrong or right.
In demo you got - there is many things are not tuned. Say in FM there is due to size simply removed several modules... I know all issues of Fm there, but that not means that it is abslutely incorrect. I have tons of emails of REAL PILOTS who GLAD that SUCH SIM WAS BORN - their opinion based on THAT DEMO
Demo based on Beta01 versions dated April.
Current beta stage is 04 - candidate to release.
Because by case and by mistake of Ubi Soft guys released THAT demo, the REAL OFFICIAL DEMO BASED ON GOLD WILL BE PRODUCED ONLY AFTER IL-2 GOES GOLD - SOMEWHERE in OCTOBER.
Galland, who did a lot of kills in FW-190 did not doubt which one was superior - it was Bf-109... (If you trust only western sources - open Falcon 4 manual where such quote is present, just look for the that:
Pete Bonani (F16 pilot that worked on the Falcon series for Microprose) in the Falcon 4.0 manual.
quote from page A-2 of the Falcon 4.0 manual:
Quote:
"While flying F-15's out of Germany, Hands (Phil "Hands" Handley) had the opportunity to talk to Adolf Galland, the great World War II German ace. Hands told the German ace that it was obvious to him that of Germany's World War II fighters, the Fw-190 was the superior aircraft based on published performance data. The Fw-190 was faster, could turn better and could climb higher than the Me-109, the plane in which Galland had recorded most of his kills. Adolf Galland smiled and said that Handley was correct in his analysis of the two planes relative performances--but wrong in his assessment of which aircraft was superior. The German ace had flown both aircraft and believed that the Me-109 was the superior fighter because "flying it felt like wearing a glove". It was smooth as silk and easy to control, whereas the Fw-190 was difficult and unruly. Galland could fly the Me-109 to his--and its--maximum performance, and this made it the better combat aircraft." End quote.
When Il-2 released - more quotes. ;)
I'm out.
-
You know what I find really funny?
The cultists of AH are bashing the cultists of IL2 who are bashing the cultists of AH who are in turn bashing the cultists of IL2.......... :)
I like both games and hate things about both too, so I guess im not acultist, phew. :D
Anyway oleg if you are posting here can you plese remove the dirt and filth from the canopy glass in your game.
Also look into reducing the size of the 20mm cannon explosions as they completly hide the enemy airplanes and make bad the aim. I have seen many LW guncamera footage where the MG151/20 and the MK108 30mm are used. No film showing MG151/20 use shows such huge black explosions, I belive this is wrong and should be reduced in size in your game.
If any of this has changed in new beta versions then thats ok.
thanks!
-
The glass will be more clear. :) I promise...
German Veteran Georg Adam, who flew Bf-109E, G-2, G-6, FW-190A-3, D-9, Me-262, said, when he begun to test IL-2: "It seems that my mechanic didn't wash the glass...."
I promised him and his grandson Steffen to wash the glass very clean, but next time with the release. :) :) :)
-
To nitpick:
Georg Adam also flew Fw 190A-6.
How is the Fw 190 in your game, Oleg ? When can we try it ? ;)
-
Great! thx Oleg!
What do you think of the very lage 20mm explosions that hide the whole plane?
-
Originally posted by Hristo:
To nitpick:
Georg Adam also flew Fw 190A-6.
How is the Fw 190 in your game, Oleg ? When can we try it ? ;)
Sorry forgot about A-6 (and didn't describe others he flew also)
FW-190A-4 (flyable with the relese) FW-190A-5, A-8, D-9 (with the release non flayble) - all are very dangerous opponents and perform charts very close to real.
Fans who like this plane found it very usable. I also like this one very much. But anyway in Dogfight I will prefer later Yaks Las and Bf-109s
-
Oh Oleg Iīd be very careful judging a statement by Galland in the way you seem to do. Do not forget that he was pulled out of frontline duty in late 1941 when JG26 just underwent re-equipment with the first 190s. So he was used to the Me 109 and I am sure that he didnīt fly that much combat sorties in a 190. So missing the feeling of a plane he knows doesnīt mean the other is worse.
