ATAG Dedicated Server is up!

[ATAG_Snapper]

Hi Jimbop, sorry no surprises here, it was the MeshShowLod edit.
Actually, it does not help me see far but stops the "vanishing moment" when the incoming dot disappears before turning into a real shape airplane.


~S~

This is a tip from Little D that he shared with over at the ATAG forum: turn your in-game menu setting for Anti-Aliasing to "OFF". Many of us have it set to x2 (for what good it does:rolleyes: ). Turning it off did this for me and a few others that tried it:

1) Can now spot enemy/friendly bomber formations from a reasonable medium-distance at high monitor resolution (mine: 1920 x 1200 native). Until now I'd been running lower monitor res just to be able to actually SEE anything before it was on top of you. The same applies for single aircraft contacts.

2) LOD doesn't temporarily "disappear" when closing on an aircraft. I did the MeshLodShow=1 in conf.ini which worked, but paid a price in terms of slower frame rates and stuttering. Leaving it at "0" and turning off anti aliasing in-game didn't affect the frame rates. I'm just happy to run at high res. low res cockpits are ugly, but high res tracers are uglier! LOL

Thanks again to Little D for this easy-to-try tip.

Reference link:
http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?893-Antialaising-to-zero-and-spotting-contacts

[bw_wolverine]

I would like to organize a 'big wing' on ATAG for tomorrow (Tuesday, Dec 13th)!

Time: 8:30pm EST (Toronto time).

Purpose of the exercise? To practice formation flying in a hostile combat environment and wingman tactics. Stay with your leader!

Very often a group of RAF planes will get together and fly out towards the enemy, but whenever combat is joined it all goes belly up. One of the most successful flights I ever had was when a group of us, 6 or so planes, managed to stay together throughout engagements and help each other.

So! With that in mind, let's arrange some group operations! If you'd like to participate, join me on the ATAG teamspeak server. We'll use a separate Flight channel to make sure we don't cross comms with others who don't want to participate.

Also, if you know you'd like to participate, shoot me a PM so I can get a sense of the numbers. Also, send me your preferred aircraft identification (A, B, C, etc.) so we can arrange all that ahead of time if possible.

Hope to see you tomorrow night!


Wolverine

[jimbop]

Thanks for the tip ATAG_Snapper & Little D, will try it out.

[335th_GRAthos]

Jimbop, where were you tonight????? :D

2min ago...
Anybody remembers where the mechanic put that fire extinguisher?????
At least I always make it back to France one way, or another (=swimming)
http://grathos.de/temp/CoD/Burning.jpg


~S~

[arthursmedley]

Thanks again to Little D for this easy-to-try tip.

Reference link:
http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?893-Antialaising-to-zero-and-spotting-contacts

+1 This works!! Thanks for bringing this up Snapper.

[jimbop]

Jimbop, where were you tonight????? :D

2min ago...
Anybody remembers where the mechanic put that fire extinguisher?????
At least I always make it back to France one way, or another (=swimming)
http://grathos.de/temp/CoD/Burning.jpg


~S~

Ouch, looks like it was a fun landing! I was at work unfortunately... I'm down under which is bad for server timings (except for weekends) but pretty good for everything else!

[Insuber]

Just checked the ATAG Stats, almost 1'200 unique nicks ... :-)

[TomcatViP]

Just checked the ATAG Stats, almost 1'200 unique nicks ... :-)

and only one Alambash ;)

[335th_GRAthos]

and only one alambash ;)

rofl !!!!!!!!

[klem]

Originally Posted by Insuber
Just checked the ATAG Stats, almost 1'200 unique nicks ...

and only one Alambash ;)


Technically, shouldn't Alambash's 'Air Kills' be 'Ground Kills' ;)

[Osprey]

Yeah what a knob

alambash spawns 87 kills 389

[ATAG_Bliss]

We're hosting an event this weekend. Should be a good time.

See here: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?903-ATAG-s-1st-Bomber-Night-this-Weekend!

[trumps]

Almost finished work for the swing, will be back home for a whole 3 weeks as of tomorrow, look forward to flying with you all again, seems like an age since I have sat down at the comp for some quality nerd time!

Craig

[5./JG27.Farber]

Had a great time tonight on ATAG public and in the bomber night event this weekend. Keep up the good work!

[White Owl]

I got online for the first time the other night. This is a fun server. :)

[jimbop]

I got online for the first time the other night. This is a fun server. :)

Sure is! Get teamspeak and it's even better.

[White Owl]

Sure is! Get teamspeak and it's even better.

I was in TS. I could hear the other guys talking just fine. I lurked mostly, trying to get a feel for how things work around here. The few times I did speak up, nobody responded, so I think they must not have been able to hear me... Not sure why. Everything works okay and sounds okay when I test it in TS setup.

And I didn't figure out how to type ingame chat until after I logged off. Whoops.

[jimbop]

I was in TS. I could hear the other guys talking just fine. I lurked mostly, trying to get a feel for how things work around here. The few times I did speak up, nobody responded, so I think they must not have been able to hear me... Not sure why. Everything works okay and sounds okay when I test it in TS setup.

Good form. Do a mic check as soon as you join - just ask if they can hear you.

[klem]

I got online for the first time the other night. This is a fun server. :)

Welcome to the world of on-line air combat. You'll never go back. :)

As jimbob says, just ask if they can hear you. Also don't be shy to ask to fly with other guys or just jump in alongside them. Working together is where a lot of the enjoyment comes from. You'll hear it going on on TS. Just make a casual arrangement with anyone there, they're all good guys, and maybe think about joining a Squad when you feel more comfortable.

[5./JG27.Farber]

Sorry to keep brining it up but its definatley that train. Do we know which model it is? Is that a custom train setup or one of the pre made ones?

Snapped this just South of Phien.

http://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af321/farber82/darkenergy4.png

[ATAG_Bliss]

Hi Farber,

Forgot about this one. I'll try changing to a different model of train when I get back. I'm on 2 cans and a string atm, still home home for xmas.

Sorry!

[MoGas]

Sorry to keep brining it up but its definatley that train. Do we know which model it is? Is that a custom train setup or one of the pre made ones?

Snapped this just South of Phien.

http://i1020.photobucket.com/albums/af321/farber82/darkenergy4.png

I have exact the same with my ATI 11.9 catalyst, but only on the german train, UK train seems good.

[ATAG_Bliss]

The train has been changed to another model. Hopefully all you ATI guys won't get sucked into the black hole anymore :)

[5./JG27.Farber]

Nope, its back... Maybe the track is the problem? :(

[ATAG_Bliss]

Looks the other way and says "ATI is your problem" :D

Hopefully we get some sort of graphical update soon.

In other news, some real stats :) http://216.52.143.205:2012/ATAGStats/ATAGStatsV1.html

[jimbop]

In other news, some real stats :) http://216.52.143.205:2012/ATAGStats/ATAGStatsV1.html

Excellent addition, many thanks!

[ATAG_Bliss]

Ok stats up and running for both servers.. Can be seen scrolling down here: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/content.php

[5./JG27.Farber]

Looks the other way and says "ATI is your problem" :D

Hopefully we get some sort of graphical update soon.



Yes, yes it is :cry:

However, I was speaking to watchman and the new map didnt come on until the server restart, so it might be fix as I think my post was before the restart. Lets find out :-P


EDITED: Train is ok now! Thanks! Can you tell us which train it was?

[MoGas]

I dont see a black graphic bug as well anymore, seems good now.

Too bad, now I need to look closer where the german train is.....:lol:

[JG52Krupi]

Hey dudes, quick question!

What is the current status of skins on the Atag server?

I am fed up with my yellow nosed 109s :(

[SEE]

New to the BF but I use the Skin without the yellow nose in the plane options menu.

I see this skin (no yellow nose) in game but wondering if that is the skin other players see, they should do because its an optional game skin not a custom one?

[JG52Krupi]

New to the BF but I use the Skin without the yellow nose in the plane options menu.

I see this skin (no yellow nose) in game but wondering if that is the skin other players see, they should do because its an optional game skin not a custom one?

I use one of those as well but everyone see the default yellow nose :(

[SEE]

Bum! Didn't know that Krupi..........don't understand why either, the optional game skins are pretty much the same file size.

[Ze-Jamz]

Bum! Didn't know that Krupi..........don't understand why either, the optional game skins are pretty much the same file size.

Not all of them are mate..

Some are a stupidly big as peeps dont design them with size in mind, this was helping to cause major lag hence why they were taking off..

You can see your skin but others cant afaik

[JG52Krupi]

Not all of them are mate..

Some are a stupidly big as peeps dont design them with size in mind, this was helping to cause major lag hence why they were taking off..

You can see your skin but others cant afaik

I think see means the other "Default" skins that are available but the ATAG server does not allow them :(

[w1nd6urfa]

I spotted a strange contact the other day, initially thought it to be a swarm of bombers ... :o

[ATAG_Snapper]

I spotted a strange contact the other day, initially thought it to be a swarm of bombers ... :o

An.............."AIRSHIP"!!!!!!!

[jimbop]

lol... Seen them once or twice. Always a laugh and at least you don't have to waste bullets! Come to think of it, if you shoot it down does it count as an air or ground kill?

[ATAG_Bliss]

Yes, yes it is :cry:

However, I was speaking to watchman and the new map didnt come on until the server restart, so it might be fix as I think my post was before the restart. Lets find out :-P


EDITED: Train is ok now! Thanks! Can you tell us which train it was?

Good deal. This was the old train: Chief Train.BR56-00_c3 de /SpawnFromScript 1/tow00_00 10_Static/pax_skin1 materials_LW/pax_skin2 materials_LW/pax_skin3 materials_LW/tow05_00 11_Static/pax_skin6 materials_LW/pax_skin7 materials_LW/pax_skin8 materials_LW/pax_skin9 materials_LW/pax_skin10 materials_LW/tow11_00 12_Static/pax_skin12 materials_LW/pax_skin13 materials_LW/pax_skin14 materials_LW/pax_skin15 materials_LW/pax_skin16 materials_LW/pax_skin17 materials_LW/tow17_00 13_Static

[jojovtx]

I think see means the other "Default" skins that are available but the ATAG server does not allow them :(

Krupi I would very much like to be able to use the skins that came with the game as well. I am unsure if it is possible to allow skins but with limitations. I sure would like to get my White Nose ZG26 skin in use again. That is the one that came with the game.

[ATAG_Bliss]

I posted about that problem here: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=375306&postcount=95

I would love nothing more than to have, at the very least, all the default skins available :(

[MoGas]

was the custom skin use a issue? I cant remember if I had any.....:confused:

[bw_wolverine]

Can someone who edits the mission for ATAG please edit the rear airfields near London to allow the selection of squadron? I've often wanted to take off from Maidstone, but have passed up on this because I can't select my squadron code.

It would be greatly appreciated!


Thanks

[5./JG27.Farber]

Krupi I would very much like to be able to use the skins that came with the game as well. I am unsure if it is possible to allow skins but with limitations. I sure would like to get my White Nose ZG26 skin in use again. That is the one that came with the game.

+1

[klem]

Can someone who edits the mission for ATAG please edit the rear airfields near London to allow the selection of squadron? I've often wanted to take off from Maidstone, but have passed up on this because I can't select my squadron code.

It would be greatly appreciated!


Thanks

+1

[Osprey]

Specifically for ACG:

RAF Croydon requires No.1(c) RCAF. Hurricane Rotol
RAF Gravesend requires No.501 County of Gloucester. Hurricane Rotol
RAF Kenley requires No.64. Spitfire Ia (preferably IIa as an option)

I don't understand some of the squadron postings, they are flying the wrong types from the wrong airfields, but I don't care as long as these 3 are set up :) And No.56, I'm sure they'd like to fly from their historical drome.

thanks

PS. Why is the Spitfire IIa removed? (so I am told) If you are doing this then also put a percentage limit on the E3's and E4's. Every time I fly there are 20 LW and only maybe a single E1 flying, most are E4's. They should be about 40% E1 and 25% E4.

[ATAG_Bliss]

Can someone who edits the mission for ATAG please edit the rear airfields near London to allow the selection of squadron? I've often wanted to take off from Maidstone, but have passed up on this because I can't select my squadron code.

It would be greatly appreciated!


Thanks

They should work now.

was the custom skin use a issue? I cant remember if I had any.....:confused:

It didn't used to be as bad as it did. Then the latest official patch came out and made skins terrible online :(

Specifically for ACG:

RAF Croydon requires No.1(c) RCAF. Hurricane Rotol
RAF Gravesend requires No.501 County of Gloucester. Hurricane Rotol
RAF Kenley requires No.64. Spitfire Ia (preferably IIa as an option)

I don't understand some of the squadron postings, they are flying the wrong types from the wrong airfields, but I don't care as long as these 3 are set up :) And No.56, I'm sure they'd like to fly from their historical drome.

thanks

PS. Why is the Spitfire IIa removed? (so I am told) If you are doing this then also put a percentage limit on the E3's and E4's. Every time I fly there are 20 LW and only maybe a single E1 flying, most are E4's. They should be about 40% E1 and 25% E4.

It's a different mission all together, even though many of the airfields carry the same plane types. There are no E4's though. There will be a rotation soon (including a revised version of the old map) that will carry the old E4/limited spitIIa planeset. I may limit the E3/fighter variants, depending on the outcome here.

Question - when you do fly on this mission, do you get radar calls if you are in a fighter? The AI bombers remain, but I'm testing something and may have actually figured out what produces the Radar. (a combination of things)

So please let me know if you are in a single seat fighter if you get the normal radar calls or not. If you're in a bomber, getting contacts from your AI gunners is normal - so those don't count.

Thanks.

[JG5_Thijs]

Hello all,

Over the last couple of months I’ve been enjoying flying on the ATAG server, which is really my favourite server for this game. Although there are still some game related issues with launcher crashes and certain flight characteristics of certain planes that are not corresponding with what I’ve read in most recently (let’s say the last 10 years) published memoirs and books regarding planes like the Messerschmitt Bf109 on the German side and the Spitfire and Hurricane it is still good fun flying the game. (I won’t go into what I think should be or shouldn’t changed in this post since there are other treads about that on the forums where people can give their, sometimes poorly based, opinion about this).

I would like to give my two cents regarding limiting the Bf109E-4 on the server and allowing mainly the E-1 to be used. Which, as the table below shows would not be correct. (I also like to state that apart from the, now poorly working, automated pitch on the 109E-4 the only difference is the canopy, which doesn’t have a large impact on flying, the only difference between the two subtypes of the Emil is the armament) The E-4, and the E-3 slightly less so, packs a far greater punch compared to the E-1 in the gun department with the MG17 being replaced by the MG FF (in the E-3) and the MG FF/M (in the E-4) making it a much more effective fighter. This is probably the reason why most people that fly fighters on the German side prefer the E-3/E-4 compared to the E-1.

Of course it annoying to get shot down by one of these cannon armed 109’s and therefore wanting to limit them.(like limiting the number of Spitfire MK II which is annoying to fly against, to say the least, for a German fighter pilot in the game. A good case can be made for limiting the number of Spitfire MK II’s when one looks at historical numbers in the actual Battle of Britain).

If the aim of the server is to give a somewhat historical planeset I don’t think severely limiting the number of cannon armed is a good one. Since a lot of documentation of the Luftwaffe was destroyed it will be impossible to find out what the exact numbers of every subtype of 109E that fought in the Battle of Britain was. There are however a number of Geschwader which documents have survived. I only have the books by Jochen Prien on JG3 (all 3 Gruppen that flew in the Battle of Britain) and JG53 that provide numbers on the losses sustained by these units during the Battle of Britain (Period taken 10 July- 31 October 1940). Both Geschwader operated the 109E in this period.

I made a list of the losses of each Geschwader (In both damaged, written off in France and shot down over England/Channel) in the period stated above per subtype of the 109E.

I./ JG3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 12 (percentage 36 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 2(percentage 6 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 18(percentage 54 )
Bf 109 E-7#A/C lost 1(percentage 3 )


II./JG 3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 16(percentage 37 )
Bf 109 E-3#A/C lost 1(percentage 2 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 26(percentage 60 )
Bf 109 E-7#A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )



III./JG 3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 13(percentage 32 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 27(percentage 68 )
Bf 109 E-7 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )


JG53
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 44(percentage 38 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )
Bf109 E-4 #A/C lost 69(percentage 59 )
Bf109 E-7 #A/C lost 4(percentage 3 )


As we can see from the tables above it is clear that although the 109E-1 still was a substantial part of the Luftwaffe inventory during the Battle of Britain the majority of planes in use by these units* was the E-4. I therefore have to say that limiting the number of e-4’s, or e-3’s, would not be a good to limit the number of the cannon armed 109’s on ATAG.

