Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Chalenge on December 22, 2014, 11:09:23 PM
-
It is obvious after a short time in researching the 109 lineage that the flaps were not as easy to use, nor especially as fast as they are in AH. Couple that with a rudder that enables the aircraft to do aerobatic moves it could never do in real life, then it becomes obvious that the concessions that enable the 109 to do the fantastic moves that it does in AH have gone too far.
Therefore, it is time to neuter the 109s. Then we can discuss the F4Us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcMjhihuuX8
-
:rofl
-
many tvinga ned to be looked over, damage modell comes to my mind, b17 thats can outdive a me163.
Htc chose to simplify flaps for some planes, easy engine management for some planes make them better fighting machines than IRL.
109s could use some flaps up to 700km/h compared with 200mph in AH although barder to use.
-
O.m.g :rofl
It is obvious after a short time in researching the 109 lineage that the flaps were not as easy to use, nor especially as fast as they are in AH. Couple that with a rudder that enables the aircraft to do aerobatic moves it could never do in real life, then it becomes obvious that the concessions that enable the 109 to do the fantastic moves that it does in AH have gone too far.
Therefore, it is time to neuter the 109s. Then we can discuss the F4Us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcMjhihuuX8
-
It is obvious after a short time in researching the 109 lineage that the flaps were not as easy to use, nor especially as fast as they are in AH. Couple that with a rudder that enables the aircraft to do aerobatic moves it could never do in real life, then it becomes obvious that the concessions that enable the 109 to do the fantastic moves that it does in AH have gone too far.
Therefore, it is time to neuter the 109s. Then we can discuss the F4Us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcMjhihuuX8
GLWT!
-
I thought you were exaggerating the flap thing till I watched the video you provided.
Since other control surfaces in AH like the P38 G's and J's ailerons have restrictive simulated, modeling then it would be appropriate to simulate slow flap travel on the 109s.
-
I thought you were exaggerating the flap thing till I watched the video you provided.
Since other control surfaces in AH like the P38 G's and J's ailerons have restrictive simulated, modeling then it would be appropriate to simulate slow flap travel on the 109s.
And there should be a pause when turning the wheel.
-
GLWT!
Simple fact is it's wrong. I would argue that the high speed lock up into a right hand roll is wrong also. A little give, a little take and things would be a lot more accurate.
@Randy1: Check out the time on retracting the flaps. That's 22 down and 30-1/2 up by my count. No idea why it's different, but about 25 seconds in either direction.
-
Simple fact is it's wrong. I would argue that the high speed lock up into a right hand roll is wrong also. A little give, a little take and things would be a lot more accurate.
@Randy1: Check out the time on retracting the flaps. That's 22 down and 30-1/2 up by my count. No idea why it's different, but about 25 seconds in either direction.
Don't get defensive. I agree with you in this case, but this only opens many cans of worms. Is it your intent to correct all the models?
Now, of you could get hired on by HTC, have at it.
Again, best of luck to you sir and have a Merry Christmas!
edit - have you any time to fix the 50 cal sounds for the M2 to be more realistic? :cool:
-
I could do it a lot faster than the guy in the video.
-
It is obvious after a short time in researching the 109 lineage that the flaps were not as easy to use, nor especially as fast as they are in AH.
Is that the typical design in all the 109 linage or just that model in the video?
-
Couple that with a rudder that enables the aircraft to do aerobatic moves it could never do in real life, then it becomes obvious that the concessions that enable the 109 to do the fantastic moves that it does in AH have gone too far.
Therefore, it is time to neuter the 109s. Then we can discuss the F4Us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcMjhihuuX8
Are you the authority on rudder or the rudder authority?
-
Is that the typical design in all the 109 linage or just that model in the video?
Yes. There was 2 wheels to the left of the pilot. One for stab trim and the other for flaps.
-
I thought you were exaggerating the flap thing till I watched the video you provided.
Since other control surfaces in AH like the P38 G's and J's ailerons have restrictive simulated, modeling then it would be appropriate to simulate slow flap travel on the 109s.
What restrictions are simulated on the P-38G/J's ailerons?
-
I could do it a lot faster than the guy in the video.
While maneuvering at 3 to 4 g, managing throttle and controls? The guy in the video is just sitting there....
-
The logic and proof on this one is pretty strong.
All 109s?
-
Good luck.
Hey
When you're in combat and that adrenaline is pumping, yeah them flaps gonna DROP. :rofl
Nothing like in that video.
Everyone who doesn't fly 109's is gonna think everything a 109 does in AH is impossible, ok it's a game. :aok
And why pick on the 109?
-
Yes. There was 2 wheels to the left of the pilot. One for stab trim and the other for flaps.
Has to make you think how huge a difference there really is compared to the video & in game. For example you can tap a button on the game controler five times & your flaps are all the way out in only about five seconds, also being able to do throttle control all with just your left hand when in reality it is not possible.
-
The point of the video is to clearly show the number of partial turns, not the fastest time to turn to a useful setting.
The notion that the rudder has too much authority is also unsupported speculation.
-
Does the game even model different actuation times for different planes? For example the real Spitfire flaps drop in less than a second (operated by compressed air) yet take quite awhile to actuate in AH.
(Not that I care. I've never found Spit flaps to be useful in AH combat, they are more just air brakes useful for landing.)
-
The point of the video is to clearly show the number of partial turns, not the fastest time to turn to a useful setting.
You would agree though that 5 clicks on a button would be a lot faster than hand cranking the flaps though the full range of motion though?
-
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH......... ..............
-1
Sacrilege!
-
DCS is coming out with a 109. If you want you can hand crank its Flaps.
-
DCS is coming out with a 109. If you want you can hand crank its Flaps.