Unfortunately we cannot ask men like Walter Nowotny, Otto Kittel, Albin Wolf or August Lambert (btw the worlds highest scoring fighter bomber pilot :D) what they think about the characteristics of the 190. These men (alonmg with some others) scored most of their kills in different versions of the 190 and Iīm sure they would tell another story.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ:
Great! thx Oleg!
What do you think of the very lage 20mm explosions that hide the whole plane?
I think that we have it almost correct. B&W film just do not register all the things which happen in real life.
-
Thx again for the fast response oleg.
Im not sure yet that the Il2 representaion is accurate though. What bothers me is the HUGE dark black cloud. Something very large and very dark like this certainly would show up on black/white film.
Anyway I will now go watch some of the LW guncamere films I have at home jut to make sure.
thanks oleg!
-
Originally posted by csThor:
Oh Oleg Iīd be very careful judging a statement by Galland in the way you seem to do. Do not forget that he was pulled out of frontline duty in late 1941 when JG26 just underwent re-equipment with the first 190s. So he was used to the Me 109 and I am sure that he didnīt fly that much combat sorties in a 190. So missing the feeling of a plane he knows doesnīt mean the other is worse.
Unfortunately we cannot ask men like Walter Nowotny, Otto Kittel, Albin Wolf or August Lambert (btw the worlds highest scoring fighter bomber pilot :D) what they think about the characteristics of the 190. These men (alonmg with some others) scored most of their kills in different versions of the 190 and Iīm sure they would tell another story.
I'm careful :) So I have many other samples, which I will post some time later :) Not all at once.
But I never said that FW-190s was bad! In design of all things inside that plane I personally like it beter all WWII planes. But that not means that this plane will perform better all in our sim :) It will perfor like it must (same for all others)
I can even confirm, that many designer's technical solutions of FW-190s went into IL-10(cockpit and electical equipment) and La-5FN (engine injection system).
Better these fighter planes where inside is better pilot.
-
Hehe but sometimes your replies sound like you ment the opposite :D ... Thanks for taking time Oleg! Most of "our" developers could learn much from you!
PS: Check your mail. Iīve just mailed someting for you.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: csThor ]
-
Originally posted by Yeager:
Did Galland or any of the other great german aviators ever address the difference in roll between 190 and 109 series to any useful extent?.
Take a look into SWOTL's manual.General Kuprinski's talking about the 109. And what did he said about the 109's rollrate compared wit the 190's.
I have the spanish version so I can't quote it literally. But he said that teh 109 while a decent roller, was NOTHING NEAR like the 190.
Mr. Maddox, once again with the deepest of the respects.
Do you really think that a 109, with the ailerons it had, where it had them, with the wing it had, with the round tips, with the anhedral angle of the wing, and with the lighter structure wing, will be able to EVEN APROACH the Fw190?.
I'm by no means an aeronautic engineer, but the Fw190's wing seems like designed to make the plane a rolling twister while the 109 emphasized stability on the lateral control (why that anhedral angled wing?)
BTW, about that "Georg Adam", is not the first time I hear about him.
http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=004559 (http://www.hitechcreations.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=004559)
But so far I NEVER have found ANY kill at his name.IN all the kill lists I have looked, tHere was a Georg-Peter Eder with 78 kills, but NO Georg Adam at all. He is not listed in any Knight's Cross recipents list, either, and he was supposed to have one.
Care to give more data about this Adam guy?.Backuped with GOOD data, please BEcause I still have to believe he really was a pilot in WWII, let alone an ace.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
Oleg I just finisahed watching some of my LW guncamera films.
These films showed Bf109 and Fw190 attacking and scoring cannon HE hits on P38, Yak9, LA5, Mustang, B17 and Liberator.
Most were at extremly short range and showed up very clearly.
Here is what I saw every single time a 20mm HE round hit regardless of plane type.
A small quick flash of light, followed almost instantly by a small cloud of very light gray almost white smoke.
Once again every single hit was exactly the same, flash of light and light gray smoke.
Not one single hit showed BLACK smoke of any kind. And the cloud of smoke was very small compared to the effect in ILs, plus it was easy to see through.
The only time the target was hidden was if many many many rounds hit at same time, yet in IL2 a single hit hides the plane.
