Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: John F Kennedy on June 12, 2002, 09:41:05 AM
-
I spotted this on AGW and my intention is seriously not to kick off a wet towel snapping contest on AH vs WB vs WWIIO. My question is honest and all I'm asking is iif AH's fm lacks what this guys thinks it does. He feels ONLY WWIIO models what he wrote about. Or is he a MAC player who is only talking about fm's of what he can test for himself on his MAC?
"In 'other sims', you have to pull more than 1 G in order to spin, but in WW2OL it seems to be AoA dependent (both positive and negative) and you get the same reaction by exceeding the envelope as you would in a real plane, which you *don't* in 'other sims'.
The same goes with the various gyroscopic reactions to throttle and control inputs, again something which doesnt happen in 'other sims'.
In short, WW2OL airplanes *behave* like real airplanes. Their performance numbers might be off, but when you move the controls around, they influence your maneuvers the way I would expect in a real, albeit lighter plane. (Daff)"
(from http://agw.warbirdsiii.com/bbs/showthread.php?threadid=7112&pagenumber=2 )
Thank you in advance for any objective replies...
-
Er, someone took Daff seriously? ;)
-
try it and form your own opinion :)
something look wrong in my sentence but I can't figure what :eek: :eek:
wass a bbit gennerous when typping
-
As soon as a Ju87 can't outmanuever a Hurricane in that game, I'll try it again and let you know.
-
one too many Ps in opinion straffo.... if that's what you mean?
-SW
-
that's it :)
-
If you're above the 1G stall speed, how do you achieve max aoa at only 1 G? If accelerated stalls occured at 1G, your plane would spin out in level flight. The original poster is either confused about how stalls work in real life or how they work in the games.
-
re: WWIIOL FM
a 109 couldn't shake me off his 6 in a turn fight, and i was driving a blen full of bombs. and was pinging his bellybutton untill, of course, the fight got low, the object count got a little high, my screen froze, and i became a lawn dart.
how realistic.
POS flight models, POS game.
-
So, Pyro, what happens when you close the throttle and try to maintain level flight?...and when you reach stall and press the rudder to either side?.
Daff
-
Well, I've been trying it offline.
I level out and cut engine.
I watch my vsi and gradually add back pressure to attempt to maintain 0fpm drop. I watch the accelerameter to make sure I'm not exceeding 1g at any time.
Eventually the stall horn start softly then eventually I am not able to maintain 0fpm vsi.
At this critical point one wing will drop. I then roll over and either enter a spiral dive or sometimes a fully developed stall/spin.
If I accuate the rudders at the critical point, consistently it is the receeding wingtip that will stall first.
At no point did I exceed 1g except once I was in the dive. At least to the limits that my flying skill would allow.
What behavior were you expecting?
Regards,
Wab
-
Daff:
>>>So, Pyro, what happens when you close the throttle and try to maintain level flight?...and when you reach stall and press the rudder to either side?.
You stall in AH as you would expect.
Regarding other gyroscopic effects, I guess you haven't noticed the effect of torque whenever you take off or how planes will roll better one direction over another?
Not meant to be a flame- Not sure where you're getting your info from Daff but I recommend that you actually try flight testing aircraft in AH to be more informed before you make statements like the above.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
Wab, I can only get it to enter a spiral dive, which is exactly what also happens in WB, unless you pull more than 1 G. It's been awhile since I've 'tested it', but I will be happy to do so again over the weekend.
Dtango, try open and closing the throttle, while flying level. Sure, it will roll a little bit, but the ball will hardly move and there's no yaw.
I have to use the rudder more in a underpowered tricycle gear Beagle Pup 100 than I do in either AH or WB, where 2000HP+ monsters are modelled.
Daff
-
Originally posted by dtango
I guess you haven't noticed the effect of torque whenever you take off [/B]
It isn't torque, it's prop wash ;)
Daff, you're trying to compare apples and oranges. The main difference isn't HP.
AH's aircraft are at least about 6 times as heavy as a Beagle Pup 100. So you need a lot stronger forces to make it move. Also airspeed is higher, keeping the aircraft straight, so less yaw when changing throttle.
Beagle Pup 100 has got a fixed pitch prop, AH's aircraft use constant RPM props. therefor there isn't much torque effect/roll when changing throttle.
-
Originally posted by Kratzer
As soon as a Ju87 can't outmanuever a Hurricane in that game, I'll try it again and let you know.
Hehe. In a Hurricane in that game I once followed a JU87 through 4 consecutive loops. I knew then that all I had read about Stukas being sitting ducks during the Battle of Britain was a load of BS. But I didn't cancel my subscription until from the ground I witnessed a Blenheim saddle up on the 6 of a 110 and shoot him down.
Beautifully rendered those planes unarguably are (the new Heinkel 111 is a beauty in the screen shots I've seen). But I don't understand how it's possible to divorce some abstract quantity like "feel" from the fact that the planes don't perform in a remotely realistic fashion. Surely if they felt right, and correctly modelled "gyroscopic" effects, that would in some sense be reflected in even passably realistic flight performance?
BTW, I hear they've actually addressed some of these performance problems in the latest release (some planes now bleed more energy (not hard since they used to bleed none at all) and their top speeds have been adjusted)--anyone got any firsthand experience of these chances?
Loved the ground war in WWIIO, but I'll snap the wet towel at their flight models any day.
-
ccvi: Actually 4 factors play a part to the left turning tendency on take off (right turning for counter-clockwise turning props from the perspective of the cockpit): Torque, P Factor, Slipstream (prop wash), and Gyroscopic Effect. You are right- prop wash plays a significant factor. My mistake in not correctly pointing that out though I don't know how much the other 3 contribute to the distribution to cause the yaw to the left. I was responding to Daff's statement of AH not modelling "various gyroscopic reactions".
