You know it's a good kill when...

[ElAurens]

You joust with a 109 E4 at low level over your field.

You are flying a Hurricane...

He has the far better aeroplane...

You do a nice little barrel roll and drop on his six and paste him and he crashes...

You salute him in chat...

And he says...

"Gay game" and quits.

Oh so satisfying.

:cool:

[CWMV]

Lol!
As a 109 driver I know one thing-don't joust with the reds.
Low and slow fight is a recipe for disaster.

[Tacoma74]

Lol!
As a 109 driver I know one thing-don't joust with the reds.
Low and slow fight is a recipe for disaster.

+1. The 109 becomes a very stubbourn beast the closer you get to stall speeds. Boom and zoom baby! :)

[Vengeanze]

You joust with a 109 E4 at low level over your field.

You are flying a Hurricane...

He has the far better aeroplane...

You do a nice little barrel roll and drop on his six and paste him and he crashes...

You salute him in chat...

And he says...

"Gay game" and quits.

Oh so satisfying.

:cool:

He's probably so totally in character that he was refering to the old meaning of gay.
I say, rather nice chap. Chin chin. Should I put the kettle on? Ohh dear. I have to go to the loo.

[Feathered_IV]

When they quit out like that, you know you've really beaten them.

[Tvrdi]

Hurri is not that bad..

[Insuber]

The Hurri has some weird advantages over 109 at this stage of the game, namely speed ...

[Madfish]

True and probably fun but at the same time it's the very reason why less people are playing sims day by day.

The core issue here is probably that many just buy the game and expect some sort of balanced multiplayer. Which is so far from the reality in sims.

We need more beginner servers, also "fun map" servers and people actually teaching people to fly and combat - an easy interface of some sort to eventually request help. That'd rock.

If more people stop playing these games and go for easy stuff like BF3 we won't see another IL-2 anymore ever.

[335th_GRExandas]

Don't brag serious pilots DON'T PLAY JUST YET COD,
when they do things will be different .....

[335th_GRExandas]

Aaaa and something else serius pilots still playing IL2 1946
online wars ADW.

[Tvrdi]

Don't brag serious pilots DON'T PLAY JUST YET COD,
when they do things will be different .....

ahahahahahah

[SNAFU]

Yes, the better/real pilots always play another game/on another server/the only true war etc. :) I too always have to fight the better planes. Whatever I do, the other guy is always in the über-plane. :rolleyes:

In the end, the transit from Il2 1946 to CoD is like a new start. All the pros are starting agains as "noobs" in the new game, I guess that`s why many stick with 1946... In the end it all depends on the time available and the amount of time you want to waste in your hobby and there are already some guy that have a huge amount of flying time and know what they are doing/ how to shoot straight.

On the weekend, I found some time for a little flying around, so me and my squadmate took off for an evening sortie along the British SW coast. As we were just cruising along in echelon formation at 4500m it was quite relaxed, some chatting and discussing issues. I just remarked to my wingman that I can not overlook his six, meaning him to go into combat spread, cause you never know. I never saw an RAF player-plane over 2000m in my limited playing time, so I didn´t expect anything to happen anyway, just a remark.

4 seconds later my squadmate says in TS, "Oh I am hit, am bailing out." Looking around I saw a spitfire zooming up above me. Well, I tried to take a few angles from him to complicate his next bounce and then went into a dive. Diving from 4000m on deck I thought I should be clear and saw nothing behind me, so I got my bearing. Then I looked around again and the spit was 300m behind and closing in fast. Well, so far for the better dive speed of the 109, I thought 700km/h would be enough, but well... no chance of out running I went into a flat scissor. The Spitfire didn´t swallow that bait and just zoomed up again. In the next scissor to answer his high jojo I received some hits in the wing, stalled and crashed. "Valec" in the Spitfire being a full time CoD-Pilot did everything right and just wasted us two weekend pilots with ease.

To cut it short, a player just coming along, hopping onto a server and in need of some success/satisfaction, will probably quit the game really fast, especially when he is used to 1946 fast-success-gameplay, even though the game is quite new to the most of us (I for myself have not even mapped the WEP of the 109 yet).

[tintifaxl]

I totally concur with your assessment SNAFU. The servers are catering the hardcore flight sim fans and will leave newcomers running.

And without at least a wingman I never fly on the online servers. It's just not worth my time.

[6S.Manu]

In the end, the transit from Il2 1946 to CoD is like a new start. All the pros are starting agains as "noobs" in the new game, I guess that`s why many stick with 1946... In the end it all depends on the time available and the amount of time you want to waste in your hobby and there are already some guy that have a huge amount of flying time and know what they are doing/ how to shoot straight.