*Both JG3 and JG53 were not privileged units in that they received the latest equipment first and can be considered as ‘normal’ units in respect of converting to the latest plane types.

Note in all the books I checked, In October 1940 the E-1 appears in very limited number and has been largely replaced by losses of 109 E-4’s.
It is also safe to assume that lost 109e-1’s were replaced by 109e-4’s since the E-1 was phased out as the Battle of Britain went on.

Maybe someone that has the Jagdfliegerverbande series by Prien or the JG27 and JG77 by the same author could provide numbers of the losses in the Battle of Britain period by these units in the manner I have done above.

Regards

Thijs

[jg27_mc]

I may limit the E3/fighter variants, depending on the outcome here...

If that's because of the Jabo capabilities (B version) I can understand (not agree :P) that regarding other LW options and also because the RAF doesn't have fighters with the ability of carrying bombs, otherwise is nonsense IMHO.

I am not bitching here, cause my main ride already is the E1. Only use E3/B for blowing up stuff.

Regards.

[CaptainDoggles]

It continually mystifies me why there's a pervading fear of cannons amongst Allied pilots.

I can understand it being a holdover from il2 where the DMs were simplified and FW190 aces could de-wing an aircraft in the blink of an eye, but the DMs in clod are much better. Machine guns are still very very effective, and will only become more effective as the silly bugs are fixed (like no fuel tank explosion damage :rolleyes: )

[csThor]

Hello all,

I would like to give my two cents regarding limiting the Bf109E-4 on the server and allowing mainly the E-1 to be used. Which, as the table below shows would not be correct. (I also like to state that apart from the, now poorly working, automated pitch on the 109E-4 the only difference is the canopy, which doesn’t have a large impact on flying, the only difference between the two subtypes of the Emil is the armament) The E-4, and the E-3 slightly less so, packs a far greater punch compared to the E-1 in the gun department with the MG17 being replaced by the MG FF (in the E-3) and the MG FF/M (in the E-4) making it a much more effective fighter. This is probably the reason why most people that fly fighters on the German side prefer the E-3/E-4 compared to the E-1.

Of course it annoying to get shot down by one of these cannon armed 109’s and therefore wanting to limit them.(like limiting the number of Spitfire MK II which is annoying to fly against, to say the least, for a German fighter pilot in the game. A good case can be made for limiting the number of Spitfire MK II’s when one looks at historical numbers in the actual Battle of Britain).

If the aim of the server is to give a somewhat historical planeset I don’t think severely limiting the number of cannon armed is a good one. Since a lot of documentation of the Luftwaffe was destroyed it will be impossible to find out what the exact numbers of every subtype of 109E that fought in the Battle of Britain was. There are however a number of Geschwader which documents have survived. I only have the books by Jochen Prien on JG3 (all 3 Gruppen that flew in the Battle of Britain) and JG53 that provide numbers on the losses sustained by these units during the Battle of Britain (Period taken 10 July- 31 October 1940). Both Geschwader operated the 109E in this period.

I made a list of the losses of each Geschwader (In both damaged, written off in France and shot down over England/Channel) in the period stated above per subtype of the 109E.

I./ JG3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 12 (percentage 36 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 2(percentage 6 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 18(percentage 54 )
Bf 109 E-7#A/C lost 1(percentage 3 )


II./JG 3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 16(percentage 37 )
Bf 109 E-3#A/C lost 1(percentage 2 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 26(percentage 60 )
Bf 109 E-7#A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )



III./JG 3
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 13(percentage 32 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )
Bf 109 E-4 #A/C lost 27(percentage 68 )
Bf 109 E-7 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )


JG53
Bf 109 E-1 #A/C lost 44(percentage 38 )
Bf 109 E-3 #A/C lost 0(percentage 0 )
Bf109 E-4 #A/C lost 69(percentage 59 )
Bf109 E-7 #A/C lost 4(percentage 3 )


As we can see from the tables above it is clear that although the 109E-1 still was a substantial part of the Luftwaffe inventory during the Battle of Britain the majority of planes in use by these units* was the E-4. I therefore have to say that limiting the number of e-4’s, or e-3’s, would not be a good to limit the number of the cannon armed 109’s on ATAG.

*Both JG3 and JG53 were not privileged units in that they received the latest equipment first and can be considered as ‘normal’ units in respect of converting to the latest plane types.

Note in all the books I checked, In October 1940 the E-1 appears in very limited number and has been largely replaced by losses of 109 E-4’s.
It is also safe to assume that lost 109e-1’s were replaced by 109e-4’s since the E-1 was phased out as the Battle of Britain went on.

Maybe someone that has the Jagdfliegerverbande series by Prien or the JG27 and JG77 by the same author could provide numbers of the losses in the Battle of Britain period by these units in the manner I have done above.

Regards

Thijs

Actually it's not that the E-1 was phased out and replaced by new E-4. The Bf 109 E is unique among the german aircraft as an Emil that was upgraded received a new sub-type number on the Werknummer plate. It was common to rebuild earlier types (such as E-1 and E-3) with the new MG FF/M wing-mounted cannons and turn them into E-4s. It wasn't uncommon for aircraft to be built as E-1s, upgraded to E-4s and finally into E-7s. The german Technikmuseum in Berlin has one such aircraft, an E-7 salvaged from a lake near Murmansk, which was built as E-1, got an upgrade to E-4 and another to E-7, served in the MTO, was refurbished and sent to JG 5 at Petsamo.

[JG5_Thijs]

You are right CsThor, I should have phrased that better, thanks for clarifying this for everyone.

[JG52Krupi]

:( not happy with the current mission, it seems to have hit my performance massively, too many object on the ground.

[JG5_Thijs]

According to Radinger & Schick (Messerschmitt Bf109A-E Development Testing Production, by Schiffer publishing) on page 97 "In mid- 1940 the units (meaning Jagdgeschwader, note by myself) rejected the E-1 because it was inferior in action, Consequently the remaining E-1s in service were converted into E-4 or E-7s, while the last 175 E-1s were completed as E-7N's"

This, in addition to other sources (like Prien and Prien/Stemmer) on JG3 and JG53 shows that the E-1 was replaced, especially later in the BoB, by E-4’s and E-7’s and that the majority of 109’s were cannon armed.

[jimbop]

:( not happy with the current mission, it seems to have hit my performance massively, too many object on the ground.

Is it my imagination or are there more clouds too? I haven't noticed any difference on my system, though.

[ATAG_Dutch]

:( not happy with the current mission, it seems to have hit my performance massively, too many object on the ground.

Huh? :confused:

My system copes with it fine (see sig) and I've run exclusively bombing missions so far. I'd've thought yours would be better mate.

The mission itself is a huge improvement IMHO, with achievable objectives for both sides and some strategic thinking required (some very nasty flak though!).

There was an initial hiccup which I fedback to Bliss regarding the wrong 'target destroyed' messages coming up, so that the blue guys were defending a target which had already been destroyed, whilst leaving an untouched target undefended, but I'm assured this is now corrected.

Would like to see variations on this theme become the norm. ;)

[JG52Krupi]

Is it my imagination or are there more clouds too? I haven't noticed any difference on my system, though.

Huh? :confused:

My system copes with it fine (see sig) and I've run exclusively bombing missions so far. I'd've thought yours would be better mate.

The mission itself is a huge improvement IMHO, with achievable objectives for both sides and some strategic thinking required (some very nasty flak though!).

There was an initial hiccup which I fedback to Bliss regarding the wrong 'target destroyed' messages coming up, so that the blue guys were defending a target which had already been destroyed, whilst leaving an untouched target undefended, but I'm assured this is now corrected.

Would like to see variations on this theme become the norm. ;)

When I fly near Hawkinge my fps go from ~65 to 16 :(, not the only one with this problem.

[Osprey]

From looking at those records posted from JG53 the only conclusion which can be drawn is that more E4's were shot down. JG53 may have been well equipped but not all crews were. Steinhilper makes it clear that only 'the Spaniards' got the E4 in his squadron for example. If there is a good source for ratio information I would love to read it though, all parties regardless of preference should make efforts to understand the historical information we have in the interests of making a sim not a game.

As an RAF pilot I do not fear the cannon because it is harder to hit with, lower muzzle velocity etc. In actual fact although I call for an E4/3 limit to enforce use of the E1, I fear the E1 much more because it has a minute of ammunition! Very dangerous indeed - but I still want it in for the sake of history.

The other feared item is the FM's which are awful, but mainly the "rear deflector shield" carried by 109's, where that can be hammered by belt after belt and remain largely unaffected. Still, I think that will change and when it does half the 109 drivers will shout and the other half will change their tactics.

[FFCW_Urizen]

When I fly near Hawkinge my fps go from ~65 to 16 :(, not the only one with this problem.

Had the same today south of littlestone, at altitude!!! Going from smooth 40 down to 5 or less. OK there were a major furball going on at that time, but the moment it was quieter, i still struggled at around 15 fps. and i´ve already lowered my settings to the point where it hurts looking at the graphics :( .
Next thing i heard on comms, was people being disconnected from the server.
Maybe the problem isn´t mission related.

[335th_GRAthos]

When I fly near Hawkinge my fps go from ~65 to 16 :(, not the only one with this problem.

When I look at the Hawkinge airfield my fps go from ~68 to 28 :(
If I flying near it without looking at the airfield my fps does not suffer.

~S~

[SEE]

I noticed that performance seemed worse than usual at low altitude (mine sucks anyway...:evil:) but fps got better once at altitude and away from the coastal airbases.

[Bounder!]

When I fly near Hawkinge my fps go from ~65 to 16 :(, not the only one with this problem.

Had the same today south of littlestone, at altitude!!! Going from smooth 40 down to 5 or less. OK there were a major furball going on at that time, but the moment it was quieter, i still struggled at around 15 fps. and i´ve already lowered my settings to the point where it hurts looking at the graphics :( .
Next thing i heard on comms, was people being disconnected from the server.
Maybe the problem isn´t mission related.

I've had the same thing this weekend over Hawkinge with my fps dropping to single digits which I can't say I've had before to this extent - I blamed it on my rubbish pc (hoping to upgrade soon[tm]). When I fly away from Hawkinge I recover good fps again. It may have been a coincidence but I seemed to notice it during busy peak time periods on the server.

[xnomad]

How can a player be in your sights then instantly warp onto your six, is this some sort of bug?

I heard players discussing this 'phenonema' on teamspeak but this is the first time I have actually witnessed it happening. The ac warped vertically and then re-appeared behind. There were no other ac around and nothing came of it but it was weird even so!

Something similar happened to me on ATAG the other day. I was coming in on Mr X and we went into a scissors and somehow he shot me up in the scissors when from my point of view it was impossible for him to put his nose on me as we were parallel. It was like he had a thrust vectoring engine.

I didn't see his aircraft change plane but I suddenly received damage messages. It's not the first time I've had this. Quite a few times when I am attacked I get hit whilst evading, thinking that the opponent never had the angle for a shot. It doesn't happen when I'm attacking but for now I'm attributing it to lag. And yes I'm certain no other planes were in the vicinity.

It's bad enough fighting good pilots, but with lag issues like that I don't stand a chance because my evasive actions are wrong because the opponent is actually somewhere else. e.g. I don't think I would have been shot in the scissors and probably would have had a good go but .... oh well....:(

Yeah my ping is crap but ATAG is the best full real server that my ping is acceptable on (240 ms). However as I said I've never noticed lag when attacking only when defending.

[klem]

Something similar happened to me on ATAG the other day. I was coming in on Mr X and we went into a scissors and somehow he shot me up in the scissors when from my point of view it was impossible for him to put his nose on me as we were parallel. It was like he had a thrust vectoring engine.

I didn't see his aircraft change plane but I suddenly received damage messages. It's not the first time I've had this. Quite a few times when I am attacked I get hit whilst evading, thinking that the opponent never had the angle for a shot. It doesn't happen when I'm attacking but for now I'm attributing it to lag. And yes I'm certain no other planes were in the vicinity.

It's bad enough fighting good pilots, but with lag issues like that I don't stand a chance because my evasive actions are wrong because the opponent is actually somewhere else. e.g. I don't think I would have been shot in the scissors and probably would have had a good go but .... oh well....:(

Yeah my ping is crap but ATAG is the best full real server that my ping is acceptable on (240 ms). However as I said I've never noticed lag when attacking only when defending.

I think the 'how did he get that shot' is probably lag. I'm not talking about warping (which we know can be done on purpose).

Its most noticeable in head-on shots where I have ducked below the aircraft's nose/boresight angle and I get killed as he passes over me. I assume it was a longer range shot made before I ducked down, however that means a lag of about 2-3 seconds from shot fired to aircraft hit.

[jimbop]

What is an acceptable ping? Being in Australia I can't really get faster than 200 ms. I haven't heard any complaints from people I'm flying in formation with at ~250 ms so I assume I'm not lagging out at this delay. REPKA is always +400 for me so I avoid them.

[SEE]

Since posting that question I have seen this warping effect many times and players have seen me warp too. For me, this is now some sort of 'lag' issue where the game slows down in certain conditions (possibly due to differences or change of ping) then does a quick refresh as if trying to resolve the correct point in time.

As for Mk.MrX, his gunnery skills are outstanding and a master of the deflection shot...give him the briefest guns solution and he has you - pretty sure he doesn't use tracers so you have no idea when he is firing either!

[MoGas]

400 ping should be max! In DCS/FC2 servman kicks you automaticly if you are higher then 400ms....

[JG52Krupi]

400 ping should be max! In DCS/FC2 servman kicks you automaticly if you are higher then 400ms....

Bliss has asked them to add a few options like that.

[xnomad]

I find anything over 280ms unacceptable in a close dogfight. You'll notice your opponent twitching about in a dogfight and suddenly going the other way. Bouncing a sleeping plane is ok for over 300ms. Unfortunately for us Australians there aren't enough servers, if only ATAG was even closer to us..... ;)

Yep Mr X is a great pilot indeed and no matter how high I climb he always seems to be higher. I'm not the best but I do think I've got great deflection skills and the shot I got hit with was impossible from my point of view. I don't stand a chance against a player like that in a dogfight if I have lag issues.

[JG52Krupi]

Since posting that question I have seen this warping effect many times and players have seen me warp too. For me, this is now some sort of 'lag' issue where the game slows down in certain conditions (possibly due to differences or change of ping) then does a quick refresh as if trying to resolve the correct point in time.

As for Mk.MrX, his gunnery skills are outstanding and a master of the deflection shot...give him the briefest guns solution and he has you - pretty sure he doesn't use tracers so you have no idea when he is firing either!

They really need to come up with a ammo belt lock, in my E4 cannons I have a historically correct load out but in my E1 I have a setup that cause reds to catch fire quite quickly (see the screenshot thread).

The same goes for the reds I haven't changed the ammo for any a/c and I don't get any blues on fire, need to have a look at what others are using.

[SEE]

Is there a Steam issue with ping rates?

Last night was packed on ATAG and the Ping rates went sky high, a lot of players thought the server had crashed and left, a few minutes later pings went back to normal for those still left in game?

[jg27_mc]

When I fly near Hawkinge my fps go from ~65 to 16 :(, not the only one with this problem.

Try this:

Install AMD Catalyst 12.1a Preview Windows Vista and 7 driver.

On the gaming (3D Application Settings) tab

Anti-Aliasing: Use application settings | Morphological filtering: Unchecked | Filter: Standard

Anisotropic Filtering: Use application settings

Tessellation: AMD Optimized

Catalyst A.I.: Performance | Enable Surface Format Optimization: Unchecked

Wait for vertical refresh: Off, unless application specifies

Anti-Aliasing Mode: Multi-sample AA

OpenGL Settings: Triple Buffering unchecked

On the My Digital Flat-Panels tab: Uncheck Enable GPU scalling, Reduce DVI frequency on high-resolution display, Alternate DVI operational mode

Launch the game on Very High settings with Anti-Aliasing Off | Anti-Epilepsy Off | SSAO Off | Vsync On

After setting your ride hit create, then after all textures are loaded hit Esc go to your video options and set Buildings Detail: Very Low | Forest: Medium | Texture Quality: Medium | Land Shading: Medium. Return to your cockpit with the new settings and see if you had a more stable/smoth FPS over land/cities without loosing your aircraft texture (even after dropping down the Texture Quality to Medium).