Please look into this oleg, and thanks for the communication.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: GRUNHERZ ]
-
Originally posted by R4M:
Take a look into SWOTL's manual.General Kuprinski's talking about the 109. And what did he said about the 109's rollrate compared wit the 190's.
Do you really think that a 109, with the ailerons it had, where it had them, with the wing it had, with the round tips, with the anhedral angle of the wing, and with the lighter structure wing, will be able to EVEN APROACH the Fw190?.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
I know that at different speeds and at the same altitude they have different rollrate, say that on small speed FW-190 better, on middle speed - almost equal and on high speed 109 rolls better even with the more light force on the stik of 190.
That is the acsioma.
Also I know that is myth that on 109 wasn't possible to recover from a deep VERTICAL dive with the critical for airframe speeds. Both Soviet and German test say that it is almost equal to other planes...
That is my last post here.
Please wait for release and please be sure that all will be fine and will differs well from that demo.
-
Originally posted by Oleg Maddox:
I know that at different speeds and at the same altitude they have different rollrate, say that on small speed FW-190 better, on middle speed - almost equal and on high speed 109 rolls better even with the more light force on the stik of 190.
That is the acsioma.
NOW we are talking about a completely different issue.
First of all let me tell you that I dont believe that at middle speeds (200-300mph) the Fw190 rolled worse or equal than the 109. The FW190 rollrate was at its highest peak just at that speed.
HOWEVER, and pending on what is found regarding the 109 stick forces at very high speeds I CAN believe that at very high speeds (where the 190's rollrate degraded significantly), the 109 could roll better...but only if the 109 stick forces were not as high as they are claimed to be.
But on the speed ranges from 120mph to 350mph IAS I still dont believe it.
Dont take me wrong, Oleg. Il2 is graphically impressive and has a detail I've NEVER seen before in a flight simulator. The demo is simply awesome for EVERYTHING...but the FM. And the FM is exactly what is the most important thing for me.
Il2 can be the best sim ever (box sim, and who knows, maybe Multiplayer in the future),I wont care so much about it if it wasnt so good.
I simply want to see an accurate FM in its place, and 109 rolling like or better than 190s is not what I expect from an accurate FM. That is my complain, wich does not detract from the fact that IL-2 shows a GREAT promise.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
http://www.pczone.co.uk/guest/php3/openframe.php3?page=http://www.pczone.co.uk/guest/newreviews/printrev.php3?id=33893 (http://www.pczone.co.uk/guest/php3/openframe.php3?page=http://www.pczone.co.uk/guest/newreviews/printrev.php3?id=33893)
http://www.pilotenbunker.de/ (http://www.pilotenbunker.de/)
-
R4M,
In this case you should forget and don't play other sims too if you think that FM there is very correct :) :). Just kidding :)
I told many times, I have no problem if smeone thinking that I'm wrong :) :) :)
I'm not only aviation engineer(Graduated Moscow Aviation Institute), but I'm also real private pilot (not so good of course and fly almost only Yak-52, if you know what it is ;)) and sure know what I do :)
I told you that I will publish opinions of German WWII pilots...(including sepcial interviews of them) which are now accessible.... I will do it but not here and not on SimHQ.
That is really my last post here. It is not nice to use AH developers page to discuss other sim, especially with me. I Very respect guys made AH as it is.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Oleg Maddox ]
-
Dmitry nice post. :)
-
Pretty classy responses from Mr. Maddox too. :)
-
yeah gotta admit oleg is a classy guy
hey mabye all the data we had is wrong. who knows? after all if i had been alive a few hundred years ago mabye i would have believed the world was flat.... mabye this is a similar thing?
actually i think the best way to resolve it is for funkedup to go talk to that 109 test pilot at chino and ask him how it handles! thats probably the best solution :)
-
Originally posted by Hristo:
name one, please
Gunther Rall. In his interview on LuftWaffe Wings- Discovery channel. About 6 years ago.
I will look through my books tonite, and find more.
-SW
-
While I had a hard time coming up with a direct comparison between the 190 and 109, I did find the following that suggests the high speed handling of the 109 should be similar to how it's modeled here.
