Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Fud on July 26, 2011, 05:44:31 PM

Title: Flight modeling
Post by: Fud on July 26, 2011, 05:44:31 PM
How do the programmers know how the planes are supposed perform in here?..Blue prints maybe? actual plane performance? guess work?
Just curious <S> fudmukkr
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: FLS on July 26, 2011, 05:51:51 PM
It's a combination of anecdotes, youtube videos, community polls, Wiki pastes, and grainy black and white pictures.   :devil


Kidding. They use official documents and math.  :D
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Fud on July 26, 2011, 05:58:12 PM
It's a combination of anecdotes, youtube videos, community polls, Wiki pastes, and grainy black and white pictures.   :devil


Kidding. They use official documents and math.  :D

lmao ...math and official documents :rofl
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Karnak on July 26, 2011, 06:08:07 PM
"Official documents" meaning primary source documents of flight testing done back in WWII, or shortly after.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: JOACH1M on July 26, 2011, 06:13:09 PM
Hitech flew in a p51 in real life
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: FLS on July 26, 2011, 06:15:40 PM
Karnak I expect the flight test data is used for verifying the model not creating it.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: oneway on July 26, 2011, 06:17:58 PM
I would like to have this flight test modeling data

Not holding my breath
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Karnak on July 26, 2011, 06:20:23 PM
Karnak I expect the flight test data is used for verifying the model not creating it.
It will be what they use as the basis of the FM's target performance as well.

I would like to have this flight test modeling data

Not holding my breath
You can get some of it at http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ 

Good books are another source.

You can request some more from government sources.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Fud on July 26, 2011, 06:36:03 PM
Hitech flew in a p51 in real life
I flew in a B24, B17 ,C47 and a C172 in real life lol
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Ack-Ack on July 26, 2011, 06:45:17 PM
I also believe that HiTech has his personal airplane also in the game so he can use it to compare it's performance with real life data and for the odd evil con mission.

But as someone linked to wwiiaircraftperfomance.com, you can find some of the official data that was used and in books and government sources as well.  Also, people have to remember that due to the complexity of creating a perfectly accurate flight model, it would be beyond our feeble desktop PCs to be able to process it so allowances have to be made.

For a PC flight sim, Aces High has a pretty damn good flight model and physics and there is a reason that after 10+ years, the game is still around and doing well.

ack-ack
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Fud on July 26, 2011, 06:50:52 PM
I fly the 4hog in the DA and I am curious if the real plane could physically do some of the things the cartoon plane does in the DA? (assuming the pilot is invincible against g's and head banging turns lol)
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: JOACH1M on July 26, 2011, 07:02:41 PM
I flew in a B24, B17 ,C47 and a C172 in real life lol
How do they compare to this game?
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Fud on July 26, 2011, 07:06:58 PM
How do they compare to this game?

Dunno, I was a passenger and once we hit 6k, I bailed out of the bomb bays....I was told the C47 saw action during D-Day  and the C172...well is a C172 lol
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: FLS on July 26, 2011, 07:18:49 PM
I fly the 4hog in the DA and I am curious if the real plane could physically do some of the things the cartoon plane does in the DA? (assuming the pilot is invincible against g's and head banging turns lol)

Yes it can do some of those things. The pilot doesn't even have to be immune to G loading.

Why would you bang your head in a turn?
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Fud on July 26, 2011, 07:20:09 PM
Yes it can do some of those things. The pilot doesn't even have to be immune to G loading.

Why would you bang your head in a turn?

The way I fly ...I need all the bracing I need lol
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: JOACH1M on July 26, 2011, 07:29:40 PM
Yes it can do some of those things. The pilot doesn't even have to be immune to G loading.

Why would you bang your head in a turn?
Have u ever riddin a ruler coaster that's twists and turns?  My head swings side to side alot, wouldnt surprise me If 109 pilots hit there heads with that small cockpit
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Yeager on July 26, 2011, 07:57:53 PM
math (aka physics) and actual flight test results for the most part.  and a dash of hog warts.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: FLS on July 26, 2011, 09:07:55 PM
Have u ever riddin a ruler coaster that's twists and turns?  My head swings side to side alot, wouldnt surprise me If 109 pilots hit there heads with that small cockpit

You might hit your head in a snap roll but not in a turn.


Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: JOACH1M on July 26, 2011, 09:09:34 PM
You might hit your head in a snap roll but not in a turn.



or heavy turbulence, but the again we have none ingame sadly :(
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: FLS on July 26, 2011, 09:18:35 PM
Turbulence is up and down like hitting a bump. Mind your lift vector.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: JOACH1M on July 26, 2011, 09:25:21 PM
Turbulence is up and down like hitting a bump. Mind your lift vector.
When I fly, (I'm taking private pilot lessons) turbulence moves me up and down yes, but some times he will get pushed right or left.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Fud on July 26, 2011, 09:35:04 PM
When I fly, (I'm taking private pilot lessons) turbulence moves me up and down yes, but some times he will get pushed right or left.
Well that's it for me...I'm staying off the sidewalk lol....
and yes I can imagine some snap turns i make in the game would cause some serious neck issues lol
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: JOACH1M on July 26, 2011, 09:52:04 PM
Well that's it for me...I'm staying off the sidewalk lol....
and yes I can imagine some snap turns i make in the game would cause some serious neck issues lol
:rofl the sidewalks are not safe in your area  :old: :neener:
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: B-17 on July 27, 2011, 12:29:04 AM
Hmm.... they appear to have some data for a certain operation British jet during WWII...
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: dtango on July 27, 2011, 08:43:36 AM
math (aka physics) and actual flight test results for the most part.  and a dash of hog warts.