At this point, if all went as expected, you should be able to start tweaking FXAA at your taste.

Regards.

[jimbop]

Unfortunately for us Australians there aren't enough servers, if only ATAG was even closer to us..... ;)

Salmo runs a good Australian server, just never anybody on it unfortunately.

[335th_GRAthos]

...my ping is acceptable on (240 ms). However as I said I've never noticed lag when attacking only when defending.

Well, if you have 240ms and the other player has 240ms as well, this gives a total of 0,5 seconds.

If you are attacking and have somebody in front of you it makes less impact because your vectors are more or less towards the same direction.
Doing barel-rolls or scissors next to each other is more comlicated because both opponents are constantly changing their vectors nearly 160° each one, each time. Within 0,5sec total lag, a lot may happen.

Besides I have the feeling that CoD uses a complecated formula something to calculate the position of the objects. It has happened many time that I saw dots in the horizon or far away ship-dots in the sea warping when changing between wide and narrow view.

Let us all be happy that ATAG has such a good bandwidth that such problems are very very limited! :)

~S~

[ATAG_Bliss]

Is there a Steam issue with ping rates?

Last night was packed on ATAG and the Ping rates went sky high, a lot of players thought the server had crashed and left, a few minutes later pings went back to normal for those still left in game?

On all previous patches (including the beta patches) we could have as many players connected without any steam/server issues. We had over 100 players at one point in the latest beta. Of course, with the skin download problem, you could imagine the stuttering, but at least the server/steam didn't seem to mind.

But now, you get over 60 players (seems to be the magic number) the server console will become unresponsive, the server won't be on the steam list anymore, and you'll be flying in limbo land. But, when enough people get fed up with this and leave (less than 60) in a few minutes the server will respond again, talk to steam, throw out 1,000,000 chat messages from all the stuff that was stuck from before, and go back to normal.

I reported this issue the second the official patch came out - probably to only fall on deaf ears! The server filled up repeatedly, and it was always around 60 players when this happened. That's why we've had the server limit set to 60 players since then. We've recently tried to up the number, and as more than 60 joined, that's when the problem took place, yet again. I was hopeful that one of the steam updates throughout that time had done something to fix the issue, but obviously that's not the case. Broken game is broken.

When I look at the Hawkinge airfield my fps go from ~68 to 28 :(
If I flying near it without looking at the airfield my fps does not suffer.

~S~

New version up that should help with the FPS problem over the fields, but be prepared to run into some bad spawn points. We either get the choice of having you spawn into a hanger randomly, with a possible explosion, or drown down your FPS because of all the bad spawn points we have to try and fix with the game.

Hopefully, some of this stuff is actually being looked at by the dev team.

Edit: And the objective messages should be correct now, repeating the correct objectives and the right areas for them. Let me know if you see any other problems.

Thanks.

2nd Edit: For those that join our team speak some pretty cool stuff has been coded to work with the game. From our forums:

Colander has coded a pretty cool feature with regards to the TS3 server and our IL2COD servers.

Basically, if you join TS3 and enter the game, you can now switch channels in-game.

How this works: This is completely dependent by not only which side you are on but what server as well. For instance if you join the red side (in-game) once you pull up the in-game radio command menu, select the "Mission" menu and you'll see all the red TS3 channels listed for whatever server you have selected to fly on. From that list you can not only choose what channel you want to switch to (flight#1, bomber flight #1, etc.,etc.,), it will also allow you to see who else is in each of those channels by selecting it.

So for those that fly both sides, or don't like alt/tabbing to swap channels, you can now be automatically moved to w/e channel on w/e server for w/e side (phew!) you fly on.

Btw, the only way this will work is if your TS3 name is identical to your in-game (steam) name.

A big thanks to Colander for this!

[JG52Krupi]

Try this:

Install AMD Catalyst 12.1a Preview Windows Vista and 7 driver.

On the gaming (3D Application Settings) tab

Anti-Aliasing: Use application settings | Morphological filtering: Unchecked | Filter: Standard

Anisotropic Filtering: Use application settings

Tessellation: AMD Optimized

Catalyst A.I.: Performance | Enable Surface Format Optimization: Unchecked

Wait for vertical refresh: Off, unless application specifies

Anti-Aliasing Mode: Multi-sample AA

OpenGL Settings: Triple Buffering unchecked

On the My Digital Flat-Panels tab: Uncheck Enable GPU scalling, Reduce DVI frequency on high-resolution display, Alternate DVI operational mode

Launch the game on Very High settings with Anti-Aliasing Off | Anti-Epilepsy Off | SSAO Off | Vsync On

After setting your ride hit create, then after all textures are loaded hit Esc go to your video options and set Buildings Detail: Very Low | Forest: Medium | Texture Quality: Medium | Land Shading: Medium. Return to your cockpit with the new settings and see if you had a more stable/smoth FPS over land/cities without loosing your aircraft texture (even after dropping down the Texture Quality to Medium).

At this point, if all went as expected, you should be able to start tweaking FXAA at your taste.

Regards.

FYI I played around with the settings a bit more and now I have decent fps again :D

[Tacoma74]

Just had an awesome time on ATAG. Thought I would try out the Blenheim online now that I've gotten a pretty good takeoff success rate in it. I started at Littlestone with with a loadout of 40% fuel and 4x250Kg bombs. So I tookoff and headed towards France, slowly gaining altitude up to about 4k feet looking for targets. Ended up finding a nice convoy just west of French Point. So I decided to give divebombing a go. Lined up with a nice big cargo ship straight on in a shallow descent. Right before I was over it I let loose all 4 bombs. Direct hit and down she went! Ended up shattering some of my windows but other than that I was in one piece. So I headed back for home. Had a perfect landing on top of all that.... Oh what a good feeling!

The ol' Blenny is surely a treat! There's nothing more fulfilling than flying a successful mission in that old thing. It's quite a handful, but once you've got a good idea of how to fly it, it can be very rewarding! :grin:

[jimbop]

Ended up shattering some of my windows but other than that I was in one piece.

Try changing your pistol delay to 11 seconds - you should be fine and they will sink just the same.

[Tacoma74]

Try changing your pistol delay to 11 seconds - you should be fine and they will sink just the same.

Yea I was half way across the channel before I realised I forgot to change my bomb delays. Was originally planning on skip bombing, but with a 0 second delay thats pretty much suicide. I thought I would probably have better luck divebombing. But oh well... Hopefully I remember next time! lol

[Ataros]

Bliss and the team, in line with this discussion http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=28904 I wonder if you have VAC ON in confs.ini for your server?

Did you experience any cheats or mods abuse?

[WatchMan011]

To Ataros and anyone else regarding the question of VAC being enabled on our servers the answer is "yes". And as to whether or not we have seen any hard evidence of cheating, the answer is "no", because quite simply it's all speculation.

If everyone steps back and tries to look at it objectively you know we can't start banning people based on speculation. Witch hunts are always fun until the cross hairs are on your rear end.:)

What we have seen and have documented are assertions of hacks, exploits or cheats that have later been proven "false", such as fire extinguishers being used to cause lag and aircraft shooting skyward into the stratosphere.

To the question of if VAC is working or not, we would have to say we have no idea and it's a question that can only be answered by the developers and folks at steam. To the best of my knowledge VAC collects data over a period of time and then bans accounts based on that data.

Finally and I know this is a bit off topic but please everyone take into consideration that we are still dealing with a game that is broke in many areas, I mean we have ships floating 100 meters off the ground for goodness sake! Until the developers fix this game and give us the product we actually were promised and paid for that's just the way that things are, sad but true.

Sincerely, ATAG_WatchMan.

[Ataros]

Thank you very much for the info!

[jg27_mc]

To Ataros and anyone else regarding the question of VAC being enabled on our servers the answer is "yes". And as to whether or not we have seen any hard evidence of cheating, the answer is "no", because quite simply it's all speculation.

If everyone steps back and tries to look at it objectively you know we can't start banning people based on speculation. Witch hunts are always fun until the cross hairs are on your rear end.:)

What we have seen and have documented are assertions of hacks, exploits or cheats that have later been proven "false", such as fire extinguishers being used to cause lag and aircraft shooting skyward into the stratosphere.

To the question of if VAC is working or not, we would have to say we have no idea and it's a question that can only be answered by the developers and folks at steam. To the best of my knowledge VAC collects data over a period of time and then bans accounts based on that data.

Thanks for the feedback.

Finally and I know this is a bit off topic but please everyone take into consideration that we are still dealing with a game that is broke in many areas, I mean we have ships floating 100 meters off the ground for goodness sake! Until the developers fix this game and give us the product we actually were promised and paid for that's just the way that things are, sad but true.

Sincerely, ATAG_WatchMan.

Sad, but true...

[bw_wolverine]

They should work now.



Thanks for looking into the squadron selection! There's still one airfield that is stuck on a polish squadron. Eastchurch I think? I have nothing against the Poles! Honest!

Had a great flight last night. Picked up a Do17 and an escorting 109. Had a nice landing at Manston in formation with my wingman Felipe. Narrow miss with a spit taking off!

[klem]

Does this include the highly touted screenshot/recording tracks lag-cheats? I've always doubted those that claimed to have proven this.

Just so you know, we tested PrtScrn on the ATAG server. It does cause lag/warp. Whether its used on purpose is difficult to say but we have seen some a/c warp repeatedly when in a tight spot and not when they're not, so its suspicious at times.

[corchard]

S! ATAG folk,

Your server is the most fun I have with CloD, and I enjoy checking out the stats at http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/content.php just to see if I'm improving, as a personal challenge.

Since there are so many columns in the stats, would it be possible for you to freeze the top two header rows of the embedded stats table at http://216.52.148.29:2012/ATAGStats/ATAGStatsV1.html so we can see what the numbers mean?

Once you scroll down past the top several names it becomes difficult to remember which stat matches with its column header.

If you can't freeze those top two header rows, perhaps you can add a static table of just those header rows above the stats table so we can see those headers above the stats as we scroll down.

Just a friendly request, if it is easy to do. :cool:

Charlo

[ATAG_Bliss]

Hi Charlo,

You're not the 1st person that's ever asked for this ;). Last I heard, Colander is rewriting the stats from scratch - so who knows what he's coming up with. But he was working on the static portion (and complaining about how much a pain it was to figure out how to do lol). So it's being worked on anyhow :)

Glad you're having fun!

[JG52Krupi]

Hey Bliss, is he changing the flights/kill ratio to kills/deaths?

Struck me as a but odd the way they are atm.

[JG52Krupi]

Just so you know, we tested PrtScrn on the ATAG server. It does cause lag/warp. Whether its used on purpose is difficult to say but we have seen some a/c warp repeatedly when in a tight spot and not when they're not, so its suspicious at times.

Have you tested fraps recording?

I was planning on making a video.

[kestrel79]

First time online last night and of course I chose the ATAG server! Wow great pings, I was anywhere from 15-28.

I was on pretty late not a lot of people flying, I flew two missions over the channel just looking for targets and saw no one, but it was still pretty fun scanning the skys and learning to manage my engine.

My engine didn't blow up, so I deemed both missions a success for me. I still have a LONG way to go getting familiar with the CEM. This is more more difficult than full switch in IL2. I still have many buttons to map as well but I'm getting there.

Wow is the multiplayer interface clunky. It's really confusing to figure out how to spawn, select loadouts, ect. I know they are redesiging this stuff but what were they thinking in the first place? RoF's interface is brilliant. Very intuitive and easy to read.

[JG52Krupi]

Flew the Hurri for the first time tonight WOW I love it, sturdy aircraft great weapon platform.

Only con was the usual low ammo, had two 109s blow up on me one of them twice :lol: damn DM but both caught fire and killed the pilot SWEET!!!

The spits in reserve from now on :D

[klem]

Flew the Hurri for the first time tonight WOW I love it, sturdy aircraft great weapon platform.

Only con was the usual low ammo, had two 109s blow up on me one of them twice :lol: damn DM but both caught fire and killed the pilot SWEET!!!

The spits in reserve from now on :D

Glad you like it. Its the best we're allowed to use ;)

Wish my 109s went down when I flamed them, they always seem to go out and fly/fight on. As a 109 pilot can you tell me if there is any lasting damage after a flame up?

[JG52Krupi]

Glad you like it. Its the best we're allowed to use ;)

Wish my 109s went down when I flamed them, they always seem to go out and fly/fight on. As a 109 pilot can you tell me if there is any lasting damage after a flame up?

It depends which fuel tank goes up, after the 109 went up twice last night I get the impression that one of the fuel tanks, lets call it A, is bugged and only quickly drains all the fuel the second fuel tank B leads to an explosion with no physical damage as well but the aircraft does catch fire.

I have only experienced damage from fuel tank B twice and both times thought it was only the fuel tank A going up so I continued flying only to be burnt alive :(

From the red point of view after you see an explosion if the 109 is alight he is a goner if he is not it depends on how much fuel he has when you lit him up usually he will be dangerous for at least another 5 mins.

Given the limited amount of ammo the reds have its a massive pain that the aicraft doesn't disintegrate like it should with a ruptured fuel tank.

[Ataros]

Given the limited amount of ammo the reds have its a massive pain that the aicraft doesn't disintegrate like it should with a ruptured fuel tank.

I think it can be scripted that a wing or a tail is cut off in 10-30 seconds depending on what fuel tank has exploded. Need to ask C# professionals.

[SEE]

Bliss has listed the damage types (link below) and Jimbop has added a simple script routine you can use in FMB missions that will enable you too see exactly what damage is inflicted on ac. I have a whole bunch of practice Missions with this script imbedded - some damage results in SP are completely different to that in MP which are just not worrking for some reason. I have yet to see a Merlin catch fire on the Spit in MP..or a BF continue flying when a tank has exploded in SP.:confused: It supposed to be fixed next patch.......:grin:

http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?942-DamageTypes-For-Reference

[JG5_emil]

Does anyone use the FXAA injection thingie online or does it get you a vac ban?

Sorry to ask in this thread but i didn't want to start a new one.

Cheers


Emil

[SEE]

I used the FXAA for a long time in MP but recently stopped using it - not for fear of a Vac Ban, but because I found it makes ac more difficult to spot with high res settings. TBH, there is not much point to use it with low res settings (great for SP though)!

[JG5_emil]

Thanks mate

[TomcatViP]

The old cheat consisting of "frozing the stick of the guy in front of you" is back. Don't be surprised if the strength of your pilot suddenly vanished. Tht's not estrogen in you morning coffee :-x:

Great clever guys one day it wld worth a kick in the nest. :evil:

[jg27_mc]

The old cheat consisting of "frozing the stick of the guy in front of you" is back. Don't be surprised if the strength of your pilot suddenly vanished. Tht's not estrogen in you morning coffee :-x:

Great clever guys one day it wld worth a kick in the nest. :evil:

What do you mean TomcatViP? In plain English this time... :P

[ATAG_Bliss]

I don't think it's a wise move typing any sort of ways to exploit in the forums ;)

We need more people to help us push for admin tools!

[jg27_mc]

I don't think it's a wise move typing any sort of ways to exploit in the forums ;)

We need more people to help us push for admin tools!

Well we can not denouce them if we are not aware... Probably the best way to avoid them in the first place.

[TomcatViP]

PM sent

[klem]

What do you mean TomcatViP? In plain English this time... :P

+1 please

[ATAG_Bliss]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about that screen and print thingy.

[jg27_mc]

I'm pretty sure he's talking about that screen and print thingy.


Humm... It could be, but that one is rather old. It was Klem that told me about it some time ago.
Regards.
Ps: I am replying from my smartphone... I'll check your PM tomorrow. Thanks Tomcat.

[TomcatViP]

Just a few words to say that today I had again a great fight with a 109. We spiraled down from a pretty high alt down to sea level.

Hurri Vs 109 does always a great fight what ever plane you fly from both.