Apparently, not all Soviet sources agree on the same things about the 109. Here are some translated excerpts from a Soviet Fighter Tactics manual I came across, posted by Luthier no less (good job, by the way, translating these materials), that seem to support heavy controls at high speeds. The link can be found at:Luthier's Excellent Site (http://luthier.stormloader.com/home.html)
Soviet Fighter Tactics
(Translated from Russian, 2000) http://luthier.stormloader.com/SFTacticsI.htm (http://luthier.stormloader.com/SFTacticsI.htm)
… Me-109 dives rather well. It gains airspeed quickly and loses our fighters easily when in a dive. It is not recommended to follow a diving Me-109. It is best to stay above, slightly lowering your plane’s nose just to keep the enemy in sight, and dive into the Me-109 after it exits it’s dive.
Me-109 loses a great deal of altitude when exiting a dive. It is very difficult for a Me-109 to exit a deep dive at a small altitude. It is also very hard to alter direction during a high-speed dive. When it is needed to alter directions during a dive, Me-109 will usually end the attack and climb to repeat the attack in a new direction. This particular weakness of a Me-109 can be exploited by our fighters.
And,
…FW-190A has the following advantages compared to the Me-109G6: under 4,000 meters it is about 20-30 km/h faster in horizontal flight. It is easier to controland has better overall pilot visibility. It also has superior firepower.
FW-190 is inferior to Me-109G by the following criteria: it is substantially heavier than the Me-109G (wing loading of 206 kg per square meter) and thus its climb rate is worse. Above 4,500 meters is it slower in horizontal flight. Landing speed is higher. It is slower in a dive. There is no armor protection against attacks from below or the side.
Here are some recent Buchon flight impressions from the late Mark Hanna (who died in a Buchon in 1999 as a result of an in-flight fire.)
The roll rate is very good and very positive below about 250 mph. This is particularly true of the Charles Church's Collection clipped wing aircraft. Our round tipped aeroplane is slightly less nice to feel. With the speed further back the roll rate remains good, particularly with a bit of help from the rudder. Above 250 mph however the roll starts to heavy up and up to 300 or so is very similar to a P-51. After that it's all getting pretty solid and you need two hands on the stick for any meaningfull roll rates. Another peculiarity is that when you have been in a hard turn with the slats deployed, and then you roll rapidly one way and stop, there is a strange sensation for a second of so of a kind of dead area over the ailerons - almost as if they are not connected ! Just when you are starting to get worried they work again !
Pitch is also delighful at 250 mph and below. It feels very positve and the amount of effort on the control column needed to produce the relevant nose movement seems exactly right to me. As CL max is reached the leading edge slats deploy - together if the ball is in the middle, slightly asymmetrically if you have any slip on. The aircraft delights in being pulled into hard manuevering turns at these slower speeds. As the slats pop out you feel a slight "notching" on the stick and you can pull more until the whole airframe is buffeting quite hard. A little more and you will drop a wing, but you have to be crass to do it unintentionally. Pitch tends to heavy up above 250 mph but it is still easily manageable up to 300 mph and the aircraft is perfectly happy carrying out low-level looping maneuvers from 300 mph and below. Above 300 mph one peculiarity is a slight nose down trim change as you accelerate. This means that running in for an airshow above 300 mph the aeroplane has a slight tucking in sensation - a sort of desire to get down to ground level ! This is easily held on the stick or can be trimmed out but is slightly surprising initially. Maneuvering above 300, two hands can be required for more aggressive performance. EIther that or get on the trimmer to help you. Despite this heavying up it is still quite easy to get at 5G's at these speeds].
So how does the aeroplane compare with other contemporary fighters ? First, let me say that all my comments are based on operation below 10,000 feet and at power settings not exceeding +12 (54") and 2700 rpm. I like it as an aeroplane, and with familiarity I think it will give most of the allied fighters I have flown a hard time, particularly in a close, hard turning, slow speed dog-fight. It will definitely out-maneuver a P-51 in this type of flight, the roll rate and slow speed characteristics being much better. The Spitfire on the other hand is more of a problem for the '109 and I feel it is a superior close in fighter. Having said that the aircraft are sufficiently closely matched that pilot abilty would probably be the deciding factor. At higher speeds the P-51 is definitely superior, and provided the Mustang kept his energy up and refused to dogfight he would be relatively safe against the '109. Other factors affecting the '109 as a combat plane include the small cramped cockpit. This is quite a tiring working environment, although the view out (in flight) is better than you might expect; the profuseion of canopy struts is not particularly a problem.