Ppshaw, who needs maths?  What possibly more do you need than hasty generlizations made from the intardnetz, WW2 hyperbole, a few mystifying charts, & aerohunchnautics for FM verisimilitude?
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: dhyran on July 27, 2011, 09:35:55 AM
Have u ever riddin a ruler coaster that's twists and turns?  My head swings side to side alot, wouldnt surprise me If 109 pilots hit there heads with that small cockpit

Fighter pilots are well trained with a great physical fitness! In the past and today, also they didn't stick stirr and turn and burn 5 complete rounds. The Aces just saw the targets earlier than the opponents!

Back to topic, lot of math inside
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: WYOKIDIII on July 27, 2011, 02:20:42 PM
I fly the 4hog in the DA and I am curious if the real plane could physically do some of the things the cartoon plane does in the DA? (assuming the pilot is invincible against g's and head banging turns lol)

Most of these aircraft can do things that exceed the phyisical limitations of human beings. No sane pilot with a fear of death would fly these planes the way we do in cartoon land . Even in combat .
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: dedalos on July 27, 2011, 02:35:06 PM
I fly the 4hog in the DA and I am curious if the real plane could physically do some of the things the cartoon plane does in the DA? (assuming the pilot is invincible against g's and head banging turns lol)

 :lol The answer is no, for every plane.  Some things can only be modeled so far.  Same thing as stall fighting 100 feet off the ground.  I don;t think that was part of WWII pilot training.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: SIK1 on July 27, 2011, 05:49:15 PM
Ppshaw, who needs maths?  What possibly more do you need than hasty generlizations made from the intardnetz, WW2 hyperbole, a few mystifying charts, & aerohunchnautics for FM verisimilitude?

Don't forget good old gut feeling, and that's how I think it should be.  :aok
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Karnak on July 27, 2011, 06:33:09 PM
:lol The answer is no, for every plane.  Some things can only be modeled so far.  Same thing as stall fighting 100 feet off the ground.  I don;t think that was part of WWII pilot training.
Physically possible and trained for are two entirely separate things.  I know of one case in which a Mossie VI was attacking a German airfield and the pilot pulled it to tight and stalled it violently at low altitude.  The stick was yanked out of his hand and the Mossie was upside down at what his navigator said was 10ft, though I'd guess more like 50ft, and he recovered it.  All sorts of stuff happened that pilots weren't trained for.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Krupinski on July 27, 2011, 06:36:15 PM
When I fly, (I'm taking private pilot lessons) turbulence moves me up and down yes, but some times he will get pushed right or left.

I wish my parents had $10,000 easily accessible.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: JOACH1M on July 27, 2011, 07:12:27 PM
I wish my parents had $10,000 easily accessible.
It's not that much...
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: B-17 on July 27, 2011, 09:25:51 PM
Depends on where you live. I'm with you, Krupinski. barely enough for groceries :(
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: dedalos on July 28, 2011, 10:01:45 AM
Physically possible and trained for are two entirely separate things.  I know of one case in which a Mossie VI was attacking a German airfield and the pilot pulled it to tight and stalled it violently at low altitude.  The stick was yanked out of his hand and the Mossie was upside down at what his navigator said was 10ft, though I'd guess more like 50ft, and he recovered it.  All sorts of stuff happened that pilots weren't trained for.

True, but you are talking about an accidental stall vs intentionally stall fighting at that altitude.  In either case, there is only so far simulation can go.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Karnak on July 28, 2011, 02:32:23 PM
True, but you are talking about an accidental stall vs intentionally stall fighting at that altitude.  In either case, there is only so far simulation can go.
It still looks like you're conflating what was physically possible for the aircraft to do with what they actually did due to pilot training and self preservation and expecting HTC to limit players to the second somehow.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: dedalos on July 28, 2011, 03:26:14 PM
See rule #4
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: B4Buster on July 28, 2011, 04:40:31 PM
They get all their information from various 'History Channel' shows. It's a great resource.

 :bolt:
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: Krusty on July 28, 2011, 04:55:13 PM
Same thing as stall fighting 100 feet off the ground.  I don;t think that was part of WWII pilot training.
True, but you are talking about an accidental stall vs intentionally stall fighting at that altitude.  In either case, there is only so far simulation can go.

While I agree flight models can only be "so true" to reality, you're confusing PRACTICE (I mean how something is used, not "practice makes perfect") with POTENTIAL (I mean physics allows it).

The soviets pretty much earned half their kills at treetop levels. I know many others did too.

And then there's always the story of Ta152s and Tempests stall fighting over the trees at the end of the war, the Ta152 pushing the Tempest to turn tighter and tighter until he snap stalled and crashed without time to recover because they were so low.


So while I agree with the general comment, I disagree with the notions behind it.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: icepac on July 28, 2011, 05:34:28 PM
That tempest pilot turned the wrong direction for most of the fight.

He reversed near the end but it was too late.

Not sure it would have mattered.
Title: Re: Flight modeling
Post by: dedalos on July 29, 2011, 08:36:10 AM
While I agree flight models can only be "so true" to reality, you're confusing PRACTICE (I mean how something is used, not "practice makes perfect") with POTENTIAL (I mean physics allows it).

The soviets pretty much earned half their kills at treetop levels. I know many others did too.

And then there's always the story of Ta152s and Tempests stall fighting over the trees at the end of the war, the Ta152 pushing the Tempest to turn tighter and tighter until he snap stalled and crashed without time to recover because they were so low.


So while I agree with the general comment, I disagree with the notions behind it.

It was just an example to show how games are different from real life.