~S to my opponent that day

[xnomad]

I was really surprised by the bf110's performance yesterday. I could not catch this guy with a Spit 1a. I was thinking maybe I haven't calibrated my throttle correctly but when I checked it did go to 100 %. Even in a dive where my Spit was creaking with strain I had trouble closing in fast.

Every time I was just about to catch up he'd dive a little and then extend off again. I was very impressed but surely that's not historically accurate? :confused: and I wasn't getting suckered into neg G cut-outs or anything.

[SEE]

This post illustrates why you are experiencing problems.........the relative FM performance is porked but hopefully will be fixed in next update. Use the Hurri for best performance regards speed is the only solution at the moment or always attack from high with the Spit1a!

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=347529&postcount=29

[jimbop]

Glad to hear I'm not the only one having trouble with the spit 1a. I find it very difficult to fight against a 109 on the deck due to the lack of power. Pretty much restricted to B&Z with the 1a so I'm finding myself in the hurricane much more often. Turning isn't too fun though.

[MoGas]

Thats why I have voted to allow SpitII for the ATAG server for the RED`s, even when the FM is correct or rong many topics present, but the SpitII is given the prober fear of a Spitfire. The current Spit I-Ia is just ridiculous easy to fight below 4000m. You need to worry about a Hurrican Rotol more in case of speed and climb performance....:rolleyes:

When I ask my grandfather what he had to fear over the channel, it was the Spitfire and not so much the Hurrican. Anyway, the lobby for realism, and BLUE side had and has his run against the SpitII....;)

[JG52Krupi]

Hurri Rotol can keep up with the 109 but can't climb as fast I find, spit is a very slow but in the hands of a okay pilot you can still get your fair share of kills using Bnz and it's turning rate means that any 109 that tries to turn with is not gonna walk away unscathed.

Spit 2 I didn't mind but there's no denying it wiped the floor in all areas compared to the 109... faster, climbs better etc...

[MoGas]

Hurri Rotol can keep up with the 109 but can't climb as fast I find, spit is a very slow but in the hands of a okay pilot you can still get your fair share of kills using Bnz and it's turning rate means that any 109 that tries to turn with is not gonna walk away unscathed.

Spit 2 I didn't mind but there's no denying it wiped the floor in all areas compared to the 109... faster, climbs better etc...

I know what you are saying, for me the gap between Spit I-Ia compared to a 109 is just too big in the other direction too, soo, either way is a bit weird lol

[JG52Krupi]

I know what you are saying, for me the gap between Spit I-Ia compared to a 109 is just too big in the other direction too, soo, either way is a bit weird lol

Yes but if the reds flew in hurris and spits they could use the spits advantages to remove the hurris disadvantages... You can't do that when all blues have is a 109 ;)

I got my fair share of kills in a spit, this week I took the hurri up and was surprised how good it was, only turning was bad and you could still keep up with a 109 in a turn.

[TomcatViP]

Nomad,

I don't know if your comment is meant to be provocative, but if you pay any attention to the plane in question you'd see that the answers are obvious.

The 110 is a big twin engined fighter with a much greater mass than your Spit.

In WWII all fighters had a fairly poor thrust to weight ratio (or power to weight (P/W)). This mean that the influence of gravity in any move is greater than that of your eng power. Ok if you hve been a Spit aficionados during IL2 years I understand that this is a bit complicated to understand now.

When you are diving and without considering the neg G cutout induced lag, you are in fact adding all the "power" of gravity to your engine thrust. It means that the heavier you are, the faster your acceleration will be this only impaired by the drag of your airframe.

Even WWII 4 engined bomber could shortly hoped away from a single engined fighter that way (usually the time for rear gunner to score some good hit).

Here that's what is happening when a 110 dive in front of you. His mass pull him away from you and until the difference in drag between your Spit and him got some influences.

With a term dive speed of around 640 (comfortable value), the 110 won't escape you. The trick for the 110 driver is then to alternate, push over, dive and straight path flight (usually I use a shallow climb once term vel is reached) to add time to the merge. Time meaning distance traveled to reach a safety spot on the map where help could be available (you are dragged).

I hope this have answered your question. What you see is only fairly logical.

There is no need for Spit IIa when a bit of brains activity is done.

[JG5_emil]

Not trying to inflame but can I ask if Spit II is currently on the ATAG server or not?

I am tempted to pop back for some online action after having given CLOD a break due to the CTD and other problems.

[MoGas]

Not trying to inflame but can I ask if Spit II is currently on the ATAG server or not?


On the ATAG#1 where I fly she is not there right now.

[SNAFU]

Nomad,
When you are diving and without considering the neg G cutout induced lag, you are in fact adding all the "power" of gravity to your engine thrust. It means that the heavier you are, the faster your acceleration will be this only impaired by the drag of your airframe.

Huh, I always had the feeling that all the other ones travel on other geodesics in the spacetime... ;) Well, but true Spits in 1946 had another gravity constant. :cool: ... but I hoped in CloD all the planes would be bound by more or less the same gravity.

Well, sorry for OT, just couldn´t resist to do a litte smart-a**ing... ;)

[bw_wolverine]

Huh, I always had the feeling that all the other ones travel on other geodesics in the spacetime... ;) Well, but true Spits in 1946 had another gravity constant. :cool: ... but I hoped in CloD all the planes would be bound by more or less the same gravity.

Well, sorry for OT, just couldn´t resist to do a litte smart-a**ing... ;)

Yeah, gotta admit, that bit made me scratch my head a second.

If the 110 has more drag on it than a Spitfire, shouldn't it's dive acceleration be slower? All things being equal in drag, shouldn't their dive acceleration be equal?

[Bewolf]

Yeah, gotta admit, that bit made me scratch my head a second.

If the 110 has more drag on it than a Spitfire, shouldn't it's dive acceleration be slower? All things being equal in drag, shouldn't their dive acceleration be equal?

Depends on the mass behind it, really, and the 110 is not a light bird. A piano will undoubtly fall faster then a feather, despite the feather having much better drag characteristics then a piano.

[Osprey]

Hurri Rotol can keep up with the 109

Sorry Krupi but it doesn't. The only reason I get as many kills as I do is because so many 109 drivers are complacent in my opinion, knowing that even when hit they have a very high chance to run home anyway. They behave predictably so I've learned to position myself accordingly. I am astonished at the rate of turn of some 109 drivers though.

I expect a big change, the gap between Hurricane and 109 in speed and climb should rightly widen and I will find things tougher. Effectively, today, the Hurricane and Spitfire roles are reversed. If the patch isn't utter junk I expect way more 109's to start falling out of the sky to Spitfires, and the Hurricane to become the workhorse.


...this week I took the hurri up and was surprised how good it was, only turning was bad and you could still keep up with a 109 in a turn.

Exactly. It should just plain out-turn the 109 afaik. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/hurricane/hurricane-109.pdf Point 6 is particularly interesting.


Sorry, OT.

[bw_wolverine]

Depends on the mass behind it, really, and the 110 is not a light bird. A piano will undoubtly fall faster then a feather, despite the feather having much better drag characteristics then a piano.

Well, it's really more of an air resistance to weight ratio thingy apparently (looked it up).

So if the greater bulk of the 110 compared to it's surface area resistance (drag? dunno) is a larger divide than that of the Spitfire, then it'll go faster in a dive, I guess.

Not my area I suppose. Air physics and such is very interesting stuff.

[Bewolf]

Well, it's really more of an air resistance to weight ratio thingy apparently (looked it up).

So if the greater bulk of the 110 compared to it's surface area resistance (drag? dunno) is a larger divide than that of the Spitfire, then it'll go faster in a dive, I guess.

Not my area I suppose. Air physics and such is very interesting stuff.

Not an expert myself, but yes, that is the direction it goes in.

That said, the Spitfire is not the wonderbird you make the impression of thinking it is, Fear Factor and the likes. I feel a bit of P51 syndrome going on here by making a few selective Luftwaffe pilots comments bout the Spit to be more then there is to it. But then again I belong to those 109/110 flyers who see no problem in Red utilizing the SpitII on servers.

[JG52Krupi]

Sorry Krupi but it doesn't. The only reason I get as many kills as I do is because so many 109 drivers are complacent in my opinion, knowing that even when hit they have a very high chance to run home anyway. They behave predictably so I've learned to position myself accordingly. I am astonished at the rate of turn of some 109 drivers though.

I expect a big change, the gap between Hurricane and 109 in speed and climb should rightly widen and I will find things tougher. Effectively, today, the Hurricane and Spitfire roles are reversed. If the patch isn't utter junk I expect way more 109's to start falling out of the sky to Spitfires, and the Hurricane to become the workhorse.




Exactly. It should just plain out-turn the 109 afaik. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/hurricane/hurricane-109.pdf Point 6 is particularly interesting.


Sorry, OT.

Hurri does keep up with a 109, easily with the current FM's slightly slower perhaps but not a lot in it.

[jimbop]

I find it difficult to keep up if the 109 is diving, easy if he is climbing. I've had several comments from 109 pilots online about how the hurricane shouldn't be able to climb that fast. They were insinuating I was using a modded FM!

Trim it correctly and use the right boost/pitch settings and the rotol is great.

[JG52Krupi]

I find it difficult to keep up if the 109 is diving, easy if he is climbing. I've had several comments from 109 pilots online about how the hurricane shouldn't be able to climb that fast. They were insinuating I was using a modded FM!

Trim it correctly and use the right boost/pitch settings and the rotol is great.

+1 I only just started using the Rotol this week its arguably the best fighter atm lol.

[Jugdriver]

I think the present plane set with the exclusion of the Spit II and the E-4 has pushed the dogfights down to the deck again. This can become a bit of a quandary for the Rotol and Spit 1/1a if 109’s get above you and they manage their E correctly it is hard to turn the tables and go on the offense (this is where comms are an absolute must). With the Spit II’s in there you have to respect its low alt performance when flying the 109 and so the dogfights were much higher. I enjoy both plane sets and hope they start rotating them.

JD
AKA_MattE

[jimbop]

Yes, I'm undecided about the absence of the Spit IIa. The 1a is certainly useless on the deck against a good 109 - they will just climb away and start booming you. The tight turn of the spit allows you to evade but apart from a lucky snap it is impossible to go offensive if they don't start turning with you.

As for the spit 1, I just don't see the point of it...

[SEE]

I don't see the Spit2/E4 making a return on this server untill the next update is released. Too many bad vibes!

As for the ME110, didn't the LW devise a defensive circle tactic for them as they were being picked off by both the Hurri and the Spit too easily?

Personally, I have learn't a lot from flying the Spit1a despite the frustration when you know that the encounter is going to be purely defensive! I avoid the low altitude furballs- the FPS is dreadfull , it's tactically incorrect for a Mk1a - you can't shoot properly in a slide show, or bail without frigging dying and it usually ends up in a rapid Launcher crash!

Roll on the update........meanwhile I will hapilly stay with the Spit1a - preferably at 16K+ (except whem Mk.MrX is about then its 21K..........)

[jimbop]

Lol but he's dangerous at any altitude. ATAG should have another column: "# times shot down by MrX", I would probably be leading!

He often uses an accomplice rabbit to line you up - very effective tactic.

[SEE]

I say 21k because we engaged at high altitude twice and the fights were good - I imagine its more difficult to go vertical (to the extent where the BF can climb vertically, seemingly for ever and ever) at that altitude. The other encounter was at around 18k but he can still (and does use) the vertical climb superiority of the BF to get a solution - in my case a forced bailout as he swiped my controls in a single short burst.

Last night I emptied all my rounds into his E1 and he still killed me! - I was gutted as I stared into my Black screen - a few seconds later his E1 hit the deck and it was 1 pilot kill each - I felt much better! Had a brief exchange of chat afterwards and he is a very nice guy as well as an outstanding pilot!

I learn more from him and the good BF pilots so don't mind getting swiped - it's how you learn.

[xnomad]

I'm not being provocative about the 110. I fly red and blue so I don't have an agenda. I am aware of the affect mass has on allowing an object to hold it's speed. This is also why you can gain altitude faster by diving and zoom climbing than just by conventional climbing However if the 110 was this effective in real life it would not have needed a 109 escort which it famously required during bob. Sent from my phone so forgive any mistaskes pls.

[MoGas]

Lol but he's dangerous at any altitude. ATAG should have another column: "# times shot down by MrX", I would probably be leading!

He often uses an accomplice rabbit to line you up - very effective tactic.

Dont forget, he is to 90% not alone, you can say, 5-8 guys on comms on repka, flying as a team.

[TomcatViP]

I am aware of the affect mass has on allowing an object to hold it's speed. This is also why you can gain altitude faster by diving and zoom climbing than just by conventional climbing


Aaaaaaarrrrrgghhh

You've just kill me hundreds of time.

Tht's why I hate so much the stupid FM IL2 had on some plane (not talking abt old CFS). Painful to see that way how disastrous a complaisant FM can have on the sim community (and RL pilot ?).

Pls don't take me wrong there is nothing personal. You hve all the right to be wrong (as I do take mine from time to time ;) )

No, the height you loss in a dive is not to be exceeded after with a zoom climb. You can't climb by alternating dive and zoom. Tht's Il2 world only.

If you want to fast climb, first use your kin E by putting your nose over the horizon using your cte climb incidence as a reference. Your plane will coast rise using the energy due to the speed and then climb at the best ratio possible once your vector speed has fall down to best climb speed.

Zooming (like going full vertical) does not accelerate your time to alt. It simply
reduce the time for distance separation with an opponent that hve less E. But you hve to know that the maximum alt you will gain with a given state of E is in fact much less than using the above technique.

~S

[MK.Mr.X]

Dont forget, he is to 90% not alone, you can say, 5-8 guys on comms on repka, flying as a team.

I fly not one, when my evening. On the server at this time, no more than 20 people.
But I still fly in the morning, when all the Russian sleeping, I am one. 40-50 pilots on the server
Roll on the update........meanwhile I will hapilly stay with the Spit1a - preferably at 16K+ (except whem Mk.MrX is about then its 21K..........)
In that fight, I flew to 4000m. I saw you at 5500m
I went to the side. climbed, went to you.
Your mistake was that you saw me started to climb. why?:) was the same height
It was too late, I was close. I picked up speed.
Remember! At such an altitude is easier to collect energy than the height.
Energy is converted into height after convergence.
You're a good pilot, fighting with you is always interesting.:grin:

[SEE]

In that fight, I flew to 4000m. I saw you at 5500m
I went to the side. climbed, went to you.
Your mistake was that you saw me started to climb. why?:) was the same height


On my encounters with MrX he has been on his own.

It was a mistake - lesson learn't :grin: - You were quite a distance away and slightly lower alt when we saw each other - I didn't know it was you at the time!

I enjoy meeting you, your advice and observations are much appreciated too - look forward to more encounters (at altitide MrX :grin:) S:

[Ataros]

Zooming (like going full vertical) does not accelerate your time to alt. It simply
reduce the time for distance separation with an opponent that hve less E. But you hve to know that the maximum alt you will gain with a given state of E is in fact much less than using the above technique.

~S

I think theoretically it is better to zoom in case your speed exceeds your best climb speed because drag is proportional to speed square IIRC. Thus every second an airplane has speed higher than best climb speed it is wasting E due to extra drag. If it zooms it reduces time spent at speed higher than best climb speed and converts kinetic E to potential E. As soon as speed is dropped to best climb speed zoom can be stopped and changed to sustained climb at best climb speed. Just my understanding, may be be not 100% correct.

PS. And btw acceleration of a falling object does not depend on its weight, rather on weight to drag ratio IIRC. In vacuum 2 objects of different weight would fall with the same speed.

[MoGas]

I fly not one, when my evening. On the server at this time, no more than 20 people.
But I still fly in the morning, when all the Russian sleeping, I am one. 40-50 pilots on the server


Then I should fly on other times ;)

[Osprey]

Hurri does keep up with a 109, easily with the current FM's slightly slower perhaps but not a lot in it.

I've read on here about 109's doing @ 450kmph straight and level. I've even managed well over 400kmph myself in one of my 2 flights as a novice.
450kmph = 280mph. You cannot do that in a Hurricane straight and level, best I ever get is about 250ish. That fits in with 109's pulling away easily, which they can and do. I always have to catch them napping.

Are you sure you aren't confusing '109' with '110' ? ;) That does about 250mph. I'm getting good climb now though, yet to try a chase of a 109 in the climb though.