What?

There's only one way to fly a warbird correctly: keep your energy, don't give a firing solution to your opponent, attack only with advantage OR go away. This is the way you score some kills AND RTB.

Why should be it different? Maybe because in CloD the fights are usually below 2km? Over airbases too? Then I agree with you...

I'm sticking with 1946 because the game keeps freezing after 30 minutes and I can't see enemies (50 guys on the server and I see nobody from 4km)...

[Skoshi Tiger]

Aaaa and something else serius pilots still playing IL2 1946
online wars ADW.

I thought serious pilots would be flying real aircraft with a frown on their faces?

I couldn't class myself a a serious pilot! The look I had on my face when I flew real aircraft was constantly shifting from sheer joy to absolute terror!

Though I could be wrong.

Cheers!

[335th_GRExandas]

Did i miss something here ?
We are talking about virtual flights.

If I'm misunderstood, I'm rephrasing the serious virtual pilots still stay with
1946 because :
- Cod has serious bug issues
- has no on line wars
- has over-modeled planes
- has PC requirements most cant afford

Time will tell about this game ....

So when you brag about a snapshot of time being behind 1 or another plane is
just random shooting opportunity which you might have or you might have not.....

What if there was a wingman there a bit higher?

[ARM505]

Wow. No wonder I don't play online anymore. Thanks for the reminder.

'I love it when they quit'? Awesome. Make sure everybody quits. That'd be brilliant. 'Then you know you've really beaten them'.....or maybe they went to make a cup of tea? Or real life (gasp!) intervened. Who knows. Who cares. And coming here to chest beat about it is, in fact, lame. Clearly I don't have the 'serious gamer' life anymore....these kind of comments are no better than playing COD (the other, bigger one) all day, and laughing at 'teh noobz'. Please.

[335th_GRExandas]

My comments are not insulting about anyone i feel!!

and my hobby is flightsims covering about the most 1 or 2 hours every 2 day...

There is also real life as you said but

When I do my hobby I get the most of it.

[ElAurens]

Wow, has this tread been totally derailed.

And there is no Hurri in the game that can catch a 109 at any altitude if the 109 driver decides to disengage. You guys that fly 109s know that.

The only time I have caught a 109 with my Hurri was when I had significant height advantage and turned all that into speed, and even then it is short lived as once the Hurri levels out it's like pushing a barn door through the air. If you are getting caught by Hurris, you are not extending away enough, or have grossly misjudged your and his energy state. Period.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Did i miss something here ?
We are talking about virtual flights.


No, I was just having a joke!


Wow. No wonder I don't play online anymore. Thanks for the reminder.

'I love it when they quit'? Awesome. Make sure everybody quits. That'd be brilliant. 'Then you know you've really beaten them'.....or maybe they went to make a cup of tea? Or real life (gasp!) intervened. Who knows. Who cares. And coming here to chest beat about it is, in fact, lame. Clearly I don't have the 'serious gamer' life anymore....these kind of comments are no better than playing COD (the other, bigger one) all day, and laughing at 'teh noobz'. Please.

I wouldn't take it so so seriously, I think El Aurens was just having a go at someone who was a bad sport and quit because he 'lost'!

Every time I get shotdown or have to bail, I try to send a "Good Kill" message to my opponent. If I manage to limp back home and wreck my plane landing on a friendly airfield I count that as a victory for myself (if I'm still alive).

After waiting a long time for the sim I think El was a bit dissapointed with COD at it's release (please correct me if I'm wrong El !) I took his post as having a go online and enjoying the experience!

Cheers!

[Whiski]

I would have to disagree with the idea of people leaving because its to hard to play online full real because the basis of air combat are the same in CLoD as in 1946. Nothing changes how you approach engaging an enemy. At least not for me.

The biggest step in getting into the "hardcore Multiplayer" servers in CLoD is knowing how to operate your a/c properly, good wingmanship and the biggest, Situational Awareness. I had purchased CLoD and flew offline for 2-3 days before entering online play. Found my way around the controls and was in the air. I loved the game from the start, so not to easily discouraged by being killed over and over.

I jumped into the ATAG server and started to shoot the AI bombers or escort them. Ran into a few enemy planes up there and engaged, got killed quite a few times. It was very exciting, and I loved it even though I got bounced and didn't even see him coming (actually scared the crap outta me lol). The game had me hooked by this time. Not only by game play but by the help offered by the other players on the TS provided by ATAG as well. If someone jumps into the online arena without any voice communication they are at a disadvantage already.

