poll: what do real-life pilots think of Aces High

[CyranoAH]

I have limited experience (got my license not long ago) in a lot of different planes: Robin 200-120, Robin 400, C172N, C182, PA27 (twin), and the CAP-10 (aerobatic).

For me, the best thing about AH is the view system, it feels very natural. Of course there are a lot of things missing, and some of them are impossible to simulate correctly due to hardware limitations, such as trimming.

Also I think pilot fatigue should be modelled to some extent, since, for example, aerobatic sessions hardly last more than 40 mins and I'm limited to 4-5G and -1.5G, and boy do I end up tired.

Anyway, I fly AH for the sheer fun of flying with friends and against friends, and I fly IL2 for the landscapes :-P

Daniel

[Animal]

I have around 85 hours, mostly in Cessna 152 and 172. Nothing high powered, but I already developed a natural sense of control in flight.

The only reason I play AH and not any other flight sim is: the view system.

Such a simple feature makes a world of diference for me.

As for the flight model and physics: AH feels pretty much like I would expect one of these fighter planes to react.

But I really cant tell you AH is a very accurate simulation because I really believe there is no way you can simulate flight in a computer. I bet all pilots here agree with me when I say that a big part of flying is the sensation, how your body feels and reacts to gravity and momentum, how you control the plane when you FEEL the power of these outside forces that you simply have no way of percieving in a simulated enviroment.

[Xjazz]

Great topic!

what about IL2 FM? How it feels to the real life pilot?

Yes, IL2 head-top-of-the-pole views feels too tight, but its not FM issue.

Thanks

[eagl]

mjolnir - yes.

[ra]

IMHO the AH FM doesn't model enough drag in turns, or with engine at idle, or with flaps and gear down.  Just my feeling, no numbers to back it up.  Il-2 model feels better in that way.

ra

[Sikboy]

Originally posted by J_A_B
"Take a P51 expert from AH, put him in a real life P51, he would die, that is if he could get it off the ground. "


Heck, he'd be doing good if he could even get the engine started  


J_A_B

Whadaya mean? Just hit "E" duh!

What? No Keyboard? How the hell are you supposed to talk to the tower then? Sheesh.

-Sikboy

[ATC]

I have my my ATP, (airline transport pilot rating) and former CFII (certified flight instructor-Instrutment) with 3000 plus hours.  

Been flying sims since 1995 beginning with Air Warrior.  

AH is the best gaming flying SIM I have flown.  I fly just like I do in RL, I always adjust prop speed and Manifold pressure, usually use full flaps for landing, try to land on a 3degree descent.  Also for the fun of it, I will practice my instrument flying i.e. not looking outside and using the instruments only.  

I have never flown a ww2 airplane and cannot compare these aircraft to RL.  

A couple observations with this and RL:

P factor/torque is not as realistic but it is modeled some, ie usually have to apply some rudder to stay on centerline on takeoff.

The spins, stalls, and snaps of the AH planes are pretty good as the recovery from these is fairly realistic.  

1 big difference

NO G force effects and you cannot "feel" the aircraft, btw something that could never be modeled unless we all bought very expensive 3 axis sims, but even those are not as accurate.   If G force could be done, most people in here would quit and have barf bags next to them.  Your equilibrium and successful management of it, is a major factor and player of RL flying.  

I think AH has done a pretty good job with the technology that is available for an affordable flight sim.

ATC


 

[batdog]

No idea... but I wonder if my bellybutton would get all sweaty in a real FP as compared to my pixel based one?


xBAT

[narsus]

My flight experience is just in the piper cherokee

There are similarities obviously, the biggest difference to me is the feeling of flight, landing in AH is simple. Taking off is simple IMO in real life.

They biggest difference to me is the feeling of flight and a cross wind on landing, highest crosswind for me was 22 knots, I really had to fight to keep it on the centerline. Very exilerating (scary as hell), flight sims definately helped me though I knew all the instruments, all basic flight stuff, really just had to learn radio procedure and landings (in wind).

I haven't flown a tail dragger yet though so I imagine taxiing would be much more difficult.