[Osprey]

I don't see the Spit2/E4 making a return on this server untill the next update is released. Too many bad vibes!

So some of the LW have bullied the Spit IIa off the server. Well done lads, nice work.

[TomcatViP]

Well Osp I think that they will be more chaps regretting the E4 than the few of you that hve over done the SPitIIa

The E4 was far more credible as a model than the thing was and was praised by new player being an easy mount.

So when you say "well done lads" you shld feel concerned.

Regarding climb speed vs zoom :

Cl/Cd give you the order of magnitude. Then look at the CL vs AoA.

[JG52Krupi]

I've read on here about 109's doing @ 450kmph straight and level. I've even managed well over 400kmph myself in one of my 2 flights as a novice.
450kmph = 280mph. You cannot do that in a Hurricane straight and level, best I ever get is about 250ish. That fits in with 109's pulling away easily, which they can and do. I always have to catch them napping.

Are you sure you aren't confusing '109' with '110' ? ;) That does about 250mph. I'm getting good climb now though, yet to try a chase of a 109 in the climb though.

Where did 450 come from?

[camber]

It's shame there is so much capability difference between the current 109s and Spit Ia/IIa. Balance is impossible for 1v1s.

Was just on ATAG in a SpitIa, saw 109 (a certain 109 specialist ;)) at dot distance about 2000 ft below. As he saw me all he had to do was gently turn and dive a little away until speeds were equalised, climb above me while maintaining seperation and then turn into a fight where he could increase his E to untouchable after 1-2 passes, while I could either enter a mad defensive spiral or drop speed to 80mph while attempting to get the nose up for some sort of snap shot.

It reminded me of doing the same thing to 109s in the SpitII when they were in. Once I remember yoyo-ing over 3 circling impotently below and popping a few DeWildes into the most saucy one on any particular pass.

I don't mind getting hammered but would be nice to have the IIa for the odd mission. Of course numbers are fuzzy but I would say the SpitII is about 30% better than the 109s, which are 20% better than the SpitIa. So it would be nice to have the IIa now and again ;). Otherwise the LW might get overconfident and go and invade Russia or something.

[Bewolf]

Easy solution, kick 109s and Spits alltogether and fly Hurries and 110s. Problem solved ; )

[TomcatViP]

Easy solution, kick 109s and Spits alltogether and fly Hurries and 110s. Problem solved ; )

I am not sure that we won't ear soon some ppl complaining abt the 110 being Über with twice as more engines than the Hurri :rolleyes:

[GraveyardJimmy]

Tried out the server today. Bit difficult at first with engine realism and no external view or padlock (I dont have track IR so I find looking at enemies from cockpit view without padlock quite difficult). Once I'd sorted out how to take off and nurse the engine a few times I decided to get off the ground.

My wheels come up and my screen goes black, strafed and killed instantly.

Second try I got off, did a half circle and engine shot dead instantly.

Happened a few more times before I got bored.

The pilot distribution was uneven in favour of blue and they just circled the base shooting people taking off, not sure how a new player is supposed to enjoy flying for the reds if all that happens is you get hit on takeoff. I wouldnt mind getting shot down in a dogfight due to being new (like on one of the online maps I playe before) but the channel map on the ATAG server wasnt much fun. Is it always like this?

[Osprey]

Don't misquote me in an effort to insult me Cheesehawk. I said 250ish not 240.
Krupi falls even further short in the 109, why didn't you direct anything to him?

[ATAG_Dutch]

Is it always like this?

Hi Jimmy.

This does sometimes happen if you're unlucky enough to spawn at one of the coastal airfields when the strafers are around.
The best thing to do when this happens is to spawn at a more inland airfield such as Maidstone, head for the coast whilst gaining altitude and go attack the strafers.
Also it helps to get on Teamspeak and team up with any of the Red team guys there, or just listen out for what's being said. You'd also be able to call for help from the other players. The Red team flyers are only too happy to come looking for the strafers as long as they know they're there!

If you let me know your game name, what time zone you're in, and what time you go online, I'd be happy to ask the ATAG guys to look out for you. :)

[Osprey]

Yeah Jimmy, sounds like bad timing. Amazingly, and I don't know why, I am yet to be strafed. I was bounced just after taking off once though which imho is even lower than strafing.

If you are new and want to get to grips with it then comms is the way forward and joining a crew even more so, but that bit is up to you. Of course you'll need a headset.
As for head tracking then look at Freetrack, you can put something together for around £20 and a little labour.

[GraveyardJimmy]

Hi Jimmy.


The best thing to do when this happens is to spawn at a more inland airfield such as Maidstone, head for the coast whilst gaining altitude and go attack the strafers.

Ah right, I'll try that out. I think I've got CEM worked out ok for the hurricane so might see if I can catch anyone if I have some altitude.

[bw_wolverine]

Yeah, I think 250 is a bit low Osprey. I can get around 260-270 if I'm at the right altitude and have the pitch set low enough. I'm claiming this from memory, though, and I'll have to do some tests later to confirm.

260 to 270 seems about right to me though.

[bw_wolverine]

Ah right, I'll try that out. I think I've got CEM worked out ok for the hurricane so might see if I can catch anyone if I have some altitude.

Maidstone is NOT a good airfield for the newer pilots, unfortunately. You have to be very careful not to wreck your prop in the dirt because it's so bumpy and slanted. Your best bet there (if you're new to it) is to take off east to west (downhill).

[GraveyardJimmy]

I tried Lympne as it was hurricanes only and caught it at the start of a mission. Noone strafing, I had time to warm up the engine and gain altitude. Flew over the channel and helped a spit attack some bombers then got engine damage (not sure if it was my management or good rear gunners!) so returned to the airfield lost sight of the runway and lost too much speed in a turn so crashed in a village.

Much better experience than earlier. Must have caught it in a bad state in the mission or something. I think I'll stick to the hurricane for now, trying to get my head around prop-pitch means hearing lots of different things from different people.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Flew over the channel and helped a spit attack some bombers then got engine damage (not sure if it was my management or good rear gunners!) so returned to the airfield lost sight of the runway and lost too much speed in a turn so crashed in a village.

Heh! I was there at the time. I saw you returning as I was catching up to the Ju88. I downed the '88, but we shared the kill. I think you'd gone by then, but thought I'd let you know!

By the way, that DH prop Hurri is a bit of a handful. The Rotol prop Hurri is far easier to manage with constant speed prop. Much better performance too. ;)

[Osprey]

Looks like I need CEM courses, I'm sure Cheesehawk will offer a good price :rolleyes:


TBH I don't ever really need to hammer the engine, I don't often get shot at either yet I still get plenty of Hun. It sort of reminds me of when people say how good John Terry is in defence because he makes such outstanding last ditch tackles but I've always considered him a carthorse who makes mistakes and ends up having to make last ditch tackles.

[JG52Krupi]

Yeah, I think 250 is a bit low Osprey. I can get around 260-270 if I'm at the right altitude and have the pitch set low enough. I'm claiming this from memory, though, and I'll have to do some tests later to confirm.

260 to 270 seems about right to me though.

Agreed was just chasing a 109 across the channel at 270 and caught him up before we hit the coast :D

[klem]

I tried Lympne as it was hurricanes only and caught it at the start of a mission. Noone strafing, I had time to warm up the engine and gain altitude. Flew over the channel and helped a spit attack some bombers then got engine damage (not sure if it was my management or good rear gunners!) so returned to the airfield lost sight of the runway and lost too much speed in a turn so crashed in a village.

Much better experience than earlier. Must have caught it in a bad state in the mission or something. I think I'll stick to the hurricane for now, trying to get my head around prop-pitch means hearing lots of different things from different people.

Rotol Hurricane (don't bother with DH prop it isn't modelled properly)
General guide (my 2p):-
After takeoff reduce to 2600rpm or less, boost 3-4lbs continuous.
You can fly on max boost for a while at 2600 (historically 30 mins max but I wouldn't risk it that long in CoD). Watch the temps (max 95 oil, 120 Rad)

Overheating Oil? Reduce to 2200 rpm and cut back to 4lbs or less - soon cools down*.

Combat: Have cool engine (about 80 oil, <100 rad) when entering combat. See above*.
Combat 2600/max boost - combats don't usually last long enough to damage engine - and max rpm/max boost when necesary but 5 mins max (watch temps). Also don't forget Boost Overide for the extra bit of power but not for more than about 5 mins. Cut back on boost/override whenever possible.

Continuous max boost or Boost Override can also fail the engine without temperature warning.

[GraveyardJimmy]

Thanks! Just to clarify- I move the prop pitch lever rather than the throttle to adjust rpm?

Mixture should remain the same generally?

Edit: Just went up for a flight (cross country quick mission), that worked great, thanks! The other hurricane is a bit easier to keep the RPM at a nice level and the engine shakes a lot less (only on start up now, rather than in flight).

With this hurricane, mixture is full back = rich? When would I use it pushed forwards, other than a little bit at takeoff- at high altitudes where air is thinner so less fuel is needed?

[Robo.]

Rotol Hurricane (don't bother with DH prop it isn't modelled properly)

Hi klem, what do you (except reverse mixture lever axis) consider as a problem with the DH? In my opinion it's not too bad and the RPMs are as expected - once in the air mind you :D

General guide (my 2p):-
After takeoff reduce to 2600rpm or less, boost 3-4lbs continuous.
You can fly on max boost for a while at 2600 (historically 30 mins max but I wouldn't risk it that long in CoD). Watch the temps (max 95 oil, 120 Rad

All great but wasn't the 30' climb limit at 2850rpm @ +6.25PSI? This works both in RL and in game. Great guide btw.

[TomcatViP]

If you set the boost cut-off on it will cool your engine.

Try to use it only when you are on the defensive. It's kinda a cheat.

I expect this to be corrected in the same time they re-installed the more stringent 109's EM rules.

280 is what you shld get with a hurri. Start with a shallow dive and coarse the pitch at 12hr (needle full vertical). Retract your rad to 1/4 to 1/3

With a bit of descent rate you shld get 290 easily. Th's a lot deck even if the 109 will still catch you, you'd get time to think how you can manage the unavoidable fight.

The few time I hve tried the Spit I online I did not have any prob keeping a 109 in gun range. But it might hve changed with patches. I am not the best to make a comment here ;)

[Robo.]

If you set the boost cut-off on it will cool your engine.

Try to use it only when you are on the defensive. It's kinda a cheat.

In my experience it's quite the opposite - more heat and more strain with the BCC-O (even though the MFP gain is tiny atm). Can anyone confirm?

[klem]

Thanks! Just to clarify- I move the prop pitch lever rather than the throttle to adjust rpm?

Mixture should remain the same generally?

Edit: Just went up for a flight (cross country quick mission), that worked great, thanks! The other hurricane is a bit easier to keep the RPM at a nice level and the engine shakes a lot less (only on start up now, rather than in flight).

With this hurricane, mixture is full back = rich? When would I use it pushed forwards, other than a little bit at takeoff- at high altitudes where air is thinner so less fuel is needed?

Yes you move the Prop lever to control the prop rpm but at low boost it will fall away anyway.

Leave Mixture on Rich (lever back). It could be leaned (lever forward) for economic cruising wih restrictions on boost/rpm but lets face it, you're not going to be doing that unless you enter into a 2.5 hour patrol scenario :) By the way if you fly the Spitfire as modelled at the moment the lever is the wrong way round - forward is rich. Should be fixed sometime.

You can play with the mixture, leaning it gradually until the yellow exhaust flame just turns blue but then you are on the edge for those particular circumstances (boost etc) so I don't bother. We're never up long enough to run out of fuel and we can keep the engines reasonably cool by boost and rpm. Focus more on basic tactics like being above the bandit rather than below him and get out before you lose the advantage - ahem.... do as I say not as I do! :)

I'm only trying to give an operating guide, I'm not trying to give you the perfect setup for various conditions. You could research those in the Pilots Notes and see if the modelling is perfect or not but frankly those are test scenarios. Some guys worry about things like "the flight model delivers 8mph below the XXXXX test data". Well, all a/c were different anyway with no guarantee of returning that test performance and its unlikley you'll be in a perfect "test" situation when you spot that bandit. And as a newbie to the Squadron do you think they'll give you the factory fresh aeroplane? No, the boss gets that one, yours is the one with the near-expired engine :)

[TomcatViP]

And as a newbie to the Squadron do you think they'll give you the factory fresh aeroplane? No, the boss gets that one, yours is the one with the near-expired engine :)

in fact on many occasion that was just the opposite.

[Osprey]

@cheese, I use lower RPM than most, usually plodding about on 2000. It's all tactical anyway, just plain don't need that top speed because I catch Hun in the right place. If you are going flat out they've already seen you.

[klem]

Hi klem, what do you (except reverse mixture lever axis) consider as a problem with the DH? In my opinion it's not too bad and the RPMs are as expected - once in the air mind you

The control movement for the two-pitch prop went through a mid-stage where the pitch moved (not flipped) from one setting to the other and with slow and careful movement you could actually select a rpm between the two extremes. It would of course alter with changes in power and airspeed so the pilot had to be the rpm 'governor' and adjust it but you could hold a general rpm setting that way. The result was that the general performance of the aircraft, managed that way, was almost as good as the Rotol version but it took some management. I suspect in combat it was shoved to fully fine and left there. Apparently (I've lost the link) it became an officially recommeded method of managing the aircraft for better performance. Unfortunately in CoD it flips between the two. The A2A simulations spitfire models it correctly.

In my experience it's quite the opposite - more heat and more strain with the BCC-O (even though the MFP gain is tiny atm). Can anyone confirm?

I see very little change in the boost with the cutout plug pulled and that is only when I give the prop and/or throttle a little twitch which seems to "wake it up" but that could be my imagination. I do seem to be able to overtake my buddies when its pulled unless our e-states were different so I'm really not sure if its doing anything. There was a long thread about just that point but it didn't come to any amicable conclusion.

I have had engine faiure with the plug pulled for a long time (was it 10 mins + ??) with no overtemp indications.

Actually I'm a bit mystified because we can get the full +6.25lbs on full throttle without the boost override. In the MkI pilot's notes that's the max for take-off, 6.25lbs @ 3000rpm (3 mins max), max climbing +6.25lbs @ 2600 rpm (30mins max), emergency +6.25lbs@ 3000 rpm (5 mins max) max cruising +4.5lbs @ 2600rpm. (The 100 octane combat rating was +12lbs but lets stay on track with 87 octane.)

I wouldnt trust those climbing figures in CoD, I'm sure I've wrecked my engine in less than 30 minutes.

Now this report on the Merlin III
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/merlin3-rating.jpg
seems to relate to the 87 octane performance because it has above take-off, climb and cruise figures but there is also a combat power rating of +12lbs. Is this what should be available with the plug pulled? I have found no other sources to indicate this is so but why would it be listed there?

Other bits and pieces suggest an uncontrolled Merlin would overboost to +17lbs and that the 100 octane engine modification was made specifically to keep the MP down to +12lbs so that obviously wasn't occurring on the 87 octane engine which had to be modified for it. In fact I have found nothing to suggest the plug needs to be pulled to get +6.25lbs, no mention of a 'normal' full throttle MP versus plug pulled MP, nor any mention of the plugs use in combat for 87 octane.

The only thing left for me to do is re-read the pilots notes for Section 1 and restudy the cockpit diagrams when I next get back to the library (I noted the above figures from Section 2).

[klem]

Originally Posted by klem :
And as a newbie to the Squadron do you think they'll give you the factory fresh aeroplane? No, the boss gets that one, yours is the one with the near-expired engine

in fact on many occasion that was just the opposite.


Just kidding him, the point is that we all hang our hats on the perfect 'test performance' aircraft but in RL there were variations between aircraft depending on hours flown, past damage etc.

[JG52Krupi]

Just kidding him, the point is that we all hang our hats on the perfect 'test performance' aircraft but in RL there were variations between aircraft depending on hours flown, past damage etc.

+1 over than speed I stay away from the FM talk, there are just too many variables and "experts" to ever make me want to openly discuss them.

The way I see it is regardless of what you fly its down to who sees who first.

Just wish I could follow my own advice and not plough head long into a fight regardless of who has the advantage :|

[jimbop]

Just wish I could follow my own advice and not plough head long into a fight regardless of who has the advantage :|

Lol, exactly my problem, too. Optimism always triumphs over common sense!