The K4 has already been released. I've killed 3 so far with the A-10's GAU 8.
My 30s are better, Eat it German tin can!
-
The K4 has already been released. I've killed 3 so far with the A-10's GAU 8.
My 30s are better, Eat it German tin can!
Get out :furious
Our 30mm isn't a scrub version like yours. :mad:
-
Get out :furious
Our 30mm isn't a scrub version like yours. :mad:
Depleted Uranium > Cheesy poofs
-
Get out :furious
Our 30mm isn't a scrub version like yours. :mad:
(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view4/2966826/a10-thunderbolt-o.gif)
You sure about that, tin can flyin' jerry?
Glzz knows what's up
-
(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view4/2966826/a10-thunderbolt-o.gif)
Mk108 makes better gifs
-
Depleted Uranium > Cheesy poofs
Infidel
-
You would agree though that 5 clicks on a button would be a lot faster than hand cranking the flaps though the full range of motion though?
The real issue is the actual time required to deploy a useful amount of flaps. I don't see that posted anywhere.
Do you think that 15 clicks on a button is more realism?
-
Mk108 makes better gifs
Mk108 makes a better piece of scrap metal too. :)
-
Mk108 makes better gifs
Yea, the "Reported Bugs" section of the forum is filled with examples of how great German engineering is :neener:
-
Mk108 makes a better piece of scrap metal too. :)
Yes it does, it makes good scrap metal of you. :aok
Yea, the "Reported Bugs" section of the forum is filled with examples of how great German engineering is :neener:
The one in real life didn't have bugs. :bhead
-
The one in real life didn't have bugs. :bhead
sure as hell jammed a lot more.
-
Yes it does, it makes good scrap metal of you. :aok
Scrap metal of the A-10? No no no good sir, let's just remember
What plane can shoot 70 30mm rounds a second
What plane doesn't break apart like a twig when shot at
What plane can kill you from 15 miles via air to ground guided missiles
What plane wasn't built on a country's last dying breath of resources
What plane isn't a worthless tin can
.... and what plane was built by AMERICA
-
While maneuvering at 3 to 4 g, managing throttle and controls?
While potentially getting shot at? I'd sure have the motivation to!
-
Scrap metal of the A-10? No no no good sir, let's just remember
What plane can shoot 70 30mm rounds a second
What plane doesn't break apart like a twig when shot at
What plane can kill you from 15 miles via looking at you
What plane isn't a worthless tin can
.... and what plane was built by GERMANY
The 109 :aok
sure as hell jammed a lot more.
They sure did a heck of a job for 70 years ago. :bhead
-
The 109 :aok
WHY I OUGHTA :furious :furious :furious
-
The real issue is the actual time required to deploy a useful amount of flaps. I don't see that posted anywhere.
Do you think that 15 clicks on a button is more realism?
It is not the number of clicks that matters, it is the time delay between the click and the time the new setting takes effect. HTC can make it so you tap the key 3 times to lower 3 notches, but the game takes a 4-5 seconds delay before moving to the next flap setting, then 4-5 seconds to the next.. etc.
Flap deployment time should be slowed down across the board for all planes. Silly full-flaps hover moves will only be possible if you start deploying the flaps 15-20 seconds in advance - and then take as long to retract them back and recover. 1-2 notches max (5-10 sec to deploy!) would still be useful in a fight, as it was in real life (still, was not common use). No one deployed full flaps in a fight.
-
They sure did a heck of a job for 70 years ago. :bhead
Is that why they lost? :D
Let me guess, the next whine is gonna be :cry but but but, Logistics! :cry
-
Is that why they lost? :D
Let me guess, the next whine is gonna be :cry but but but, Logistics! :cry
Inifidel
:) :O
-
It is not the number of clicks that matters, it is the time delay ...
That sounds familiar.
The real issue is the actual time required...
-
Hi.
-
(http://i1213.photobucket.com/albums/cc473/UnkShadow/savingtheinternet.gif)
-
I got tired just watching.... :old:
-
Is that the typical design in all the 109 linage or just that model in the video?
Every model of the 109 and 110 have the same flap design. The inside wheel is the 'elevator trim' which adjusts the incidence angle. If this is set incorrectly during landing or takeoff it will be an instant write-off.
-
The notion that the rudder has too much authority is also unsupported speculation.
Unsupported thus far, maybe. However, HiTech has flown the P-51 and other aircraft and should be aware of precisely how the rudders act near the stall. Therefore, he should also know they are wrong as they are now. I do not believe they are accurate and I do not believe that a pilot in a full stall trying to 'rudder monster' his nose into a gun solution could ever pull it off. It would be the miracle of all miracles.
All I am asking for is even more realism. Air combat in WWII was very, very hard and I would like to see it portrayed that way in AH.
-
Unsupported thus far, maybe. However, HiTech has flown the P-51 and other aircraft and should be aware of precisely how the rudders act near the stall. Therefore, he should also know they are wrong as they are now. I do not believe they are accurate and I do not believe that a pilot in a full stall trying to 'rudder monster' his nose into a gun solution could ever pull it off. It would be the miracle of all miracles.
All I am asking for is even more realism. Air combat in WWII was very, very hard and I would like to see it portrayed that way in AH.
You claim it is incorrect yet you provide nothing more than your 'gut feeling' it's wrong. When asking for more realism to the flight model, it's a good idea to provide something to back it up.
ack-ack
-
Flap deployment time should be slowed down across the board for all planes. Silly full-flaps hover moves will only be possible if you start deploying the flaps 15-20 seconds in advance - and then take as long to retract them back and recover. 1-2 notches max (5-10 sec to deploy!) would still be useful in a fight, as it was in real life (still, was not common use). No one deployed full flaps in a fight.