I do believe that anyone who loves to play any game, be it a combat flight sim or an fps, will play it no matter if he/she gets killed a thousand times while getting only one kill. If people go online and expect to rule the skies there will be disappointment because no matter how good you are, this game provides enough realism to give your enemy a chance to exploit the smallest of mistakes and deliver a good taste of defeat. But then, you learn from it, if you look at it as anything different, you were defeated before you got in the air.

There are servers available that offer more relaxed parameters, but I would think that flying in that setting would be more difficult, you are denied the possibility of surprise as external padlock gives you away and takes away the escape route as you are tracked. Although a more relaxed setting is a good way to warm up to this game, I jumped directly into full real and found it difficult at first but that much more enjoyable when I did score my first kill. Its the challenge!


Whiskey

EDIT:
You know its a good kill when .... you are flying along, taking in the scenery, when you look behind you in time to see the tracer ...fade to black. S! your opponent for a good bounce and grab another plane.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Heh heh.

I think I was online at the same time as El last night. One bloke said that the game was 'lame' because the bombers were too slow. This was after I'd just blown up his port fuel tanks. He was in a He111, I was in a Spit 1a.:confused::rolleyes::grin:

[SNAFU]

What?

There's only one way to fly a warbird correctly: keep your energy, don't give a firing solution to your opponent, attack only with advantage OR go away. This is the way you score some kills AND RTB.

Why should be it different? Maybe because in CloD the fights are usually below 2km? Over airbases too? Then I agree with you...

I'm sticking with 1946 because the game keeps freezing after 30 minutes and I can't see enemies (50 guys on the server and I see nobody from 4km)...

Sure the basics are all the same, doesn´t matter if you play ROF, IL2, CoD, DCS, FC2.0 (never tried WoP, but I guess it is the same there).
You still have to get used to the new game, learn to "see" (you can spot planes on deck from 4km, it just harder, than in 1946 and you have to get used to it), learn to shoot all over again. The best tactics and control skills are useless, if you cannot shoot straight. (I used to hit something in 1946 from the funniest angles, but in CoD I can park 10m behind a Wellington and miss. :cool: )

[Bewolf]

I do not think flying and shooting is much harder then in IL2, really. Sure, there is CEM coming into play, but since the E4's introduiction on the german side, for example, it really is pretty much like in IL2.

The same applies to shooting. I think Cod delivers a different feeling for speed and position and thus deflection shooting and ballistics are often based on wrong "instinct" input, but once you get a feeling for that, shooting is as "easy" as in IL2. It may be even easier, really, as aircraft have many more parts that can be damaged. I hardly ever used machine guns in the original IL2, but in COD they almost became main armament.

[6S.Manu]

Sure the basics are all the same, doesn´t matter if you play ROF, IL2, CoD, DCS, FC2.0 (never tried WoP, but I guess it is the same there).
You still have to get used to the new game, learn to "see" (you can spot planes on deck from 4km, it just harder, than in 1946 and you have to get used to it), learn to shoot all over again. The best tactics and control skills are useless, if you cannot shoot straight. (I used to hit something in 1946 from the funniest angles, but in CoD I can park 10m behind a Wellington and miss. :cool: )

;)

I agree about the sim limitations that you have to get use to.

[Ze-Jamz]

109 better plane? Ermm

Not when hes low and slow :)

I would of found that quite funny though when he said that and quit lol

[Insuber]

Wow, has this tread been totally derailed.

And there is no Hurri in the game that can catch a 109 at any altitude if the 109 driver decides to disengage. You guys that fly 109s know that.

The only time I have caught a 109 with my Hurri was when I had significant height advantage and turned all that into speed, and even then it is short lived as once the Hurri levels out it's like pushing a barn door through the air. If you are getting caught by Hurris, you are not extending away enough, or have grossly misjudged your and his energy state. Period.

Maybe it's me, but last weekend I ran full throttle (auto prop pitch) for 10+ min across the channel at low alt on my 109 E-4 and a Hurri gaining on my 6 ... and 2 other 109's behind the Hurri, trying to catch up ... saved only by other 109s zooming the magic hurri. I started with high speed after a dive, and a comfortable margin, by the way. Hey it's not to whine (I don't care, my bad for ending up like that), but the FM is still seriously flawed. I will try to organise some tests.

[CaptainDoggles]

I'm all for conducting organized testing but we know the FM will be changed soon anyways... better to save our efforts for after the next patch don't you think?