[MoGas]

In my experience it's quite the opposite - more heat and more strain with the BCC-O (even though the MFP gain is tiny atm). Can anyone confirm?

No, I dont have seen seen that ones, if I use Boost Cut Out, she gets more temp.

[Robo.]

The control movement for the two-pitch prop went through a mid-stage where the pitch moved (not flipped) from one setting to the other and with slow and careful movement you could actually select a rpm between the two extremes. It would of course alter with changes in power and airspeed so the pilot had to be the rpm 'governor' and adjust it but you could hold a general rpm setting that way. The result was that the general performance of the aircraft, managed that way, was almost as good as the Rotol version but it took some management. I suspect in combat it was shoved to fully fine and left there. Apparently (I've lost the link) it became an officially recommeded method of managing the aircraft for better performance. Unfortunately in CoD it flips between the two. The A2A simulations spitfire models it correctly.

Hi klem, I am perfectly aware of the propeller developement for early Merlin engines (and happy a2a flyer ;) ), but I believe this was only the case with our Spitfire, not the Hurricane. Although sharing the same engine (Merlin III), the Spitfire Mk.I featuring DH propeller had this 'bicycle pump' prop pitch lever that made finding the RPM sweet spots between full coarse and full fine possible. The Hurricane Mk.I though had slightly different PP controls (lever instead of pump) and it seems the trick was not possible to fiddle with it. At least there is no evidence whatsoever that Hurri could go semi-CSP with a DH airscrew.

That's why I tend to believe that DH props as such are modelled OK for both Spit and Hurri - if you remember, Spit used to be wrong prior to the last patch, they fixed that because we reported this issue and backed it up with evidence (merlin in perspective, Spit Mk.I manuals etc.)

I see very little change in the boost with the cutout plug pulled and that is only when I give the prop and/or throttle a little twitch which seems to "wake it up" but that could be my imagination. I do seem to be able to overtake my buddies when its pulled unless our e-states were different so I'm really not sure if its doing anything. There was a long thread about just that point but it didn't come to any amicable conclusion.

At this moment, the gain is only 0.02lbs. That is as per data someone pulled out of FM files apparently. It helps a little bit but you will overheat and you can blow your engine quicker than you say 'messerschmitt'.

I have had engine faiure with the plug pulled for a long time (was it 10 mins + ??) with no overtemp indications.

Confirmed, same here

Actually I'm a bit mystified because we can get the full +6.25lbs on full throttle without the boost override. In the MkI pilot's notes that's the max for take-off, 6.25lbs @ 3000rpm (3 mins max), max climbing +6.25lbs @ 2600 rpm (30mins max), emergency +6.25lbs@ 3000 rpm (5 mins max) max cruising +4.5lbs @ 2600rpm. (The 100 octane combat rating was +12lbs but lets stay on track with 87 octane.)

Normal full throttle MP was +6.25lbs (that's correct), plug pulled MP was +12lbs - only possible with 100 octane fuel.

The 2600rpm figure is probably on the conservative side even for RL, you can do 2850 with Rotol Hurricane in game with no problem and Merlin could take that in RL, too when necessary.

Full rating for Merlin III with 87 octanes was indeed lower e.g. 4lbs @ 2600rpm for climb ('30) vs. 6.25lbs @ 2600rpm for 100 octane powered one. The 6.25lbs @ 2600rpm combination is mentioned in some sources but that was the early non-CSP variant I suppose as 2600rpm is what you get with DH prop set at fine pitch at optimal climbing speed (called High power climb in manual). The only difference between 87 and 100 octane variants would be Boost, not RPM, obviously

With 100 octanes and BCC-O on, your Merlin III could do 12lbs @3000rpm.

I wouldnt trust those climbing figures in CoD, I'm sure I've wrecked my engine in less than 30 minutes.

They're fairly realistic and more forgiving from my experience, Hurricane Rotol:

Every machine I get is slightly different regarding overheating characteristics. I would say that the Hurricane is the only machine with some kind of FM variety modelled.

Take off at full power - 6.25lbs and 3000rpm
climb at 6.25 and 2850rpm, rad fully open, watching temps
cruise as desired, usually 4lbs @ fairly low rpm (depending on altitude and water temp)

I never wrecked my engine at 2600rpm full MFP climb (rad open in climb mind you), not even at 2850rpm! I usually climb at 2700-2800rpm

Now this report on the Merlin III
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/merlin3-rating.jpg
seems to relate to the 87 octane performance because it has above take-off, climb and cruise figures but there is also a combat power rating of +12lbs. Is this what should be available with the plug pulled? I have found no other sources to indicate this is so but why would it be listed there?

+12lbs boost was not available at all (impossible) with 87 octane fuel. That chart is almost certain about 100 octane (it's a later version obviously)
Merlin XII was rated at 9lbs @ 2850rpm for climb, just for comparsion.

Other bits and pieces suggest an uncontrolled Merlin would overboost to +17lbs and that the 100 octane engine modification was made specifically to keep the MP down to +12lbs so that obviously wasn't occurring on the 87 octane engine which had to be modified for it. In fact I have found nothing to suggest the plug needs to be pulled to get +6.25lbs, no mention of a 'normal' full throttle MP versus plug pulled MP, nor any mention of the plugs use in combat for 87 octane.

The plug was there from the day one, but it's function was not WEP (that came in later) but simply what it said - overriding the boost control in case of a failure of the BC. No modification was needed for 100 octane fuel as such afik, the holes drilled were simply to use the existing BCC-O system as emergency power later on. What they did was look we can bypass that thing but we need to limit it to 12lbs because that's about as much as this Merlin can take. So they did. The limit was still 12lbs for either 6.25lbs rated Merlin III or for 9lbs rated Merlin XII (Mk.II Spit).

As you say, no plug needs to be pulled to get the 6.25lbs from Merlin III as that was it's nominal rating.

Normal full throttle MP was 6.25lbs, plug pulled MP was 12lbs - only possible with 100 octane fuel, hope that made sense.

[TomcatViP]

12lb 12lb 12lb... Damn get this out of your mind. Looks like an illness with so much reference.

There is no 12lb until very late in 1940 if ever. The 9lb MkXII shld suffice as an evidence.

Regarding the cruise, Rob I think you are cruising too fast.

At 0 (zero) boost I hve got around 200mph as cruise speed btw 15kft to 20kft and a very cooled engine that let me fight with half rad for nearly all the time full pow is needed in a dogfight.

Usually the 12hour needles is a good ref for WWII fighters both in boost and rpm. But I use 2400 rpm in general

[Robo.]

12lb 12lb 12lb... Damn get this out of your mind. Looks like an illness with so much reference.

There is no 12lb until very late in 1940 if ever. The 9lb MkXII shld suffice as an evidence.

You're wrong I am afraid. The early Merlins are well documented and no matter how you look at it, the 12lbs Boost is reality of BoB era. Is there any evidence stating otherwise?

9lbs. Merlin XII was due to improvements over Merlin III + different glykol - hence the +9PSI rating. They both could go 12lbs btw.

Regarding the cruise, Rob I think you are cruising too fast.

Matter of opinion or preference I guess, I only mentioned cruise as reference and I state 'as appropriate'. I like higher boosts and moderate RPM - that's 'crusing' in a combat zone called ATAG mind you ;)

[TomcatViP]

You're wrong I am afraid. The early Merlins are well documented and no matter how you look at it, the 12lbs Boost is reality of BoB era. Is there any evidence stating otherwise?

9lbs. Merlin XII was due to improvements over Merlin III + different glykol - hence the +9PSI rating. They both could go 12lbs btw.



Matter of opinion or preference I guess, I only mentioned cruise as reference and I state 'as appropriate'. I like higher boosts and moderate RPM - that's 'crusing' in a combat zone called ATAG mind you ;)

Disagree with you Rob, sry.

I still hve not seen any strong EVIDENCE for the much publicized 100oct and 12lb.
The fact that those guys are pushing the SPit frwrd on that case is also dubious when you think of the Hurri "Big Wings" lobbying that was predominant in the 1940 RAF (just re-read Badder). It does not makes sense to tune up your best competing fighter when you hve 2/3 of your fighter force that struggle everyday and bombers that hve difficulties taking of with war wary equipment field-fitted.

Frankly it looks like more of a Gamer Fantasy.

Regarding the cruise, don't forget that the best manoeuvring speed of teh Hurri is also ard 200mph and not 240 ;)

Regarding the boost value for the Spit as it was unvailed breaking the code, just don't forget that the in-game spit hve nearly no drag. Giving her a boost similar to the hurri could hve made her even hair raising than she is for now

[Robo.]

Disagree with you Rob, sry.

I still hve not seen any strong EVIDENCE for the much publicized 100oct and 12lb.

http://img1.wantitall.co.za/images/ShowImage.aspx?ImageId=Merlin-in-Perspective-The-Combat-Years-Historical%7C510WOuHB2DL.jpg

No problem, I respect your opinion. There is lots of evidence, both technical (see the above book for example, very comprehensive) and historical (pilot memoirs even from BoF era). I am blue pilot mind you. ;)

Regarding the cruise, don't forget that the best manoeuvring speed of teh Hurri is also ard 200mph and not 240 ;)

I can still slow down when I want.. but I cruise to kill :mrgreen: (BnZ mostly that is).

[Osprey]

Robo, I'm not sure how familiar you are with Blackadder II, if you aren't then I recommend a download. This is the 12lbs argument in a nutshell.....;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NMOllP3eN4

@klem, for 2600 & 6.25lbs, you can go forever like that without overheat with an open rad for as long as you like from my experience.

[TomcatViP]

If you are trying to make a conclusive end with some typical British humor, now I understand why you can't share an agreements with many here !

Sry typical French irony ;)

[Osprey]

You mean you don't get it?

[JG52Krupi]

You mean you don't get it?

:lol:

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/7960/43536975.gif

Don't annoying the Frenchy Osprey ;)

[MoGas]

Isn`t not even "100 octan" painted on the ClOD Spitfire skin, on the nose lol....?

:)

[TomcatViP]

You mean you don't get it?

Don't say me you do :cool:

[TheGrunch]

I still hve not seen any strong EVIDENCE for the much publicized 100oct and 12lb.

Frankly it looks like more of a Gamer Fantasy.
If you had made even the most cursory effort to do so, maybe you would have. Even just in the combat reports from Mike Williams' site (www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org) you can see evidence for use of the +12lb boost in squadrons operating from the following locations:

RAF North Weald (11 Group) in February
RAF Drem (13 Group) in February
RAF Rochford (11 Group) in March
RAF Digby (12 Group) in March
RAF Hawkinge (11 Group) in May
RAF Hornchurch (11 Group) in May
RAF Tangmere (11 Group) in May
RAF Duxford (12 Group) in May
RAF Gravesend (11 Group) in June
RAF Catterick (12 Group) in June
RAF Biggin Hill (11 Group) in July
RAF Kenley (11 Group) in August
RAF Northolt (11 Group) in August
RAF Westhampnett (11 Group) in August
RAF Middle Wallop (10 Group) in August
RAF Leconfield (12 Group) in August
RAF Croydon (11 Group) in September
RAF Warmwell (10 Group) in September

If you have reservations about Mike Williams' site, you can confirm this at www.oldrafrecords.com, where there are even more. It only took me around 30 minutes to compile that list a few months ago, and I didn't even bother to go through that many on the Old RAF Records site. It's a bit silly how people just denounce these things without making even a token effort to look.

[Osprey]

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

[ATAG_Snapper]

:lol:

http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/7960/43536975.gif

Don't annoying the Frenchy Osprey ;)

Well.....I've been watching this for 45 minutes; you'd think the stupid dog would catch on.......

[xnomad]

Well on a completely different note I've discovered why my Hurri keeps cutting out after a while (I've been flying the Hurri after recommendations on this thread).

It turns out I've had the bloody thing running off the reserve tank. :grin:
That's cost me my life twice now on ATAG, I couldn't figure out why the engine would cut out when I had so much fuel still. Hahaha:rolleyes:

[xnomad]

Aaaaaaarrrrrgghhh

You've just kill me hundreds of time.

Tht's why I hate so much the stupid FM IL2 had on some plane (not talking abt old CFS). Painful to see that way how disastrous a complaisant FM can have on the sim community (and RL pilot ?).

Pls don't take me wrong there is nothing personal. You hve all the right to be wrong (as I do take mine from time to time ;) )

No, the height you loss in a dive is not to be exceeded after with a zoom climb. You can't climb by alternating dive and zoom. Tht's Il2 world only.

If you want to fast climb, first use your kin E by putting your nose over the horizon using your cte climb incidence as a reference. Your plane will coast rise using the energy due to the speed and then climb at the best ratio possible once your vector speed has fall down to best climb speed.

Zooming (like going full vertical) does not accelerate your time to alt. It simply
reduce the time for distance separation with an opponent that hve less E. But you hve to know that the maximum alt you will gain with a given state of E is in fact much less than using the above technique.

~S

Yep I agree, I have no idea why I wrote that or what I was thinking.

[Blakduk]

Robo, I'm not sure how familiar you are with Blackadder II, if you aren't then I recommend a download. This is the 12lbs argument in a nutshell.....;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NMOllP3eN4

@klem, for 2600 & 6.25lbs, you can go forever like that without overheat with an open rad for as long as you like from my experience.
Osprey- You've outdone me sunshine!
I quoted the dialogue in that scene in another thread about this same topic- you've managed to imbed a link to the actual footage. I tip my hat ;-)

[bw_wolverine]

I was on ATAG around 1:30am est on tonight (this morning) and I could have SWORN I saw a clip wing spitfire take off from Hawkinge and fly about. Seriously! Clipped wings! What the hell?

I have previously not taken much stock in all the clammoring about cheats and hacks etc. This is the first time I've actually seriously considered the possibility that people are really doing this stuff rather than people just thinking that they are.

Has anyone else seen this!?

[klem]

I was on ATAG around 1:30am est on tonight (this morning) and I could have SWORN I saw a clip wing spitfire take off from Hawkinge and fly about. Seriously! Clipped wings! What the hell?

I have previously not taken much stock in all the clammoring about cheats and hacks etc. This is the first time I've actually seriously considered the possibility that people are really doing this stuff rather than people just thinking that they are.

Has anyone else seen this!?

No, but I did see a pink elephant one night (what are you drinking?!!)

I thought there was an anti-cheat thingy running. No?

[xnomad]

I was on ATAG around 1:30am est on tonight (this morning) and I could have SWORN I saw a clip wing spitfire take off from Hawkinge and fly about. Seriously! Clipped wings! What the hell?

I have previously not taken much stock in all the clammoring about cheats and hacks etc. This is the first time I've actually seriously considered the possibility that people are really doing this stuff rather than people just thinking that they are.

Has anyone else seen this!?

I've noticed that red now spawn in hangars now. Maybe the guy clipped his wings getting out of the hangar? :grin: I've knocked the tips off my own spit a couple of times and it looks like a clipped wing.

[jimbop]

Also remember that there are graphics anomalies in the game. You often see 109s flying around with wheels down (that are actually up) - maybe this extends to clipped wings? Don't know...

[Basha]

I can confirm you can can clip your wing exiting the hanger (the narrow door one) and fly, i didnt notice until i was airbourne tho...to do both wings it must have been a lady driver !

[SEE]

Agree, you can sever the edge of the wing by contact with another object (e.g, poor take-off). You can still fly but have to compensate with ailerons - it does affect the ac though wether enough I don't know. Do both, and yes, you have a clipped wing Spitty..............:grin:

[335th_GRAthos]

I've knocked the tips off my own spit a couple of times and it looks like a clipped wing.

LOL, the best "home-made" MOD ! :D


~S~

[klem]

ggrrrrr, typed this all out once and then hit some keyboard combo that closed the tab :(

Anyway thanks for the reply.

Hi klem, I am perfectly aware of the propeller developement for early Merlin engines (and happy a2a flyer ;) ), but I believe this was only the case with our Spitfire, not the Hurricane. Although sharing the same engine (Merlin III), the Spitfire Mk.I featuring DH propeller had this 'bicycle pump' prop pitch lever that made finding the RPM sweet spots between full coarse and full fine possible. The Hurricane Mk.I though had slightly different PP controls (lever instead of pump) and it seems the trick was not possible to fiddle with it. At least there is no evidence whatsoever that Hurri could go semi-CSP with a DH airscrew.