What proof do you have that shows flap deployment speeds for all planes are incorrect? The P-38 only took around 7-8 seconds to deploy full flaps and 2 seconds to deploy the dive flaps on the P-38L.
-
The real issue is the actual time required to deploy a useful amount of flaps. I don't see that posted anywhere.
Do you think that 15 clicks on a button is more realism?
Well as a trainer of AHII pick one of the 109's we have in game preferably the one in the flap video if we have it. Then with your background as a trainer in AHII what is that useful amount of flap needed for that model & what purpose. Then give us a flap angle setting & then we can go back to the video & time how long it takes to get to that approximate point in the video.
I don't think there would a huge difference in time in the video & the angle you have chosen.
It should be a fair approximation though.
-
You claim it is incorrect yet you provide nothing more than your 'gut feeling' it's wrong. When asking for more realism to the flight model, it's a good idea to provide something to back it up.
ack-ack
Incorrect. What I said is HiTech knows. In reality he is the only one that matters here. HiTech made the flight model and he knows exactly how far he can push it.
For the last two years I have been telling you why people are leaving AH. It's not the graphics. It's not the overall game. It is the fact that if someone has an idea that truly will make things more realistic, or more accurate, that person has to get it past a committee of people with their feet stuck in the mud. Meanwhile, the people that have seen little problems in the game are afraid to speak up on the BBS. Well, I'm not afraid.
If things remain as they are then AH will always have aspects of the game that can be pointed out as unrealistic. Well, that's fine if all you want is a constant furball below 3k and you want it to be as easy as possible. Well, I don't want it to be easy. I want to feel the air slipping away from my wingtips as I approach a stall. I want to hear it, too. We have enough airplanes, until this is sorted out. We have enough MGs and cannons. All we need are a few adjustments to remake the simulation into a more realistic environment and to push the criticisms back and this game will be good to advance into more aircraft and more combat reenactments.
If you resist changes that will make the game even better then you are part of the problem.
-
You had agreed with FLS that it was unsupported speculation on your part about the rudders being modeled incorrectly near or at stall speeds. You don't even know for sure if there is a problem, as you stated its speculation on your part. If you believe there is a problem, then provide some proof and give it to HTC. If you've shown conclusively there is an error in the flight model, I'm sure it will be fixed.
-
Wrong, AKAK, I know there is a problem. I just didn't tell you how I know.
-
Wrong, AKAK, I know there is a problem. I just didn't tell you how I know.
So why don't you tell us how you know, rather than playing this "I know something you don't, and I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you" mystery game.
-
How many fighters in WW2 had insta-auto-retract of their flaps at some predetermined speed from a lookup table?
That video shows a possible gameness in our ACM with the 109. We have auto-retract flaps on our 109. Looks like in real life you had to remember to muscle them up or suffer the consequences.
Would a better interim approach to HiTech be, to ask for more realistic consequences per each plane's technology once you deploy your flaps?
Many average players have enough trouble learning how to purposely get their fighter slow enough during ACM to include lowering their flaps as a tactic. For many vets, it is the gold standard technique of our air show acrobatical gameness. Without insta-auto-retract in most fighters, it would be vets who would suffer the consequences more often of the deployment. Maybe even giving newer players more opportunities to cash in on them forgetting to raise flaps.
-
So why don't you tell us how you know, rather than playing this "I know something you don't, and I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you" mystery game.
For the very reason that the gang-bang inquisition is yet another example of why customers are leaving. On the BBS there are plenty of people pointing at the HTC team and claiming they are to blame why ignoring their own involvement. This is one of them, and I already told you all you need to know.
-
Wrong, AKAK, I know there is a problem. I just didn't tell you how I know.
Let me guess, it's from flying your own P-51? :devil
ack-ack
-
Let me guess, it's from flying your own P-51? :devil
ack-ack
You really want to go back to that 1 trick pony of yours AKAK?
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,329370.15.html
-
For the very reason that the gang-bang inquisition is yet another example of why customers are leaving. On the BBS there are plenty of people pointing at the HTC team and claiming they are to blame why ignoring their own involvement. This is one of them, and I already told you all you need to know.
Basically your saying its wrong and the reason is because you say so. And then you wonder why there is an "gang-bang inquisition"?
I remember one time that Murdr was posting about a weight issue on the 38s. He posted his sources and I think it was 600 pounds that was ADDED to the G model. grrrr There was also a precedent with the Brewster I believe. Sources were listed and the change was made.
Now if your going to post a wiki link, or say "when I got a ride in this 109...." then no, you'll never see a change, but if you do have a good sources posting it here can only help your cause as it will get more people to move to your side and add that pressure to get it fixed.
But if your going to stick with the "because I said so!" line....... well good luck with that.
-
Well as a trainer of AHII pick one of the 109's we have in game preferably the one in the flap video if we have it. Then with your background as a trainer in AHII what is that useful amount of flap needed for that model & what purpose. Then give us a flap angle setting & then we can go back to the video & time how long it takes to get to that approximate point in the video.
I don't think there would a huge difference in time in the video & the angle you have chosen.
It should be a fair approximation though.
My varied background tells me the guy in the video wasn't demonstrating typical air combat flaps deployment speed which limits his usefulness as a reference.
Wrong, AKAK, I know there is a problem. I just didn't tell you how I know.
I hope you understand why "not telling" is considered "not knowing".
-
It is the fact that if someone has an idea that truly will make things more realistic, or more accurate, that person has to get it past a committee of people with their feet stuck in the mud. Meanwhile, the people that have seen little problems in the game are afraid to speak up on the BBS. Well, I'm not afraid.
As 'brave' as you are, that's not a 'fact' ........ either. ;)
-
Ack-Ack you should change your nick to Barbi.