The full report can be found at: 109 page (http://www.bf109.com/flying.html)
This link also covers RAF testing of the 109E, which supports Hanna’s impressions and those of German Ace Franz Stigler, who had the following to offer:
What's the fastest you ever had a 109 in a dive?
I've taken it to about 680 to 750 km/hr at which point you needed 2 hands to pull it out of the dive.
Stigler also commented on having flown the Spitfire and enjoying the extra leverage offered by its stick. The 109E results indicated that only 40 lbs of stick force could be applied.
Charon
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Charon ]
-
Funny enough P-51 pilots thought thier plane was tops over the P-47 and P-38. Likwise the P-47 and P-38 pilots all thought they had the best planes over the other two also.
So, for example, perhaps HTC and the other developers should follow suit and base P51, P38 and P47 perfomances on half century old pilot recollections, "my ride" favoritism and biased conjecture?
I can also point folks to documents and stories from living USAAF pilots who says the P-47 could outclimb the ME 109, take enourmous battle damage and make it home. Or that nothing could touch the P-39 below 15k. That the P-51 could not only outturn the 109 but also 190 - as well as outclimb them too! And quite a good number of P38 pilots firmly believe thier plane could out perfom the Lw aircraft in all aspects. If they want to ensure the P47/P51 or P38 performs accurately against thier real life counter parts.
Or is it more sound and logical to use widely accepted AND available aircraft test reports that came from several different nations and build the best program you can to model that?
I'm not saying anything bad about the WWII Soviet tests or documents. I've never seen them, never read them either. Not many have :) It is simply that they are the new kid on the block and they'll have to under go debates I'm sure before they get accepted by the aviation community, let alone computer combat/flight sim fans, as defacto correct.
Westy
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Westy MOL ]
-
The fueding of personal planes doesn't end with Fighters Westy.
American bomber pilots typically held show-off matches between B17 and B24 crews. In a book I have at home, one B24 saw a B17 crew lower and ahead of them. They went into a dive and when they got close to the '17, they shut down the two outboard engines and flew past them and great speed.
I guess if we went by the accounts of the '17 crew members, the B24 would be one fast mamma jamma....
Anyways...
-SW
-
Just to remind some of you who are testing rollrates in Il-2. All speeds are in kilometers per hour. Flying at 500 kph is 310 mph.
Gunther Rall ? said it ? OK, I believe you.
-
One of those Discovery Wings interviews where Gunther Rall was the guest (and he was on quite a few of them)... they show them as re-runs from time to time on the Discovery Wings network. Titled "Wings of the LuftWaffe" or something like that.
-SW
-
All this is great guys, however, if I can't logon to a multiplayer sim with at least 120 folks huntin each other down, it's not worth the effort for me personally, irregardless of the FM or the graphics.
Just wouldn't be much fun for this guy.
-
About Georg Adam.
Unfortunatly, the first line in the page (http://www.pilotenbunker.de/Jagdflieger/Luftwaffe/Adam_Georg/adam_georg.htm ) are not translated so i try to do it
"G.A was flying under the command of NFSK and should change after the war to the LH. For this reason almost no exact sources and informations exist, because the pilots of NFSK were administered and leaded by another commando.
The pilots of NFSK were not part of a special jaba/jg squad, thatīs why they īre not listed in the internal listings of the squads.
Furthermore, the pilots of NFSK enjoyed a better training and changed more often squads"
His nephew and me, we were both flying on german wb2.01 server so i know him a bit - though not from RL. I mailed him of course to get some infos from his uncle about the planes he flew.
He answered f.e. that nothing could outroll his 190 (Dora afaik).
The point is: It is very much possible that at the very end of the war wooden components were used for the 190. Today i was at "Flugwerk" and talked to the people there, and they confirmed that wooden components were used at the end.
But should you model a A-8 of the end of the war, when planes maybe were sometimes made in poor manufacturing quality, build in desperate effort to bring something that flies to the front line, or a imo more representative ī44 A-8?
I had a look in the A-8 manual at Flugwerk, the standard deflection were +-17° of the aillerons btw.