I must admit that I assumed the Hurricane lever would allow pitch tuning as I expected the lever to be easier to use than the plunger. I searched the web a loooong time and cannot found mention of it's use in the Hurricane :(
Anyway my advice to Graveyard Jimmy remains the same, ignore the DH5-20 until you're used to the Rotol then maybe try the more awkward DH5-20.

btw, my Spitfire info came from:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html
"The Spitfire I Pilots Notes (A.P.1565A) states:
Airscrew control.- This aeroplane may be fitted with one of the following airscrew controls: (a) de Havilland two position (b) de Havilland constant speed, or (c) Rotol (35°) constant speed. If constant speed control is fitted the r.p.m. can be adjusted to remain as desired, but within the limits allowed by the airscrew pitch range. If the two position control is fitted on this aeroplane it can also be operated to give various airscrew pitch settings between fine and coarse; this is obtained by slowly moving the control between its range of movement until the desired r.p.m. are obtained. For example, if a full power climb is required, instead of pushing the control into fully coarse pitch as the r.p.m. rise after taking-off, the control should be moved slowly forward until the r.p.m. drop to the maximum permissible for climb (2,600) and then pulled slightly back; this will leave the airscrew pitch at the position which gives these r.p.m. until power begins to drop off with altitude. As the power drops off the r.p.m. can be maintained by again fining the airscrew pitch as required. This in effect will give a similar improvement in performance to that obtained by means of a constant speed airscrew. The operation of varying the airscrew pitch in this manner to suit different conditions of flight will be found quite simple after a little experiment."


That's why I tend to believe that DH props as such are modelled OK for both Spit and Hurri - if you remember, Spit used to be wrong prior to the last patch, they fixed that because we reported this issue and backed it up with evidence (merlin in perspective, Spit Mk.I manuals etc.)

The last patch put the Rotol onto the Spifire MkIa, it's not the DH5-20 anymore. The MkI is and is definitely wrong because it 'flips' pitch settings.



At this moment, the gain is only 0.02lbs. That is as per data someone pulled out of FM files apparently. It helps a little bit but you will overheat and you can blow your engine quicker than you say 'messerschmitt'.
........
The plug was there from the day one, but it's function was not WEP (that came in later) but simply what it said - overriding the boost control in case of a failure of the BC. No modification was needed for 100 octane fuel as such afik, the holes drilled were simply to use the existing BCC-O system as emergency power later on. What they did was look we can bypass that thing but we need to limit it to 12lbs because that's about as much as this Merlin can take. So they did. The limit was still 12lbs for either 6.25lbs rated Merlin III or for 9lbs rated Merlin XII (Mk.II Spit).

As you say, no plug needs to be pulled to get the 6.25lbs from Merlin III as that was it's nominal rating.
Normal full throttle MP was 6.25lbs, plug pulled MP was 12lbs - only possible with 100 octane fuel, hope that made sense

Agreed.


Normal full throttle MP was +6.25lbs (that's correct), plug pulled MP was +12lbs - only possible with 100 octane fuel.

The 2600rpm figure is probably on the conservative side even for RL, you can do 2850 with Rotol Hurricane in game with no problem and Merlin could take that in RL, too when necessary.

Full rating for Merlin III with 87 octanes was indeed lower e.g. 4lbs @ 2600rpm for climb ('30) vs. 6.25lbs @ 2600rpm for 100 octane powered one. The 6.25lbs @ 2600rpm combination is mentioned in some sources but that was the early non-CSP variant I suppose as 2600rpm is what you get with DH prop set at fine pitch at optimal climbing speed (called High power climb in manual). The only difference between 87 and 100 octane variants would be Boost, not RPM, obviously

With 100 octanes and BCC-O on, your Merlin III could do 12lbs @3000rpm.

They're fairly realistic and more forgiving from my experience

Hmmm..... not sure on one point. Pilots Notes state +6.25lbs/2600rpm for max climb. 2850 was a combat concession. Admittedly it seems to be written for the Rotol prop as there are a variety of rpms quoted for cruising but I don't know if the boost would have been lower for the DH5-20 in fine pitch (30.25') versus the Rotol (23'). Also, I believe it was still normally +6.25lbs climb for 100 octane on the Merlin III. The 100 octane concessions are stated separately (+12lbs max combat boost and weak mixture running rpm/boosts)



Hurricane Rotol:
Every machine I get is slightly different regarding overheating characteristics. I would say that the Hurricane is the only machine with some kind of FM variety modelled.

Yes we've noticed that. I am wondering if its to do with the early running engine management ("keep cool, stay cool?"). Could they be modelling engine wear? Airspeed also has a lot to do with it, faster=cooler. But it does 'feel' inconsistent.


Take off at full power - 6.25lbs and 3000rpm
climb at 6.25 and 2850rpm, rad fully open, watching temps
cruise as desired, usually 4lbs @ fairly low rpm (depending on altitude and water temp)

I never wrecked my engine at 2600rpm full MFP climb (rad open in climb mind you), not even at 2850rpm! I usually climb at 2700-2800rpm

That's combat concession you're using for climb. Hope you're reporting it to the groundcrew :) We have often screwed our engines at 2600rpm at max boost in the climb but we would have been pretty slow. +4lbs seems to be on the edge and +3lbs is fine. I think that heating model needs a little bit of tweaking. Can certainly cool it fast by dropping to 2200rpm.

[Quote]
+12lbs boost was not available at all (impossible) with 87 octane fuel. That chart is almost certain about 100 octane (it's a later version obviously)
Merlin XII was rated at 9lbs @ 2850rpm for climb, just for comparsion.
[/Quote[
Agreed, that's probably the answer.

[ATAG_Septic]

Snapper, I laughed on my arse rolling the floor off, or whatever they say :)

[JG52Krupi]

Hmm can't connect, anyone else keep getting a time out?

EDIT:

Had to direct connect :O

[JG53_Valantine]

I have to say - thanks very much ATAG chaps!

A bunch of us from II./JG53 just had a smashing time on the Axis vs Allies server! Managed to take down a formation of Blenheims and their fighter escort before catching up with some Italians and escorting them for a raid on the Kent coast, taking down a bunch of interceptors south of Folkestone before running off back to base for a well deserved Schnapps or two!

Our only losses were launcher crashes on the user's end so a great job ATAG - and thanks for all the fun!
V

[jimbop]

Very interesting earlier today on ATAG with a few chaps escorting a Blenheim to M2. Another fighter commented about the four planes in formation as he joined the escort. "Four? There are only three of us!" Sure enough, a 109 was closing on the group but was instantly foiled after this. Exactly what TS should bring to the experience - great stuff!

[ATAG_Snapper]

Snapper, I laughed on my arse rolling the floor off, or whatever they say :)

:mrgreen:

[JG52Uther]

Does 'skins on' cause too many problems on the server? There are a lot of great skins around now, and its a shame we can't use them. Flying around in a yellow nose 109 I feel like I have a flashing neon 'shoot here' sign! ;)

[klem]

Does 'skins on' cause too many problems on the server? There are a lot of great skins around now, and its a shame we can't use them. Flying around in a yellow nose 109 I feel like I have a flashing neon 'shoot here' sign! ;)

Unless things have changed, there's a strong feeling that it causes stutters/lag. One additional problem is that the stock skins get overlooked of skin dowlnload is off and you always get the yellow nose. Devs know.

I suppose one way to be sure is to run a special session with skins on and see what happens but for now I'd prefer them to be off.

[jimbop]

Flying around in a yellow nose 109 I feel like I have a flashing neon 'shoot here' sign! ;)

Damn right you do - that yellow nose is hugely helpful!

[Bewolf]

Does 'skins on' cause too many problems on the server? There are a lot of great skins around now, and its a shame we can't use them. Flying around in a yellow nose 109 I feel like I have a flashing neon 'shoot here' sign! ;)

Completly wrong attitude, it should more be like "Here, see me and and be afraid, be very afraid." :D

[JG52Uther]

Completly wrong attitude, it should more be like "Here, see me and and be afraid, be very afraid." :D

I don't think they are too scared when they see me bumbling around the sky...

[ATAG_Bliss]

Does 'skins on' cause too many problems on the server? There are a lot of great skins around now, and its a shame we can't use them. Flying around in a yellow nose 109 I feel like I have a flashing neon 'shoot here' sign! ;)

Lets just say this. With skins on you're frozen in mid air (feels like you're about to launcher crash) more than you're actually unfrozen. It's a mess. Granted it all depends on how many players are on the server, etc.. But imagine if every single player spawn caused a 1-3 second stutter on your end? Multiply that by how many players and how many spawns in a minute and you'll see just how bad it is.

We tried turning them back on a few weeks after the latest patch came out, and I'd almost forgotten just how bad it is with them turned on. Trust me, I can't wait till we can use all those skins as well.

[bw_wolverine]

Does 'skins on' cause too many problems on the server? There are a lot of great skins around now, and its a shame we can't use them. Flying around in a yellow nose 109 I feel like I have a flashing neon 'shoot here' sign! ;)

It's just as easy for you. All you have to do is NOT see a yellow nose. There's no advantage.

[JG52Krupi]

It's just as easy for you. All you have to do is NOT see a yellow nose. There's no advantage.

I don't know about that, I fly both sides and find it much easier to spot the blues due to the yellow nose!

I understand what your saying but just from my experience I find it easier... when flying blue you have to worry about what the target is... spit, hurri, or a bomber.... for red its.. speck of yellow and you instantly know its a 109.

[Osprey]

Does 'skins on' cause too many problems on the server? There are a lot of great skins around now, and its a shame we can't use them. Flying around in a yellow nose 109 I feel like I have a flashing neon 'shoot here' sign! ;)

What about historical correctness?

[JG52Uther]

What about it? What we are doing now online is hardly historic anyway.
Not every 109 squadron had yellow noses in 1940. If there is a way of having skins without causing problems then it would be great to see them online. Apparently it is not currently possible.
I can only hope that one day the devs will go down the 'skinpack' route that 777 uses.

[ATAG_Bliss]

I hope they don't go down the ROF path. One of the greatest things about the IL2 series is all the options that we have to control virtually everything (like view distance etc.) I wouldn't want anyone other than the server provider allowing what skins are deemed usable or not. But the biggest thing with ROF skins are only 5 of em can be viewed at once. That means when you have 5 drawn planes in your FOV (meaning the LOD is big enough to actually draw the plane) the 6th plane or any thereafter starts flickering like crazy as only the closest 5 planes will have custom skins. So basically as you turn your head to scan a sky full of cons or as planes get further away (saying a plane that has it's skin drawn moves away so another plane is closer) that skin jumps to a default skin while the closer plane jumps to having a custom skin. It just ruins it for me.

So just imagine getting a big formation of bombers up (say 20 of em) and as you looked around skins would be popping on/off all the time. That sort of thing kinda kills the atmosphere to me. But I have faith that the skin issue, like many others, will be implemented/fixed in all due time anyhow.

[bw_wolverine]

I don't know about that, I fly both sides and find it much easier to spot the blues due to the yellow nose!

I understand what your saying but just from my experience I find it easier... when flying blue you have to worry about what the target is... spit, hurri, or a bomber.... for red its.. speck of yellow and you instantly know its a 109.

If you think that's hard, try telling the difference between an E1 and an E4 from distance. :P

From my experience if you're close enough to see the yellow, you're close enough to know it's a fighter (109, spit, or hurri). Besides, unless you're at very high altitude or out over the sea, usually flak is a better identifier of enemy planes than direct visual. It's the exception to the rule that I spot an enemy plane as a spec and then catch the yellow nose without any other info to help out.

I would like to see skins back at some point though, when it's possible. I will say that I'm quite happy to not be seeing purple and yellow spitfires and red, white, and blue 109s flying around however.

[w1nd6urfa]

Most annoying right now are the ghost formations that keep appearing and disappearing mid-sky

[JG52Uther]

Most annoying right now are the ghost formations that keep appearing and disappearing mid-sky

Is that still a problem? Can't say I have noticed it lately.

[jimbop]

Is that still a problem? Can't say I have noticed it lately.

Definitely is still a problem. I saw six ghosts in my last session earlier today. Strange, though, since sometimes I see none at all whilst other times I get many.

[Insuber]

Thank you again ATAG for your server! I fly quite seldom now, since I'm quite fed up of the situation, but last Sunday I flew an hour, exceptionally on the Red side, and I had a good fun in a Hurri, punishing the arrogant 109s and 110s that were raiding our airfield ...

Cheers!

[Robo.]

ggrrrrr, typed this all out once and then hit some keyboard combo that closed the tab :(

Anyway thanks for the reply.

Hey klem, I know what you mean, real pita to lose all the text, is it. I almost lost this thread (we're fairly OT I must admit), sorry about the late reply mate.

Good conversation though, I really enjoy this and it's always interesting to read other's guys insights and share the knowledge so to speak. ;)

The last patch put the Rotol onto the Spifire MkIa, it's not the DH5-20 anymore. The MkI is and is definitely wrong because it 'flips' pitch settings.

Ah I see.

Hmmm..... not sure on one point. Pilots Notes state +6.25lbs/2600rpm for max climb. 2850 was a combat concession. Admittedly it seems to be written for the Rotol prop as there are a variety of rpms quoted for cruising but I don't know if the boost would have been lower for the DH5-20 in fine pitch (30.25') versus the Rotol (23'). Also, I believe it was still normally +6.25lbs climb for 100 octane on the Merlin III. The 100 octane concessions are stated separately (+12lbs max combat boost and weak mixture running rpm/boosts)

You're right here with 2600 for Merlin III, klem. I checked the manual again. I must admit I am doing 2850 in game whenever possible (don't tell my ackack :D ), especially when I get involved in a melee right after taking off. Sorry about the confusion, my memory si crap. Obviously, you've been correct in advising this new chap flying her by the book. I'd say later on when he gets used to the CEM, he can certainly squeeze more power in some situations.

Yes we've noticed that. I am wondering if its to do with the early running engine management ("keep cool, stay cool?"). Could they be modelling engine wear? Airspeed also has a lot to do with it, faster=cooler. But it does 'feel' inconsistent.

I don't think it's that because Spitfire is not doing that - it seem sto be far more consistent. I'd say they really modelled the Hurri with a bit of variety, which feels great in game and I really hope they will model this in some extent for all planes.

We have often screwed our engines at 2600rpm at max boost in the climb but we would have been pretty slow. +4lbs seems to be on the edge and +3lbs is fine. I think that heating model needs a little bit of tweaking. Can certainly cool it fast by dropping to 2200rpm.

This is what I don't get mate - never happened to me tbh. 2600 is very low. What is you red settings and what is your IAS?

Sorry about the OT guys.

[Jatta Raso]

Does 'skins on' cause too many problems on the server? There are a lot of great skins around now, and its a shame we can't use them. Flying around in a yellow nose 109 I feel like I have a flashing neon 'shoot here' sign! ;)

i've been flying with green nose and no skins installed:confused:; there are at least 2-3 skins for 109s without the yellow noses; even without the yellow tipped wings. don't know what the fuss is about, try scrolling down the skin list when selecting the plane;

[klem]

i've been flying with green nose and no skins installed:confused:; there are at least 2-3 skins for 109s without the yellow noses; even without the yellow tipped wings. don't know what the fuss is about, try scrolling down the skin list when selecting the plane;

Could it be that you see it in your end because you selected it but others see the "default" default skin.

btw I was on ATAG last night and there was a Hurricane that had no markings at all. I assumed he had selected a custom skin but because I have skins turned off I got the 'bare' model. ??

[JG52Krupi]

i've been flying with green nose and no skins installed:confused:; there are at least 2-3 skins for 109s without the yellow noses; even without the yellow tipped wings. don't know what the fuss is about, try scrolling down the skin list when selecting the plane;

You can wear any skin you like, the problem is that everyone else will only see the default skin.

[Jatta Raso]

well i instinctively knew it couldn't be that simple, but had to sort it out.. it is a give away no doubt

[ramstein]

could more pilots please try to get close to the actual take-off runaways instead of running through the fields wide open? it's like the drunk skiers running down the slopes running over people with the skiis...


just askin', thanx..