-
Basically your saying its wrong and the reason is because you say so. And then you wonder why there is an "gang-bang inquisition"?
No, I did my homework. I talked to 109 pilots (real ones, not virtual ones like the guys on this BBS), and stunt pilots (Pitts, Extra, Magister. . .). I fly a sailplane, so I know for a fact that the low speed, near stall condition is modeled wrong. All I needed was confirmation about the factor of torque in the mix.
The problem is that, as usual, you boys want to jump on the "you don't know because you don't fly a warbird" band wagon. Instead you should ask proper questions to determine the reality of the flight model. The fact is it's wrong. You don't need to be an aircraft designer to know it's wrong. However, it is close and all it needs is a little adjustment. You want to go against having it adjusted because it will limit your advantage in being familiar with a flight model that has been this way all along. Instead, you should want it adjusted to be more realistic, and therefore limit the criticism of your favorite game.
So, where's your warbird? How many 109 pilots have you talked to? Because all you have to do is demonstrate an AH video of all the "tricks" in our current flight model and they will tell you it's not right.
However, this thread is about the flaps. Clearly, the flaps are wrong and therefore need to be adjusted, or the risk will be that even if you have spot-on graphics you will still meet with criticism.
-
As 'brave' as you are, that's not a 'fact' ........ either. ;)
You are one of the worst of the committee. That's a fact.
-
You are one of the worst of the committee. That's a fact.
Please stop whining. Thank you, in advance. :)
-
No, I did my homework. I talked to 109 pilots (real ones, not virtual ones like the guys on this BBS), and stunt pilots (Pitts, Extra, Magister. . .). I fly a sailplane, so I know for a fact that the low speed, near stall condition is modeled wrong. All I needed was confirmation about the factor of torque in the mix.
The problem is that, as usual, you boys want to jump on the "you don't know because you don't fly a warbird" band wagon. Instead you should ask proper questions to determine the reality of the flight model. The fact is it's wrong. You don't need to be an aircraft designer to know it's wrong. However, it is close and all it needs is a little adjustment. You want to go against having it adjusted because it will limit your advantage in being familiar with a flight model that has been this way all along. Instead, you should want it adjusted to be more realistic, and therefore limit the criticism of your favorite game.
So, where's your warbird? How many 109 pilots have you talked to? Because all you have to do is demonstrate an AH video of all the "tricks" in our current flight model and they will tell you it's not right.
However, this thread is about the flaps. Clearly, the flaps are wrong and therefore need to be adjusted, or the risk will be that even if you have spot-on graphics you will still meet with criticism.
There is your problem, you are trying to use "personal accounts" as facts. How a plane feels at a low speed stall to you may be described very differently by me in the same condition. How it "feels" is irrelevant as it is a very rare thing that two people will "feel" the same thing, let alone describe it the same way.
The flaps issue can be tested and debated as the film shows the time needed to move the flaps, at leisure. In the heat of battle how much flap usage was there really? Any documentation? Did the pilot make a quick swipe or two..... much like the button press we do in the game, did he count the times he rolled it? Again all speculative, relying on 60 years old memories in most cases.
Do the 109s need to be tweak, maybe, it doesn't really matter to me. The biggest difference between this game and real life is that our "pilots" have thousands of hours of practice pushing these "planes" PAST their limits. Real pilots only have hundreds, and most no where near the limits of their planes. Say HTC adjust the planes more to your liking, these guys will just learn new tricks.
As to everyone wanting the game to be more realistic, I doubt very much that will ever happen. Its a game and some concessions are made to make it "fun", not a chore. I don't want to mess with cowl flaps and heaters and such, I just want to have a good old knock down drag out fight with another human.
-
What proof do you have that shows flap deployment speeds for all planes are incorrect? The P-38 only took around 7-8 seconds to deploy full flaps and 2 seconds to deploy the dive flaps on the P-38L.
The p38 was special in having quick flaps. I did not suggest a unique value for each plane because I do not think that the data is available. Thus a flat typical value for everyone.
-
Ack-Ack you should change your nick to Barbi.
Why? Is asking to see some sort of data that backs up his speculation that there is a problem with the flight model? I'm not claiming the flight model is perfect, I am just suspect of people that claim the flight model is incorrect but yet do not show any evidence of it being so other than they think it's incorrect.
ack-ack
-
No, I did my homework. I talked to 109 pilots (real ones, not virtual ones like the guys on this BBS), and stunt pilots (Pitts, Extra, Magister. . .). I fly a sailplane, so I know for a fact that the low speed, near stall condition is modeled wrong. All I needed was confirmation about the factor of torque in the mix.
The problem is that, as usual, you boys want to jump on the "you don't know because you don't fly a warbird" band wagon. Instead you should ask proper questions to determine the reality of the flight model. The fact is it's wrong. You don't need to be an aircraft designer to know it's wrong. However, it is close and all it needs is a little adjustment. You want to go against having it adjusted because it will limit your advantage in being familiar with a flight model that has been this way all along. Instead, you should want it adjusted to be more realistic, and therefore limit the criticism of your favorite game.
So, where's your warbird? How many 109 pilots have you talked to? Because all you have to do is demonstrate an AH video of all the "tricks" in our current flight model and they will tell you it's not right.
However, this thread is about the flaps. Clearly, the flaps are wrong and therefore need to be adjusted, or the risk will be that even if you have spot-on graphics you will still meet with criticism.
What a silly thread this has become. Saying that you fly a sailplane and have talked to 109 pilots gives you little credibility in my eyes. And this comes from a former powered aircraft pilot. Who were those 109 pilots, did they fly in real combat and did they have to actuate their flaps like their life depended on it? Who is going to say how many seconds exactly does it take to deploy flaps in a 109 and for all other aircraft we have in the game? Why should the planes be corrected one at a time? I say tweak all the flap speeds to the exact values at the same time. Of course flight model feels different and it is probably incorrect, but what is correct?