It was a really interesting day at Flugwerk, i think i ll post a bit informations later
niklas
-
So, Mr Maddox says that he is in contact with Georg Adam. I take this as a hint that Mr.Adam assesses him. And so, he must be one of those pilots who say that the 109 outrolled the 190.
But Niklas says that his answer to the same question was that nothing could outroll his 190...Is me or something is really screwed here? :).
I have lots of books about WWII. Granted, none russian. But ALL of them, no exception, qualifies the Fw190 as the best rolling plane of World War 2, or at least they mention its extraordinary rollrate.
I never heard a mention about the 109's rollrate being good. I know that the 109Es outrolled early mark Spitfires, but those also had their own share of problems while rolling.
Almost unanimously the reports we have about WWII jagdflieger, describe the 190 as a notably better roller than the 109. And seems that those first hand reports talk about excessive stick forces at high speed. The only doubt I had, is now solved.
Sorry, but I stand where I started.
Oh, and Oleg...I dont pretend that AH FM is perfect. It is far from being perfect(as I have stated lots of times in this board :))
But at least it seems way more plausible to me than the 109 outrolling 190s. I really hope that the final Il2 release have the FM I pray to see. I dont want to see such a nice project and great work damaged by a strange Flight Model.
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
BTW nice info on Georg Adam, Niklas. Always since the date of the thread I linked before, I wondered if he was really an ace. I really didnt know what to think at the time :)
Seems that the guy who sent me the photos was right and not trolling us. I'm glad to know it :).
BTW niklas, please send me an email, need to ask you a couple of things and I have lost your adress :)
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: R4M ]
-
Wel, far be it for me to toss another log on the Il2 flight model fire..
but supposedly per Oleg the IL2 "FM drag module above 170-180 km/h not being present in the demo"
<cough>
So much for the "BESTest and most accurate FM ever!" reports from those who've tried this unofficial demo.
Westy
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Westy MOL ]
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Westy MOL ]
-
Originally posted by Westy MOL:
Wel, far be it for me to toss another log on the Il2 flight model fire..
but supposedly per Oleg the IL2 "FM drag module above 170-180 km/h not being present in the demo"
<cough>
So much for the "BESTest and most accurate FM ever!" reports from those who've tried this unofficial demo.
Westy
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Westy MOL ]
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Westy MOL ]
Remember AH beta ? Flap deployment ? B-17 guns ? Hit sprites ? Crash bugs ?
Cough, cough
Remember pre 1.03 flight model ?
Keep coughing
[ 08-29-2001: Message edited by: Hristo ]
-
Splash one ! :D
-
<cough> hristojob <cough>
You're so predictable. I did not know who'd reply first you or a guy who's handle begins with an "S" that usually beats you to the punch.
You avoided the whole point while at the same time proving it <G> by showing how cultboys such as yourself rave like demented sim maniacs but when the truth comes out and all the holes in your imaginary nirvana appear you lunge for the messengers throat.
Typical.
Westy
-
Westy AH has come long way since beta but it is still having planes which FM HTC is going to check.
Il-2 beta we are playing is leaked, already old beta01 while "Real" Betaplayers are using Beta04.
If you don't understand that... well I can't help you.
-
"If you don't understand that... well I can't help you."
First, I comment on any program on it's own merit or lack of. Not "IT" verusus AH, although I may add that I wish something had AH view system, clouds, or many other nice features. I've never said WW2O sukks verusus AH, or AH rAwKs over IL2. I comment on what I feel are good or weak points for any sim/game program. By itself.
Second, I know IL2 is a beta. I'm simply rubbing some folks nose in thier own doo-doo (DeeZcamp and Hristo now cause he had to put his nose in the way) for going off the deep end. Sort of trying to help clarify and show (so easily) what it is that Zigrat started to talk about here.
Westy
-
Staga, he meant to say that with this leaked beta (pre-demo) there was a lot of "it's better this way..." from the fan base that downloaded and tried it out. Unknowing it was an early(?) beta, they proclaimed that this demo was superior to what we currently have. In whatever department they felt necessary to shout the loudest about.
Now that we have beaten each other's heads in about this and that, it is uncovered that this pre-demo is indeed an early beta.