Daff:
Firstly- You probably have combat trim enabled for your throttle open/close open/close tests. When you auto-level in AH it enables combat trim automatically and trims elevators, rudder, and ailerons to maintain straight and level flight. If you are in auto-level / combat trim mode then you will notice the following things:
[list=1]
- At level flight rudder and aileron are trimmed to keep the plane level.
- If you are closing and opening throttle you will note aileron trim being and maybe even rudder trim self-adjusting to compensate for the torque, P Factor, Slipstream.
If you don't have combat trim on and have rudder and aileron trim centered you will notice that closing and opening throttle to add slight yaw and roll to your aircraft due to torque, slipstream, and p factor.
2ndly- Regarding aircraft entering spins from stalls- that's a bit too complex and beyond me so I so won't attempt to comment on spins, but you certainly stall at 1G in AH as expected when you transition below 1G level flight stall speed.
Tango, XO
412th FS Braunco Mustangs
-
ccvi, I used the Beagle Pup as an example because it's the lowest powered plane I've flown. (Well, apart from the Tiger Moth, but that's a different kettle of fish, with a heavy wooden prop).
Other planes I've flown like the Pitts, Yak52, Scottish Bulldog (All with wobbly prop), still moves around plenty when you change the throttle.
(The Pitts being at the extreme end, easily yawing 30 degrees+ if you don't counter with rudder)
Dtango, no I don't use combat trim and I'm not saying that you can't stall at 1G. I'm saying that it wont enter a spin at 1G.
Daff
-
Thanks for the civil discussion and replies!! I posted this to get some AH players pov on the discussion wich was already underway at AGW. While not one of the three 'sims' totally replicates flying a WWII fighter I'm most satisfied with the AH model. WB's has too much 'mush' otherwise it would work fine for me too. WWIIOnline feels just waay off - although I've not flown 1.64 much. Unfortunately if I'd posted this on the WWIIOnline boards (and I'd need a subscription to even try) I'd have been a simple recipient of a fan boi blanket beating party.
-
Originally posted by John F Kennedy
Thanks for the civil discussion and replies!! I posted this to get some AH players pov on the discussion wich was already underway at AGW. While not one of the three 'sims' totally replicates flying a WWII fighter I'm most satisfied with the AH model. WB's has too much 'mush' otherwise it would work fine for me too. WWIIOnline feels just waay off - although I've not flown 1.64 much. Unfortunately if I'd posted this on the WWIIOnline boards (and I'd need a subscription to even try) I'd have been a simple recipient of a fan boi blanket beating party.
JFK, I admit I haven't flown WW2Online since beta, but if they haven't changed anything, it felt off to me, but what do I know? We have MANY commercial and military pilots flying AH, and as a matter of fact, the USAF Cadets use AH as a training tool for basic ACM, with 80 free accounts comped to them. Sabre is one of the instructors there. Eagl, is an ex-Top gun instructor. MiG is an ex-Military jock, Toad is a commercial pilot and owns his own PT-19, many many others I have not mentioned in AH all fly something alittle more than a Pitt. If its good enough for them, its good enough for me. ;)
Fly what you like, like what you fly, as Toad puts it. :)
-
Not to start flames, but 1.64 didnt do a whole lot for the fm in ww2o. One thing I have noticed, and I am curious if others had noticed this, is the physics feel. ww2o fm, in all of its suckiness, really feels like your plane has mass. AH seems more lazer like, you turn and your plane follows an exact arc matching your stick movements, kinda like aw. Anybody noticed this? Also, relationship to the ground seems a little more intuitive. when you are at 500 feet you know it, and as long as you have enough ram, it is easy to avoid lawn darting no matter what the maneuver. When you are approaching a hedgerow, you can easily dip a wing and skirt between two trees. Why does AH feel so artificial in this regard? Is it the ground contours or clutter? For those that havent tried 1.64, I suggest the free download to check this out. They have cleaned up the graphics emmensely. I would be really interested in pyros impression of the 'mass' behavior.
-
dtango, the three other prop effect don't have much effect on yaw at take off. torque doesn't have any, just by the definition of torque. p-factor effect requires airspeed and increases with speed, which is 0 at the beginning of take off (unless there's wind). gyroscopic effects require the axis of rotation to change, which happens when you pull up or push the nose down, but not by just rolling forward.
daff, ww2 military aircraft are heavy and fast. their flying characteristics are close to those of a brick. you need large forces to make a brick noticably change it's flight path ;)
jfk, wb3's mushiness comes from a strange way they interpret readings from the joystick. wb3's virtual pilot's strength is limited, so control surfaces can't be moved arbitrarily like in ah. the virtual pilot just isn't moving his own surfaces, but the force required is compared with the player's joystick deflection. thus, if the joystick is fully deflected to one side and the virtual stick isn't yet, it already moves slower than it would if joystick and virtual joystick were be at the same deflection. this is expecially noticable when moving the joystick from full deflection to one side to the other side. while there would be no strenth required to move it to the center, it already moves slow because the joystick is at full deflection in the new direction. they failed to notice that force feedback sticks aren't strong enough to keep stick and virtual stick in sync.
-
" wb3's virtual pilot's strength is limited, so control surfaces can't be moved arbitrarily like in ah. "
Actually, AH got similar control delay on the elevator. I also suspect that AH has a similar max strength modelled (I believe it's 50lbs in WB).
Daff