Quote: "I fly a sailplane, so I know for a fact that the low speed, near stall condition is modeled wrong. All I needed was confirmation about the factor of torque in the mix." Do you even realise how this sounds? Different types of the same aircraft behave differently near stall speeds (small dents in the wing etc), let alone different aircraft.
-
My varied background tells me the guy in the video wasn't demonstrating typical air combat flaps deployment speed which limits his usefulness as a reference.
Well using the video lets say the guy was just landing with a non combat situation then?
-
What a silly thread this has become.
Therein lies the entire problem with this community. There's no saving it now! All we can do is enjoy it while we can.
-
I "Chalenge" any one of you to build a cockpit and prove that it is possible to fly combat and use flaps like you do in AH. Put your money where you mouth is.
-
For the very reason that the gang-bang inquisition is yet another example of why customers are leaving. On the BBS there are plenty of people pointing at the HTC team and claiming they are to blame why ignoring their own involvement. This is one of them, and I already told you all you need to know.
This response in and of itself has completely removed you as a respectable individual in my eyes. You've elevated yourself to the level of tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists who think that they know the universe. Who the hell are you to tell me what I need to know?
I point this out, because I really do enjoy realism. I love the DCS games because they model it right down to the tedious little things that are almost so insignificant in a game that they drive you crazy, but they're there in real life. I want the AH models to be as accurate as possible, even if it makes the game more work, because, darnit, that's what I enjoy.
But when you come in here screaming that YOU know better, because YOU KNOW, without any data, without any source, and when questioned, get this pretentious attitude as if you're some kind of genius who cannot be bothered to explain to mere mortals, you kill the debate. By being a joke and something of a avacado, YOU are the biggest obstacle to change, because god forbid you're right, and HTC DOES side with you, they now have to accept that it appears that your attitude is what inspired the change, and now they get to breed a whole forum of people acting JUST like this.
If there is an error with the flight model, you bet I want it corrected, even if it makes the plane much more difficult and much less effective, I want these aircraft as realistic as they can be, and I will support any push to achieve that. But don't come in thumping your chest about how you just "know". Bring data, bring references. As bad as personal stories are at conveying the real behavior of the aircraft, if you're gonna say you "talked to pilots", name the damn pilots, and tell us why we should believe them. You and I have the same cause, but you're alienating everyone who would probably be helping you in your approach.
-
What is needed is a quote from an interview of a WW2 109 pilot describing the usefulness or lack there of the manual flaps in combat.
-
Therein lies the entire problem with this community. There's no saving it now! All we can do is enjoy it while we can.
Your thread doesn't fly so now it's a community problem? Meh. :lol
1. A good argument does not require 'repeating until everyone agrees with you.'
2. You're posting more about how 'the community is doomed and life is unfair' and less in support of your premise now.
Just saying.
*Pride is one of those 'seven deadly sins' dude.
-
Some actual pilot observations...
"Yes, pilots did like them (slats), since it allowed them better positions in dogfights along with using the flaps. These slats would also deploy slightly when the a/c was reaching stall at higher altitudes showing the pilot how close they were to stalling.....this was also useful when you were drunk "
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz Stigler.
"Pilots verbatim impressions of some features are of interest. For example, the DB 601 engine came in for much favourable comment from the viewpoint of response to throttle and insusceptability to sudden negative 'g'; while the throttle arrangements were described as 'marvellously simple, there being just one lever with no gate or over-ride to worry about'. Suprisingly though, the manual operation of flaps and tail setting were also liked; 'they are easy to operate, and being manual are not likely to go wrong'; juxtaposition of the flap and tail actuating wheels in an excellent feature."
- RAF Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough handling trials,Bf.109E Wn: 1304. M.B. Morgan and R. Smelt of the RAE, 1944.
"It is important to bear in mind that minimum radii of turn are obtained by going as near to the stall as possible. In this respect the Bf.109E scores by its excellent control near the stall and innocuous behaviour at the stall, giving the pilot confidence to get the last ounce out of his airplanes turning performance."
- RAF Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE) Farnborough handling trials,Bf.109E Wn: 1304. M.B. Morgan and R. Smelt of the RAE, 1944.
"I was amazed at how docile the aircraft was and how difficult it was to depart, particularly from manoeuvre - in a level turn there was lots of warning from a wide buffet margin and the aircraft would not depart unless it was out of balance. Once departted the aircraft was recovered easily by centralizing the controls."
- Charlie Brown, RAF Flying Instructor, test flight of restored Me 109 E-4 WN 3579. Source: Warbirds Journal issue 50.
"- How the Messerschmitt reacted to hard pull? Did she stall? There is the general opinion that you could not make her stall by pulling but she could 'slip'."
- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.
"The most delightful features of the Messerschmitt were, first, in spite of its remarkably sensitive reaction to the controls, the ship showed no disposition to wander or "yaw" as we call it; neither was there any tendency to "hunt". It was a ship where the touch of a pianist would be right in keeping with the fineness of the response. And, likewise, I am sure that any ham-handed pilot who handled the controls in brutal fashion would soon be made to feel ashamed of himself.
Seldom do we find a single-seater that does not stiffen up on the controls as the ship is pushed to and beyond its top speed.
In about cruising speed, a movement of the control stick brought just exactly the reaction to be expected. And at high speed, wide open, the control sensitivity checked most satisfactorily.
Then I wanted one more check and that was at the bottom of the dive where the speed would be in excess of that ship's straightaway performance. So down we went about 2,000 feet with the air speed indicator amusing itself by adding a lot of big numbers - to a little over 400 mph. A gentle draw back on the control effected recovery from the dive; then up the other side of the hill."