[ramstein]

There is definitely something wrong with the model, now it will blow a gasket after a while of flying conservatively.. the boost is way too fast to overboost..

not sure if the prop is the cause, but something is wrong.. with the Rotol

IMHO

Hey klem, I know what you mean, real pita to lose all the text, is it. I almost lost this thread (we're fairly OT I must admit), sorry about the late reply mate.

Good conversation though, I really enjoy this and it's always interesting to read other's guys insights and share the knowledge so to speak. ;)



Ah I see.



You're right here with 2600 for Merlin III, klem. I checked the manual again. I must admit I am doing 2850 in game whenever possible (don't tell my ackack :D ), especially when I get involved in a melee right after taking off. Sorry about the confusion, my memory si crap. Obviously, you've been correct in advising this new chap flying her by the book. I'd say later on when he gets used to the CEM, he can certainly squeeze more power in some situations.



I don't think it's that because Spitfire is not doing that - it seem sto be far more consistent. I'd say they really modelled the Hurri with a bit of variety, which feels great in game and I really hope they will model this in some extent for all planes.



This is what I don't get mate - never happened to me tbh. 2600 is very low. What is you red settings and what is your IAS?

Sorry about the OT guys.

[FFCW_Urizen]

Did you check your temps? Revs? Rads? I have yet to experience a malfunction on the hurri, she isn´t easily overheated (unless you really go for it, i.e. fully closed rads and rpms way above 2650). now the spittie on the other hand :D .

[klem]

.................
This is what I don't get mate - never happened to me tbh. 2600 is very low. What is you red settings and what is your IAS?

Sorry about the OT guys.

Quick OT reply :shock:

We run with at least 50% Rad in the climb but I often use 100%. IAS is around 160+/- 10. ROC ~2000.

[jimbop]

You are blowing the rotol? I fly the entire mission firewalled using just the prop to regulate RPM. Very effective but hardly realistic - they need to tone it down some I think.

[MK.Mr.X]

What's wrong with the server?:(
Flying is not possible! Friezes powerful( launcher 40-50 minutes.)
This I did not have before.:confused:

[salmo]

Hello Blis & ATAG's. is it possible to have different times of day for server missions? maybe a random generator to launch an early morning. midday or late afternoon mission set?

[Robo.]

Quick OT reply :shock:

We run with at least 50% Rad in the climb but I often use 100%. IAS is around 160+/- 10. ROC ~2000.

Rad 100% open at all times especially in the climb, same IAS and ROC, 6.25lbs @2600 - 2750rpm in climb and not even close to overheating her. I begin my take-off run when water reaches 60C, full boost at 3000rpm. Then level her up to gain airspeed, rpm immediately to 2600ish. Water cca at 95 at this point. Climb or fly at this setting forever, water stays around 100C (95-98) as it should do. Under some 14.000 feet I got to watch my oil temp rather than water. Above that alt water begins to rise and you got to be careful in climb if it needs be. (obviously no problems at cruise settings). I found that if you start well with your temps you will be alright during the entire flight. If you happen to get your water temp close to 90 while still heating her up on the ground, you will be struggling, especially when you get her above 15k. I din't find any difference in airspeed between rads fully open and closed.

ramstein - I don't think there is any major problem, blown gasket means you're doing something seriously wrong I am afraid.

Mr.X - I had some warps and lags yesterday when the server got busy but otherwise usual stuff today.

[MK.Mr.X]

Mr.X - I had some warps and lags yesterday when the server got busy but otherwise usual stuff today.

Normal?
All throws from the server all the time.
We are all in the TS...We are throwing out for 2-3 people at once:(

[SEE]

There have been some problems recently - a lot of us were thrown out of the Server continually whilst others seemed OK - I think it may have been a steam issue rather than a ATAG server problem.

[Buckie]

Hello Blis & ATAG's. is it possible to have different times of day for server missions? maybe a random generator to launch an early morning. midday or late afternoon mission set?

+1 good idea

[Jaws2002]

Hello Blis & ATAG's. is it possible to have different times of day for server missions? maybe a random generator to launch an early morning. midday or late afternoon mission set?

I think they better wait for the patch with this one. I loved flying at dawn and dusk with the earlier versions and the gorgeous orange sun sets and sun rises. With this patch everything looks just murky dark grey, with just a very faint redish tint. The way too bright sun is not helping either. Think about it. If the mission is at dawn the Reds are going to have to fly with the sun in their eyes for most of the mission, and the evening flights will get the same bright sun in the blue players eyes.
Before this last patch flying at dawn and dusk was just an awesome experience. As the game looks now I don't think many people would be willing to put up with the very bad visibility, hard to see dots, washed up dark grey landscape.

Here's a simple example. Both shots taken in the same mission at the same time. Just after sun rise.

Current version:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/Screenshot5979.jpg

Earlier version of the game:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/shot_20120107_202855.jpg

I asked about this in one of the questions threads in the forum. The lighting and colors are not final and they are working on this together with the new graphics engine. I think it's worth waiting for it.

This is just me and I don't try to speak for anyone but myself. If the looks are rewarding, I will put up with the visibility and spotting chalenges that come with morning/evening flying.
As the game looks right now during dawn and dusk, I won't. I just don't want to put all that strain on my eyes, trying to try find dots against the ground with the dark grey faded environment.

[kestrel79]

What's fun about this server is even late at night when a few people are on there's some action with AI planes.

I finally had some free time tonight so I took up a Hurricane to do some patrolling over the channel. Control says theres BR20s inbound, so I spend a lot of time trying to find them it was quite fun. Then I see them! I took care of one, sawed his tail off it was pretty cool to see. I should of just RTB'd then but I got greedy and shot another one but then rammed it by accident. I misjudged my closing speed. What can I say I'm a noob.

But had lots of fun.

Ramstein I'd love to takeoff on the actual runway, but for me it's hard to see a defined path that leads to the main runway in this gamecompared to IL2. I feel like taxiing to the runway I would be more likely to get hit. I'm sure there's something I'm missing.

[jimbop]

You did well. Those BR20s are hard to kill...

[ATAG_Snapper]

You did well. Those BR20s are hard to kill...


+1

Kestrel, noob or not -- you did well! I have a heck of a time trying to bring them down!

[kestrel79]

Can anyone help me with some of the lingo that's used to indicate locations on the map. I keep hearing the term "French Point", "British Point", ect. I'm guessing this means the 2 distinct points I see on the map for each mainland. I'm sure as I fly on the map more often I will memorize the base and city names and land features.

Also when I see an alert about incoming aircraft that are detected it lists a city name that I have never heard of. I want to help them out and fly to the city but I have no clue where it is. It would be nice if the grid coordinates were also included. There's so many city names on the map and you have to zoom in to see them all it would really help out.

[klem]

Can anyone help me with some of the lingo that's used to indicate locations on the map. I keep hearing the term "French Point", "British Point", ect. I'm guessing this means the 2 distinct points I see on the map for each mainland. I'm sure as I fly on the map more often I will memorize the base and city names and land features.

Also when I see an alert about incoming aircraft that are detected it lists a city name that I have never heard of. I want to help them out and fly to the city but I have no clue where it is. It would be nice if the grid coordinates were also included. There's so many city names on the map and you have to zoom in to see them all it would really help out.

The correct name for 'French Point' is 'Cap Gris Nez' (pronounced "cap greenay"):
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&oe=&redir_esc=&q=cap+gris+nez+map&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=ue07T_OsF6jK0QXqw6xs&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBsQ_AUoAg

The correct name for 'British point' is Dungeness:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=dungeness+kent+map&psj=1&gs_sm=1&gs_upl=3661l7418l0l10990l12l8l0l0l0l2l2073l4536l5. 1.8-1.1l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932762849710&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=F-47T_5xisfRBeLN1Gw&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBAQ_AUoAg

Its best to use the correct names because once you find yourself patrolling the English coastline further SW you find Beachy Head may get called 'The other British point' :-
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=beachy+head+map&psj=1&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=3749l6340l0l6704l11l11l0l0l0l0l83l731l11l11 l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932773144310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=e-47T_HQEsii0QXDvqht&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBkQ_AUoAg

or even Selsey, 'No, I mean the other British point':
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=selsey+map&psj=1&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=2954l4384l0l6115l6l6l0l0l0l0l73l351l6l6l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932781534810&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=ze47T9WPAeKQ0AWn3b1s&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBkQ_AUoAg

Zoom them out a bit and compare with the CoD map, may make more sense.

By the way if you hear "Limponee", "Limpnee" or "Limnnnnn" thats Lympne
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=Map+Lympne&psj=1&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=2972l2972l1l3108l1l1l0l0l0l0l66l66l1l1l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932898121310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=XvM7T_D2K8i80QXs84lt&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CA0Q_AUoAg

amd its pronounced "Limm"
http://www.forvo.com/word/lympne/

Hope that helps.

[klem]

Can anyone help me with some of the lingo that's used to indicate locations on the map. I keep hearing the term "French Point", "British Point", ect. I'm guessing this means the 2 distinct points I see on the map for each mainland. I'm sure as I fly on the map more often I will memorize the base and city names and land features.

Also when I see an alert about incoming aircraft that are detected it lists a city name that I have never heard of. I want to help them out and fly to the city but I have no clue where it is. It would be nice if the grid coordinates were also included. There's so many city names on the map and you have to zoom in to see them all it would really help out.

Should I mention other key coastal names?:-
'Thanet' ('Isle of Thanet' but you can't easily see the river that cuts it off into an island).
That lump or 'nose' on the end of Kent.
Home of Manston and Ramsgate airfields. Note Margate on the North side.
Often referred in-game simply as Manston or Ramsgate:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=Thanet+map&psj=1&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=2238l3982l0l4974l8l8l0l0l0l0l98l593l8l8l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932829666610&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=rfA7T924DafB0QX94fFs&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBAQ_AUoAg

Others that actually are named on the CoD map:-

'Deal'
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=Deal+Kent+map&psj=1&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=2796l3643l0l3918l5l5l0l0l0l0l79l316l5l5l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932848505510&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=avE7T9TBL-HL0QXGrZ1t&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBAQ_AUoAg

'Dunkirk' (Dunquerque?)
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=dunkirk+map&psj=1&gs_sm=1&gs_upl=3275l4593l0l8167l7l7l0l0l0l0l97l521l7l7l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932811877310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=_u87T5mDIonb0QWKuOls&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBkQ_AUoAg

'Calais'
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=calais+map&psj=1&gs_sm=1&gs_upl=4502l5410l0l8046l6l6l0l0l0l0l78l400l6l6l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932816293810&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=KvA7T_HtIcOk0QX85P1s&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBAQ_AUoAg

'Boulogne'
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&q=boulogne+map&psj=1&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=2575l4388l0l5182l10l10l1l0l0l2l123l665l8.1l 9l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1680&bih=858&wrapid=tlif132932823171410&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=bPA7T4neHIbP0QXLnYRt&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=3&ved=0CBkQ_AUoAg

[ATAG_Snapper]

Nice work, Klem.

And how can we forget that other JTDawg-ism: "Mansgate"! LOL

(The combining of "Manston" and "Ramsgate" -- very handy in the heat of a dogfight when you're in a flatspin trying to give your location over Teamspeak. Hahaha)

[corchard]

We should also define the Whiskey Trail, which I'm pretty sure is taking a direct route to Calais, especially when taking off from "Mansgate".

I think the OP also couldn't find a city named in a radar alert. I've had that happen, too, and only found a name once after zooming in more closely on the map until more city names were visible, then looking verrry carefully.

Charlo

[ATAG_Bliss]

Hi fellas,

I've been away for a few weeks with traveling on business and had a death in the family. I figured we would have had a patch by now so I could throw some other missions in, but I guess that's not happening for another few weeks (I hope!) So in the time being, I'm going to modify some of these missions to be able to run them in the current format of the game (launcher crash time constraints). I understand the same thing gets old all the time.

There will be some also be some maps with the IIa/E4 (both limited) and some early morning/late in the day stuff just to change it up a bit. Hoping the 1st one can get done sometime this weekend, and that we can incorporate it into a red wins = map A, blue wins = map B etc., type thing. No promises, but that's what's being worked on atm. Making a mission work right in this state of the game isn't very easy lol. So hold on to your shorts :)

It also looks like the steam stats thingy took a crap.

[ATAG_MajorBorris]

Welcome back Bliss:)

[ATAG_Bliss]

New mission up on Server 2. Yes it's the same battle area and shares many of the same airfields etc. Not much I can do on that front until the CTD's are solved. But it has a slightly different planeset and different objectives.

It starts at the butt crack of dawn (the forward fields have runway lights). And the new objectives include ships. Sadly ships aren't grouped together like airplanes in this sim yet, so I had to code 17 objectives just for the ships alone :(.

Anyhow it's 90% done (it still shares the same AI flights as server 1 currently) but I would appreciate any feedback. The objectives aren't going to be easy :)

[klem]

New mission up on Server 2. Yes it's the same battle area and shares many of the same airfields etc. Not much I can do on that front until the CTD's are solved. But it has a slightly different planeset and different objectives.

It starts at the butt crack of dawn (the forward fields have runway lights). And the new objectives include ships. Sadly ships aren't grouped together like airplanes in this sim yet, so I had to code 17 objectives just for the ships alone :(.

Anyhow it's 90% done (it still shares the same AI flights as server 1 currently) but I would appreciate any feedback. The objectives aren't going to be easy :)

Bliss, does the setting in FMB for the battle area have an effect on CDTs? Are they worse the larger the Battle Area?

[Tree_UK]

Hi Bliss, was flying on your server last night and wanted my squad mates to have the same skin, not custom skins but skins within the game, because we wanted to be able to identify each other. However no matter what we tried we could only see one skin (109E3) a bright shiney skin with no weathering which looked terrible. I understand removing custom skins because of stutter but could you allow stock skins within the game and weathering.

Thank you.

[SEE]

Unfortunately Tree, only the default skin is applied and available when Custom skins are disabled. This is a game limitation and I'm sure Bliss highlighted this problem to the Devs. May be the next update performance improvements will allow custom skins (if the option to use Stock Game skins but still exclude custom skins for MP isn't included).

[ATAG_Bliss]

Bliss, does the setting in FMB for the battle area have an effect on CDTs? Are they worse the larger the Battle Area?

I don't think so. What I was referring to was just the area for the mission. I think it's pointless to run a mission using the channel map unless it's main concentration/area is where England and France are closest together. Using anything north or south of that area for other scenarios just won't work right now with the CTD issues. I've got quite a few missions that are done, but can't use them / add them because of it.

Hi Bliss, was flying on your server last night and wanted my squad mates to have the same skin, not custom skins but skins within the game, because we wanted to be able to identify each other. However no matter what we tried we could only see one skin (109E3) a bright shiney skin with no weathering which looked terrible. I understand removing custom skins because of stutter but could you allow stock skins within the game and weathering.

Thank you.

I wish I could. I've kinda cheated per say, to disable custom skins. I added a command from the confs.ini of old IL246 that just so happened to start working after the latest official patch that disabled skins. If there's another command that's proper to IL2COD that will disable skins and allow all the default one's to work, I don't know it. But living without custom skins is much better than the result of them being on right now.

Hopefully some of this stuff will actually be addressed or added to the confs.ini along with a 100 other things it needs to be up to IL246's standards.

Unfortunately Tree, only the default skin is applied and available when Custom skins are disabled. This is a game limitation and I'm sure Bliss highlighted this problem to the Devs. May be the next update performance improvements will allow custom skins (if the option to use Stock Game skins but still exclude custom skins for MP isn't included).

Yep, I sure have. Hopefully some of this graphic work fixes this issue. When B6 was talking about a last minute skin issue holding them back on the patch, makes me at least want to believe something is being done about it ;)

[Untamo]

S!

Have been enjoying many flights on the ATAG Axis&Allies server and it has been much fun. A couple of questions:

Where is the server located? Here in Finnieland we get pings well above 150, which causes some jumpy movements when formation flying.

Anyone else get timeouts? I get about 1 per night. So, not on every sortie, but every now and then.

[5./JG27.Farber]

Their server is in Chigago USA. Im from england and dont get time outs. ALthough are you sure thats just not the server restarting?

[bravoalpha]

S!
Around the radar stations and south(?) of the Hq, where are the guys has the launcher freezing I have "only" 1fps bug, but for minutes.
Do you use any extra 3d objects or the "local weather(–cumuls field)" in FMB around this areas?
I can reproduce the problem offline with the weather objects only.