B-17 Flight Model

[chisel]

DID you guys think of arguments on the commute home from work?


 I think HTC are gonna do it smuts way.
Build a FM and make the gauges match.

Shacker wants to build a "gauge model" and make the FM match.

BTW Where the heck are my metric gauges?!  

------------------
Jumpin Jesus on a pogo stick! Everybody knows a burrow owl... lives... in a hole... in the ground!

[Smut]

Shacker, you once again missed my point. The Dash ones do not have *enough* of the type of data needed to make a decent flight model. I never said it was incorrect or inaccurate; its just not all there. Period.

I'm done with you as well, you seem to think you know it all, so be it. After all, what do I know? I only do this for a living.

BTW, you never did answer my question: In your opinion, what combat flight simulations have a "good" flight model?

-Smut



------------------
XO, The squealing Pigs
"Oink! Oink! To War!"

[Shacker]

Plug the numbers from the Dash 1 into the physics model..

I don't see a problem with that at all. You see, with your vast knowledge, I am sure you understand that they 'physics model' is where the basic flight dynamics are loacted. The remainder of the information is contained in the dash 1.

Are you just trying to be  a pain in the butt or is there a point to this?

All I did was ask a question I did not ask it to enter into a debate with some self appointed expert.

I can see why you make your living beta testing. Having to interact with live people on a daily basis could well be hazerdous to your health with your 'holier than thou' attitude.

To answer your other question the flight models in MSCFS are pretty darn good. The factory models that is not the add ons. Not recommending the program just answering your question. It has it's shortcomings as well but high speed stalls, slip roll coupling, parasitic and induced drag, adverse yaw, and most other flight characteristics of airplanes are pretty darn well represented.

I dunno what CFS 2000 will look like but I do know one of the guys on the 2000 team and he has a good deal of experience in combat simulation having moved to MS from another well known combat sim designer. If he has any sway in the mix I would expect a much better and considerably more dynamic campaign in the next version but we'll have to wait and see.

out

[This message has been edited by Shacker (edited 11-19-1999).]

[Smut]

Shacker wrote:

"Plug the numbers from the Dash 1 into the physics model..
I don't see a problem with that at all. You see, with your vast knowledge, I am sure you understand that they 'physics model' is where the basic flight dynamics are loacted. The remainder of the information is contained in the dash 1."

-----end quote

It's not that easy. Again, there is simply not enough information contained within a Dash One to create an accurate flight model from scratch...no matter how good your "physics model" (which I take to mean your atmosphere model) is to start with.

You can believe this or not, your choice.

Am I trying to be a pain in the butt? I've been known to do that, but this isn't one of those times. I'm trying to educate you (and others) on some simple realities.

Lastly, I am not a beta tester (although I have done that in the past). I am a Designer for a large entertainment software developer/publisher. On my current project, I am the Lead Designer. I say this not to brag, but to clue you in to where I am coming from. Part of my job is knowing how all this really works, and knowing how to translate that into a game. Based on the sales of my last product, and how well the new one is showing, I feel pretty confident that I know what I am talking about.

-Smut

[Fester']

*wipes a tear*

I smell a friendship blossoming

pass me some of that popcorn Curly, this is better than Jerry Springer  

[Vermillion]

Hey Curly thought about buying a franchise from Juve over in WB's for a local version of "Juve's Bar & Grill"

This popcorn is ok, but his barbeque and beer is much better  

------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
"Real men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires "

[newt]

Boy Shacker take a Chill Pill. Yes I am A pilot and yes I flew the A/C. If you took notice I said FELT ok to me. But as for the power settings it's still a BETA.

Sure you have all the numbers, but have you ever flown a B-17? Do you know what it feels like in your hand or how sensitive the rudder is?
I do   want me to scan a page from my log?
 http://www.recomnet.net/~newt/909.gif

Thanks Fester I just now saw the line stating the 4 hours Shacker has.
------------------
Newt 487th FG
Project No. U.S.
From CK beta to Warbirds have prop will travel...