- US Marine Corps major Al Williams.
"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."
- Mark Hanna of the Old Flying Machine Company flying the OFMC Messerschmitt Bf 109 G (Spanish version).
-
Go to the youtube video. Click on the little cogwheel and set speed to 2x. There, I increased the realism of the video for you. :D
I think maybe AH should up its realism if it wants to separate from Warthunder and the like. It's not only flight model and damage model that counts. Little details like different ergonomics of flap operation count too in combat.
I understand HTC is reluctant to bring in features that "overcomplicate" things for their costumers. One way to do that without alienating the average costumer could be to implement an "increased realism standard" that you could adhere to with no advantage in its use. Then we could discuss if it could show up in scores as a "prestige badge". For example "playerA killed* playerB": the asterisk means that playerA killed, but at the same time:
-Took the trouble of managing yet more levers (radiators, blower stages...).*
-Didn't use ammo counters.**
-Risked flap damage by "disabling" auto flap retract function. ***
...
You may ask: Who would want to do without ammo counters with no advantage in return? Answer: Realism enthusiasts that are willing to pay 15$/m. to the game that offers their realism fix :)
P.S. I don't care much for "switchology" at startup, for example, but this game is lacking in things that have can have an influence in combat, as I said (the subject of this thread)
* If he wasn't flying a plane equipped with kommandogerät.
** Except if his plane had ammo counters, like in german planes.
*** This doesn't apply to F6F, for example. Am I right? :)
...
^^^Attention to detail can make a difference.
-
good thread, that's the AH I like :rock
-
-1
The other 99.999% of us guys flying 109s fly as mere mortals.
-
good thread, that's the AH I like :rock
Me too. Absolute comedy gold from the cheap seats.
:rofl
-
I "Chalenge" any one of you to build a cockpit and prove that it is possible to fly combat and use flaps like you do in AH. Put your money where you mouth is.
These pilots in real life used the flaps in combat just like how the flaps are used in AH.
Combat report of 4th FG pilot Willard Millikan in his combat report of April 22,1944, flying a P51B:
"The Hun kept up his attack and turned steeply to come in on my number 4's tail, so I pushed everything forward and dropped flaps to turn inside him. Through the early stages of the turn he outturned me, but I pulled up and corkscrewed inside him and laid off a deflection shot which hit him hard enough to cause him to flick out of his turn. He started to split-ess but my shots forced him to turn back the other way. Immediately I managed to get a few strikes and he began to skid and slow up and prepare to bale out. I was closing very rapidly so I dropped full flaps and throttled back completely....."
Quoting Lt. Robert Blandin
"The 109 was in front of me now and still in a pretty steep climb. I had him in range and was firing. I could see my tracers looping behind his tail but I didn't have enough speed to pull the lead I needed to hit him. To get it, I cracked some combat flaps which gave me added lift and let me bring the nose up without stalling. The next time I fired I hit him aft of the cockpit...."
“I was leading Yellow flight and we had completed our mission and were returning home at 3000 feet. We had lost our flight leader in clouds and haze after an identification pass at friendly A/C. We had just gone on instruments and were about to enter the overcast when we were bounced from 4 O’Clock by four Me 109s which had just broken out of the overcast. Yellow 2 called for me to break right into the E/A. The entire flight broke and I found myself after a half-turn of a Lufberry, turning inside the lead E/A. I fired a four second burst from 200 yards at approximately 20 degrees deflection and observed strikes on the engine. The E/A started to smoke and leveled off. I fell into trail behind him and fired a 6-second burst at 0 Degrees deflection and again observed strikes, this time on the fuselage and right wing root. Fire broke out and enveloped the entire right wing root as the E/A disappeared into cloud. I did not follow him because I was low on fuel. The other E/A disappeared into the clouds after the initial break. We all used our maneuver flaps and had no difficulty in out turning the E/A. I saw no one bail out from the plane I hit and in my opinion the pilot was hit and at least wounded on my first burst because he leveled off and flew at a very slight climb.”
Captain Paul Sabo, 370th FG July 31, 1944
“I was leading Blue Flight circling the target area giving Red Flight Top Cover as they were dive bombing the target. Circling above us at about 12,000 feet were 12 Me 109s. I kept watching them; then 8 of them half rolled and got behind my flight. I gave the order to jettison our bombs and break. I dropped flaps and started in a tight Lufberry. When I had completed one turn I was alone, and at that time I saw an Me 109 in a vertical turn coming in front of me so I started firing at him at a 90 degree deflection shot. He flew right into the pattern and I saw strikes on him from nose to tail. The plane seemed to shudder and slow down. I was about 200 yards when I started to fire. The Me 109 then made a 90 degree turn to the left and started to climb as if he was going to loop. I followed him, closing to about 100 yards, fired and saw strikes all over his canopy, fuselage and tail surfaces. As he was about at the top of his loop and almost on his back, I saw what looked like his canopy come off, as the plane seemed to hang there. It looked like I had wounded the pilot during the first 90 degree deflection shot and he was rolling it over on his back to jettison his canopy and bail out.
About that time I looked in my rear view mirror and saw an Me 109 on my tail. I dropped flaps and turned into him. He half rolled and went down. As I rolled out I saw an Me 109 coming down in front of me. I opened up again and gave him a 90-degree deflection shot. He ran into my pattern and I saw strikes all over the plane. I followed him and kept firing from directly behind him, seeing strikes on his tail surfaces. Then he proceeded to go down in a wild dive from about 5000 feet. I looked back in my mirror again, because all during this time I was still alone. My flight had left me. I saw another Me 109 coming in on my tail. I dropped flaps, leveled out and turned into him. He automatically went into a steep climb and I lost him in the sun. When I looked I saw no more enemy and called my Flight to join me.”