[mauser]

eagl:

What do you mean by dihedral effect?  Is it the tendency for the
aircraft to return to neutral from a rolling input due to the wing's dihedral?  I'm not a pilot, I've only books to rely on, and it seems most of all WWII aircraft had some dihedral and would exhibit some tendency to "unroll" say, when an air current bumps one wing and not the other... Is this right?

mauser

Originally posted by eagl
Dihedral effect seems to be somewhat lower in the game than in RL, same goes for the effect that yaw has on swept wings, but overall the flight model appears sufficient to "feel right" to me.

 

[gatso]

Dihedral.

consider the (very basic) diagram below. Red arrows represent the lift generated by each wing. During case 'A' level flight the angle of the lift produced by each wing is equal and hence there is no roll produced.



In case 'B' a small amount of bank is shown. The lift produced by each wing stays the same but the angle at whivh it acts is now different. Considering the vertical components of lift for each wing, one now produces more vertical lift than the other. Roll is induced which will tend to return the aircraft to level flight.

Large Dihedral angles tends to make aircraft want to fly nice and level. Good for paper aeroplanes  

Gatso

[Citabria]

simply, what can be done in aces high can not be done in modern real life flight and what can be felt in real life flying can not be felt in Aces high

AH is fun. it has the mechanics down of flying quite fine. it is quite simply the best flight sim game ever made.

but it is but a small piece of the experience that flying is. and by the same token real flying is but a piece of what air combat is. and outside of military experience the two can not be combined.

the first time i flew a world war 2 warbird was a few months ago when i took some training flights in a t6 texan originally used by the us navy as a ww2 trainer.

there is just so much that cannot be portrayed on a little computer screen when you are at the controls of one of these aircraft, all of your sensory organs are getting stimulated instead of just your eyes and ears when you are flying the real thing.
You touch the aircraft as you walk around it, you think of all the people who learned on this plane and went on to fly hellcats wildcats and corsairs.

you feel the wind from the half open canopy as you weave around the clouds. with each bank and turn you are no longer confined by gravity but you feel its effects as you loop and roll through the sky. the visceral experience of seeing the world revolve around you as you look out from the wireframe canopy, watching the ground rush toward you as you pull out of the loop and twist into a roll.

and yet with all this sensory ecstasy inflight you land with no trouble thanks in part to all the times you landed a taildragger in aces high.

then after the flight is over and the rush from your experience subsides you wonder what it would be like to be in the shoes of a ww2 pilot flying in a formation of wildcats being bounced by zero's.

and we are left again with the realization that what can be done in aces high can not be done in modern real life flight and what can be felt in real life flying can not be felt in Aces high

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

Originally posted by gatso
Large Dihedral angles tends to make aircraft want to fly nice and level. Good for paper aeroplanes  

Gatso

Balsa wood too....

You know what's really cool? Get yourself some balsa wood of assorted pieces(lots of thin flat ones to use as wings, long thick ones to use as a "body), hot glue gun, and non-exploding, non-screaming bottle rockets....

It is so fun launching those things across the lawn, or down the street....  or into a neighbors house....

For extra enjoyment, get the exploding bottle rockets...
-SW

[Dago]

Good responses from a lot of experienced guys.   AKWarp struck as pretty dead on.  Of course, Eagl is just a rookie, whats he know?  

Yup, crosswinds, G forces, stick responses, torque, these things all add up to a very differant environment when flying a real plane.

All in all, I think AH is an excellant sim, and I think in many ways if flys very accurate, but its wise not to think it has prepared anyone for a real aircraft.

BTW, one of the few real life flying practices I bring to AH is occasionally I will fly a real pattern before landing, or if I am adventurous, I will try the overhead break to landing circling approach.

Of course, I rarely land an aircraft in AH.  


dago

[udet]

thanks for the feedback guys. Like many of you said, I think the main difference is that in RL you feel every movement of the aircraft.
 From my very limited experience, though, I felt quite at home flying a glider versus flying a Cessna 172. A glider is more responsive than a GA aircraft, and has a stick for control.
The feeling was close to what I experienced when flying in AH, with the difference that slipping and skidding were more pronounced than what AH shows.