[This message has been edited by newt (edited 11-20-1999).]

[Fester']

>>Sure you have all the numbers, but have you ever flown a B-17? <<

Ummm... not taking sides or anything, But I think I remember Shacker saying that he had 4 hours in one, not taking off or landing, but all the crap in between.

One of the Caveats of posting extremely huge walls of text...  no one reads em.

[Minotaur]

Shacker;

I am quite impressed. <Salute>   Your knowledge base is quite astounding!  You have certantly have fortified your claims.

(Emotion + Attitude) * Facts = Results (not always)  

When I build an "Argument Fire" using a dumptruck, wood is often dumped way too fast.  Wood dumped too quickly on the fire fails to catch immediately and then takes a very long time to burn.  Smothering the fire out completely in some cases or creating an uncontroled wild fire in others.

Hang in there Bud.  This is YOUR thread!  

Good Luck    I hope to see you up.

Mino

[This message has been edited by Minotaur (edited 11-21-1999).]

[Goombah]

Shacker...

Your initial postings regarding the FM of the B17 are obviously valid, having been based not only on your extensive experience as a commercial pilot, but also upon your recent flight in a B17, wherein you deliberately spent four hours putting the craft through the same evaluations you later attempted to put the Aces High B17 through.

Please ignore those who have been trying to put you down, for I am sure that the knowlegeable Quality Assurance Team evaluating Aces High can recognise the difference between your valid , constructive comments and the vapid attempts at ego building posted by those who attempted to discredit your statements by citing vague references to their knowlege of aircraft design methods.

(Something actually of no interest or help to the Q.A. Team)

With the help of you and others like you, Aces High can become all that we hard core simmers hope it will be.

I too am a multi engine pilot, have time in the B17, have been a beta tester in the past and am currently an advisor to a software house producing a flight simulation that includes the B17.

I have recommended you to them as a beta tester.

Goombah

[jarbo]

Shacker,
  Thanks for quantifying how you came to your assessment of performance.  I would love to get a fax or scan of the B17 flight info you have, particulary dealing with performance.  
HiTech,
  Does the current FM model "ground effect"?  It seems to me it doesn't.  Has anyone else made a similar, or contrary, observation?  

Jarbo
of the Buccaneers

[Raptor]

Shacker and Goombah!

Please stop by Bombs-Away and join the forum discussions there.  Bombs-Away is a site dedicated to B-17 Flying Fortress II - The Mighty Eighth, a sim being produced by Wayward Design.

Thanks!

Darren 'Raptor' Evans

[Shacker]

Goombah

Thanks for your post. I was beginning to feel as though I was a lone (well almost anyhow) voice crying in the wilderness.

Would love ta help if I can. Have the developers get hold of me and I'll be glad ta beta the flight model for em.

 

[Shacker]

Jarbo

Can't freally scan the stuff it is just too extensive.

here are some sources for the material you seek.
 http://www.oldmanuals.com/
 http://www.hbs.net/gcc/
 http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/

((A note on Zeon's a good site but the video for the F-17G is done with 90 Octane fuel ((100 octane was the standard)) therefore, stated manifold pressures and RPM settings will be slightly lower than with standard fuel. Still worth looking at though))

you can also get much of the info you seek on not only the B-17 but also most, if not all, of the fighter aircraft from

The USAF Museum bookstore.

That number is

1-937-255-3284 Extension 422

Hope this helps in your quest for validation of the FMs.

 

[Shacker]

Hi Raptor

Am actually following the development of tghis sim quite closely, albiet in the background.

It holds a LOT of promise.

I am looking forward to the release. The pre beta stuff is outstanding and detail looks excellent. I watched the on-line video of the pre alfa release. I gotta tell ya the cockpit procedures, what little was depicted on the video, looked first rate.