Lt. Royal Madden (P-38 pilot) 370th FG, July 31, 1944
“Approximately 15 Me 109s came down on Blue Flight and we broke left. I then made a vertical right turn and observed Blue Two below and close and Blue Four was ahead and slightly above me. I glanced behind me and saw four Me 109s closing on my tail fast and within range so I broke left and down in a Split S. I used flaps to get out and pulled up and to the left. I then noticed a single Me 109 on my tail and hit the deck in a sharp spiral.
We seemed to be the only two planes around so we proceeded to mix it up in a good old-fashioned dogfight at about 1000 feet. This boy was good and he had me plenty worried as he sat on my tail for about five minutes, but I managed to keep him from getting any deflection. I was using maneuvering flaps often and finally got inside of him. I gave him a short burst at 60 degrees, but saw I was slightly short so I took about 2 radii lead at about 150 yards and gave him a good long burst. There were strikes on the cockpit and all over the ship and the canopy came off. He rolled over on his back and seemed out of control so I closed in and was about to give him a burst at 0 deflection when he bailed out at 800 feet.
Having lost the squadron I hit the deck for home. Upon landing I learned that my two 500 pound bombs had not released when I had tried to jettison them upon being jumped. As a result I carried them throughout the fight.”
ack-ack
-
that person has to get it past a committee of people with their feet stuck in the mud.
What "committee" is this?............. Are you referring to HT & Pyro?
-
These pilots in real life used the flaps in combat just like how the flaps are used in AH.
I think he was talking about the ergonomics of using the flaps. It would be a bit more challenging if we had to roll a wheel or reach down beside our seat and move a lever to use the flaps instead of just tapping a button on our HOTAS system.
-
I thought he was talking about the speed of actuation of the flaps, which the video clearly shows is much slower than AH models. But apparently that is a false and blasphemous video that bears false witness to the greatness that is the 109.
-
I thought he was talking about the speed of actuation of the flaps, which the video clearly shows is much slower than AH models. But apparently that is a false and blasphemous video that bears false witness to the greatness that is the 109.
You think that was the fastest that guy could turn it? His purpose was to clearly show the number of turns for full deflection so you could count them.
You could model that with a key tap for every partial turn he makes but that still doesn't answer the question of how fast a typical 109 pilot got the flaps out.
-
p39 is terribly modeled i demand a fix :devil
-
if no one finds a 109 ww2 pilot saying how well the flaps worked it is a bit daming.
There is one noted P38 pilot quote describing the problem of the throttle being on one side and thr flap lever on the other.
-
p39 is terribly modeled i demand a fix :devil
How dare you! :old:
-
if no one finds a 109 ww2 pilot saying how well the flaps worked it is a bit daming.
There is one noted P38 pilot quote describing the problem of the throttle being on one side and thr flap lever on the other.
Again... and in bold for your convenience.
"Yes, pilots did like them (slats), since it allowed them better positions in dogfights along with using the flaps. These slats would also deploy slightly when the a/c was reaching stall at higher altitudes showing the pilot how close they were to stalling.....this was also useful when you were drunk "
- Franz Stigler, German fighter ace. 28 victories. Interview of Franz Stigler.
-
All of those accounts are obvious bologna, predator. 109s are over modeled. End of discussion.
-
All of those accounts are obvious bologna, predator. 109s are over modeled. End of discussion.
The very reason why they will not be changed. :aok
-
Cockpit critique by RAF pilot: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9YVei2Yb_k
-
This is golden :rofl
-
I think he was talking about the ergonomics of using the flaps. It would be a bit more challenging if we had to roll a wheel or reach down beside our seat and move a lever to use the flaps instead of just tapping a button on our HOTAS system.
It looks like you need 10 quarter turns of the wheel for 2 notches of flaps which AH deploys in around 3.5 seconds. That seems right for a motivated young man.
-
This is golden :rofl
:cheers: :rofl
-
It looks like you need 10 quarter turns of the wheel for 2 notches of flaps which AH deploys in around 3.5 seconds. That seems right for a motivated young man.
You could never do it in combat, FLS. Not and live to tell about it.
-
You could never do it in combat, FLS. Not and live to tell about it.
Why not? Once power is set that left hand isn't doing a lot, why couldn't you manipulate the flaps? Like any muscle memory drill it becomes second nature with repetition.
-
End of discussion.
You wish. :lol
-
All of those accounts are obvious bologna, predator. 109s are over modeled. End of discussion.
Obvious troll is being obvious.
-
Right, predator. No one knows anything about WWII except AH users. :rolleyes:
None of you have even done any research on the real airplane, or the cockpit, and especially the flaps, or you would know that the reason the flaps CANNOT be moved quickly is because there is a load purposely built into the wheel to prevent the flap "blowing-up" with the slightest airspeed. So, the speed is the speed. To fully lower the flaps on the 109 and then raise them again takes nearly a full minute. It CANNOT be dropped as fast as it can in AH.
Any argument to the contrary is done in complete ignorance.
-
I thought it was the end of the discussion. :)
-
You could never do it in combat, FLS. Not and live to tell about it.
How did you acquire this magical knowledge?
-
When to fighting 109s in Aces High suddenly become too difficult? Seems like an awful lot of energy being expended on a cartoon airplane that isn't über unless in the hands of an experienced cartoon 109 pilot.
Seems to me this is a disguised complaint by a cartoon pilot who isn't killing cartoon 109s as easily as he believes he should in his cartoon airplane of choice.
-
^^^^
-
How did you acquire this magical knowledge?
He watched the lazy guy spin the wheel on youtube.
-
When to fighting 109s in Aces High suddenly become too difficult? Seems like an awful lot of energy being expended on a cartoon airplane that isn't über unless in the hands of an experienced cartoon 109 pilot.