To which everyone (myself included) who was skeptical at first began to question various parts of this pre-demo as to why it was better. Things were proven incomplete or needed revision.
There were many people shouting while sitting around a camp fire holding hands in their whitey tighteys about how this pre-demo was superior. When things were disproven about it's superiority, or questioned, they (those shouting and screaming) fell back on the "it's just a beta" line.
I hope that makes it clearer.
Westy & Zigrat were not saying this pre-demo is below, above or equal with AH- in fact they aren't comparing it at all. They were merely stating that how can it be so superior right now if what everyone is playing is simply an early beta release.
-SW
-
uhm i dont dislike il2 it looks like it will be a very cool game
it has many things i would like to see in aces high like diffrerent types of ammo, better cockpits, and customizable skins
but there are obviously things that could use improving from what ive heard. it doesnt do massive multiplay and ive heard there are FM issues taht are suspect. im currently computerless so i cannot play any games, damnit. its been 2 weeks but i think its like what i hear quitting smoking is like. at first it wasnt so bad, then i wanted to play real bad, now its not so bad again :)
hey im glad oleg is making it. it certainly looks to do some things better than aces high and hopefully hitech will make aces high better to compete :)
plus at 14.95 price of aces high is much much better now and i dont mind paying nearly as much :)
-
Il-2 is already a beter sim than AH. I can only imagine how good it will be in final release.
As for Il-2 demo missing parts of FM, crap. It is a demo from beta and it is free. And it beats AH even like this. AH is missing realistic buff guns, realistic ack, realistic gunnery, realistic cockpits.
You want to look for playability concessions ? Fly AH.
AH went to pay-to-play for quite some time and was still missing FM. Hell, all planes didn't fly like they should in pre 1.03.
Yes, I am an Il-2 cheerleader. I'd be a hypocrite otherwise.
-
Before to make any summary and conclusions, please make sure that you know what you said...
Sounds: NO ONE PLANE IN THE WORLD WAS ABLE TO OUTROLL FW-190.... ARE YOU SURE? LET SAY that YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT SUCH PARAMETER OF LAGG, LA-5FN, LA-7, or say any of Yaks?
I promissed to do not post, but someone still think that he is right.... and last work should only his word. Here is nothing personal it is nature of human ;)
I said that I will post some time later data... isn't it? Not all data I have but data for which I HAVE PERMISSION to post. Do you know that when you work with REAL archives, no matter where In Germany, USA, UK or in Russia the person who work there and copied docs MUST sign AGREEMENT ABOUT NO DISTRIBUTION ANY OF THE COPIED DOCS WITHOUT PERMISSION (for books, or for something other.....) AND IT COST MONEY, SOMETIME GREAT MONEY (some time ROYALTY if in commercial producs use original pages, etc...)
Do you think about it? Take a look for that problem from other side!
Do you know how much money I paid for some of docs? (most I got for almost free but with no permission to print in any print and internet sources)
And you offer me to post it for free not at time when I want it or when I will have official permission?
Georg Adam. That to speak about this veteran YOU SHOULD KNOW HIS HISTORY WELL BEFOR TO SAY SOMETHING.
Ace or not ace - for me is no matter. He was on Russian front and Western front. That is matter. AND HE HAS CLEAR MEMORY. I'm happy that I was able to get a help (any) from him and other German, American and Russian veterans. And I happy that I get VERY DIFFERENT OPINIONS OF EACH of them.
Georg Adam never said me that 109 can outroll 190. As I understood he loves very much FW-190D-9. At the same time his granson Steffen helped me to make interview with other veteran... And there I got very intersting data for 109, including rollrate - which fully corresponds to aerodynamics calculation in aerodynamic tunnel for 109.
The theme closed UNTIL IL-2 will be released and you'll be able to fly there FW-190 and compare with others. I never say that we HAVE 100% corresponding charts to original. But I will say that we have very close to what those planes perform.
I will not name anymore on the boards ANY names who helped me to get true data and consulted me untill release.
Some people don't understand some terms or, on the contary, understand it and that to confirm "ONLY ONE TRUTH they know" - speculate on that. That isn't correct way of discussion.
Show me diagramms of roll rate of 109F,G,K!
Can't?
Show me diagramms of forces on the control column of 109 during dive from 350 to 850 km/h and recover after that dive!
Can't?
I will be very glad to see such charts of UK/US tests (for sure I have also some German such docs) for these planes which we need to model.
I know some veterans who flew other German planes.... Experimental and serial....
They all like to help that to get some of them flyable in a sim such as our IL-2...
So, if you or anybody flame me in terms of Rollrate of FW-190s compare to other MODELED planes, make sure to have REAL arguments.
Here above I have read translation of document which I have as original book... (Soviet fighter tacitcs) By bold selected things which shows "confirmation" of summary....
But you don't see other description, which totally in contradiction about climb data comparing to the west data, but fully corresponds to MANUFACTURE DATA.
Recommendations to do not follow the dive of 109 doesn't means that ONLY 109 will have large curve to recover from that dive WITH SUPERIOR SPEED...At such big speed whe you try to recover you may loose the mind, because of HIGHEST CONTINUES G-LOAD(what about modeling of that?). There you should read also that in Soviet LaGG-3 (that description is for such fighter type like LaGG - the most mass produced fighter in the end of 1942, when this doc was existed) unable to reach the same speed in dive and better to wait and keep the maximum speed if POSSIBLE in level flight that to reach German fighter in the cross of your and enemy trajectory (really it was hellpless for many soviet early war planes, such as I-16, I-153 or for lend lease Hurricanes and P-40).
I would like to say, if possible... That is doc how to fight with ENEMY fighter tactis and how they escape attack ... That means that pilots of 109 USED OFTEN SUCH TACTIC - dive on large speed and they USED the advantage in that case over the enemy.
At the same time FW-190 was new in 1942 for Soviets and this doc have not all the recomendatios. The only one captured by Soviets FW190A-4 was tested at that time and recomendations how to fight with that plane based on that test and on soviet pilots descriptions from the front. Real recomendations were done in late 1943. There is description that only way to escape attack from six, pilot of 190 uses half roll and dive, because impossiblity of quick level acceleration and lack of climb comparing to Soviet planes of that time... In that terms, haf roll and following 190's dive, La-5FN for example was superior (recomendations for pilot of La-5FN in case if German pilot of 190 uses that common for them tactic on Russian front).
There is also recomendations for IL-2 pilots how to escape attacks from six .... there is description markered top secret and not for IL-2 pilots eyes that FW-190 attack of IL-2 was in 50%-60% fatal if FW-190 begins to shot from long distance and kill rear gunner... Not so many plots of IL-2 recalls that they successfully escaped FW-190 attack from rear... Most of them died after that attack... But a lot of survived after attacks of Bf-109...
So all terms are subjective... depends of situation and methodics of calculations/computations....
Each try to see what he want to see in one or other doc... Developer can't follow his own favorite plane. He need to learn all things....
My device is "The truth is somewhere in between"
I said many times, if I'm wrong and you have data to correct where I'm wrong - I will do corrections.
So...
My email is mado@1c.ru
-
And this man is former leading aviation engineer of institute, which created planes like su-27 etc.
No way they could know anything about aerodynamics!
Wind tunnel testing, sheesh, you didnt have Rommel involved, i dont believe your data! Only way we can simulate 190 flight charasteristics is to rebuild real one, clone Rommel and hes leather pants, put them in to air and study it!
:mad:
-
Originally posted by Tuomio:
And this man is former leading aviation engineer of institute, which created planes like su-27 etc.
No way they could know anything about aerodynamics!
Wind tunnel testing, sheesh, you didnt have Rommel involved, i dont believe your data! Only way we can simulate 190 flight charasteristics is to rebuild real one, clone Rommel and hes leather pants, put them in to air and study it!
:mad:
You can by it alreay now in Germany... With Soviet licensed to China ASh-82FN 1875 hp engine... :) :) :) :) :)
(sory some one will show you link, I have not at the moment)
I would by, just will need to accumulate more money... :(
-
Damn, wheres my wallet. ;)
-
I like Mr Maddox great arguments sir.
I won't put my POV but I think Mr Maddox does have pretty good arguments regarding his flight modeling techniques.
I agree wait for the finished product then make your complaints or regrets later.