Seems to me this is a disguised complaint by a cartoon pilot who isn't killing cartoon 109s as easily as he believes he should in his cartoon airplane of choice.
The focus on the 109 is out of place. The video showed 109 flaps, but the general argument is relevant for many of the planes in AH roster.
-
Looks like someone got killed by a 109.
-
I'm somewhat new around here. What is the BBS please?
Kimo
-
I'm somewhat new around here. What is the BBS please?
Kimo
Bullitin Boards... the forums.
-
All of those accounts are obvious bologna, predator. 109s are over modeled. End of discussion.
Holy Jesus Chalenge. Hop back on the short bus, you're not getting anywhere here.
-
Interesting discussion................... ..............
:cheers:
-
The focus on the 109 is out of place. The video showed 109 flaps, but the general argument is relevant for many of the planes in AH roster.
And that's why I asked if AH even models different actuation rates for different planes or just uses one single rate for all of them? (Again I'll point out that videos clearly show the Spit flaps drop in less than a second.)
-
And that's why I asked if AH even models different actuation rates for different planes or just uses one single rate for all of them? (Again I'll point out that videos clearly show the Spit flaps drop in less than a second.)
AFAIK each model has it's own rate. It's easy enough to time the flaps animation. The effect on trim in the flight model is also obvious in level flight if you turn off combat trim and auto pilot.
-
It is not over modeled.
It is slow (besides the K4) but still slow, cannot dive at all, anything over 450 you can't move controls which males it extremely difficult to hold and keeo E. And not using the gondies makes the ammo pretty weak. It gets caught up too easily in furballs and is hard to escape the main fight.
It is not a high alt plane, so P51s and 190ds can dive all over it and still be able to run away. Most planes can catch the G-14 and less 109s on the deck. It is an easy plane to pick in the MA because it is not a BnZ style fighter and many players including myself give up E for a fight or a shot because we cannot extend like 190Ds or P51s can, which makes getting picked by others easy.
The views are difficult.
Just because it can kind of turn well and kind of perform decently in the MA does not mean it is over modeled.
It is really a moderate plane in the MA that does have great counterpunching abilities, which can make it deadly.
I actually think it is one of the more tougher groups of planes to learn and fly in the game because you have to be very skilled in defensive style evasives.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jenWQy4Zm-w
:cheers:
-
Modern 109 pilot's opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b69pO7538sE
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jenWQy4Zm-w
:cheers:
That is actually an interesting and relevant vid to this thread.
At 4:55 the pilot starts cranking the flap wheel for landing. Looks like quite a lot of work and he does it in several stages (continues after a cut in the footage, so we probably do not see all of it).
At 6:09 while taxiing he starts cranking the flaps back up. He has to stop a few times in order to handle other things in the cockpit and goes back to cranking quite vigorously.
Very cool vid. Thanks for posting.
-
If I was flying a rare warbird I wouldn't be beating any records for flap deployment.
-
Modern 109 pilot's opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b69pO7538sE
Nose tells me that is a Spanish 109. :)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jenWQy4Zm-w
:cheers:
Oh how I LOVE the sound that engine makes. Especially on the fly by's. :x I wish the 109 would make that sound when it flies over a field when I'm in a manned gun. :(
-
According to this vid the 109 was neutered!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C81YdGITmhQ
:salute
-
And that's why I asked if AH even models different actuation rates for different planes or just uses one single rate for all of them? (Again I'll point out that videos clearly show the Spit flaps drop in less than a second.)
Spitfire deployment rate was massively increased based on video evidence.
-
According to this vid the 109 was neutered!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C81YdGITmhQ
:salute
Eduard models are the best! :salute
-
Nose tells me that is a Spanish 109. :)
It's a Buchon alrigtht. A 109G mated with a Merlin. Performance wise it is somewhere between a 109G-6 and a G-14 with a bit better high altitude performance.
-
That is actually an interesting and relevant vid to this thread.
Yes that's why I posted it. It shows most of the cockpit workload of the 109 from takeoff to shutdown. Most of the times the pilot takes his hands off the throttle and stick it's just the left hand adjusting trim or flaps. I suspect he has a modern comms panel to the right somewhere.
-
At 4:55 the pilot starts cranking the flap wheel for landing. Looks like quite a lot of work and he does it in several stages (continues after a cut in the footage, so we probably do not see all of it).
The second part just before landing is most likely just trim adjustment. The flaps required four revolutions of the wheel to fully deploy. In the vid he makes 22 turning motions in about 12 seconds. That should be it.
-
According to this vid the 109 was neutered!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C81YdGITmhQ
:salute
:rofl
-
The second part just before landing is most likely just trim adjustment. The flaps required four revolutions of the wheel to fully deploy. In the vid he makes 22 turning motions in about 12 seconds. That should be it.
I would expect the trim adjustment along with the flaps adjustment given the wheel layout. The second time was likely setting full flaps since you don't want them too early. The 22 turns could have been for 3/4 flaps and trim since we didn't see how much the wheels turned.
-
22 turns is incidentally the same number the guy in the OP's video use to leasurely apply full flaps using three fingers. And yes you apply full flaps well before landing in the 109. Lowering flaps induces a nose-down movement in the 109, you don't want that on final.
-
Spitfire deployment rate was massively increased based on video evidence.
The flap animation is slow but then I am probably incorrectly assuming that the animation matches the modeled aerodynamic effect; it's probably just cosmetic.
-
The flap animation is slow but then I am probably incorrectly assuming that the animation matches the modeled aerodynamic effect; it's probably just cosmetic.
You can see the timing of the flap effect with the trim change.
You will need auto pilot and combat trim off to see it.