[bw_wolverine]

Where speeds are concerned, keep in mind that not everyone here operates their plane with the same efficiency/methods. I like to THINK I'm getting the most out of my plane, but I'm sure there's someone else out there that can do more.

Nice to hear you're enjoying the game now El Aurens. CloD really does do a great job online.

[6S.Manu]

Maybe it's me, but last weekend I ran full throttle (auto prop pitch) for 10+ min across the channel at low alt on my 109 E-4 and a Hurri gaining on my 6 ... and 2 other 109's behind the Hurri, trying to catch up ... saved only by other 109s zooming the magic hurri. I started with high speed after a dive, and a comfortable margin, by the way. Hey it's not to whine (I don't care, my bad for ending up like that), but the FM is still seriously flawed. I will try to organise some tests.

This is another thing that keeps me away from CloD.

Models are a bunch of numbers and we already witness that some FM numbers are not correct because of the plane's attitude: what about the data that we can't easily verify like the DM model?

Who does assure me that the developer has put "5" there like he should? And if he put another number why did he? He did voluntarily or not?... see the explosion range of the IL2's bombs...

Infact after 7 months they are tweaking the FM...

[CaptainDoggles]

This is another thing that keeps me away from CloD.

Models are a bunch of numbers and we already witness that some FM numbers are not correct because of the plane's attitude: what about the data that we can't easily verify like the DM model?

Who does assure me that the developer has put a 5 there like he should? And if he put another number why did he? He did voluntarily or not?... see the explosion range of the IL2's bombs...

That keeps you away from Cliffs? :rolleyes:

Well the same problem was there in IL2, right? But you bought it?

If you played IL2 then you should know that these developers are always willing to at least look at issues if there is evidence of a flaw. So if you think the DM has a flaw then conduct tests.

[Jaws2002]

Maybe it's me, but last weekend I ran full throttle (auto prop pitch) for 10+ min across the channel at low alt on my 109 E-4 and a Hurri gaining on my 6 ... and 2 other 109's behind the Hurri, trying to catch up ... saved only by other 109s zooming the magic hurri. I started with high speed after a dive, and a comfortable margin, by the way. Hey it's not to whine (I don't care, my bad for ending up like that), but the FM is still seriously flawed. I will try to organise some tests.


The auto pitch is too lazy. Don't be surprised you couldn't outrun a manually flown Rotol Hurri.
If you fly the 109 on manual, the Hurri can't get anywhere near you.

Don't blame the game for that. It was all you.:)

[JG52Krupi]

The auto pitch is too lazy. Don't be surprised you couldn't outrun a manually flown Rotol Hurri.
If you fly the 109 on manual, the Hurri can't get anywhere near you.

Don't blame the game for that. It was all you.:)

Agreed it was nice to not keep an eye on the PP for the first 5 mins then you realize how buggy it is... odd that I still use it :( it still sticks at 12:00 and 8:30.

[CaptainDoggles]

I don't think it's buggy, I just think it reflects the limitations of the real system.

Jaws, what is the best configuration for best speed?

[skouras]

The auto pitch is too lazy. Don't be surprised you couldn't outrun a manually flown Rotol Hurri.
If you fly the 109 on manual, the Hurri can't get anywhere near you.

Don't blame the game for that. It was all you.:)

never use the AUTOPITCH here[only sometimes]
to much E3 i guess

[ElAurens]

The auto pitch is too lazy. Don't be surprised you couldn't outrun a manually flown Rotol Hurri.
If you fly the 109 on manual, the Hurri can't get anywhere near you.

Don't blame the game for that. It was all you.:)

Bingo.

I have been flat out run by 109s many many times. Sure I've caught some as well, but it is work to do so, it's not like you press the magic button and get jet assist. I'm adjusting trim, prop, mix, rads and throttle constantly. It's one of the things I really enjoy about the sim.

Kills of all sorts were far too easy in IL2.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Bf109E-4 could outspeed, outdive, outclimb, roll faster than Hurricane. Hurricane could ONLY turn better. So really wondering the "super-Hurricane" in game almost beating the legendary Spitfire :rolleyes:

[Igo kyu]

S!

Bf109E-4 could outspeed, outdive, outclimb, roll faster than Hurricane. Hurricane could ONLY turn better. So really wondering the "super-Hurricane" in game almost beating the legendary Spitfire :rolleyes:
The Molders quote is about the onset rate of rolling. I've recently read that once it reached it's full rate of roll, the Hurricane rolled faster than the 109. My memory is terrible, I can't remember where I read that, I'll have a look.

<edit>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Hurricane#Battle_of_Britain

As a fighter, the Hurricane had some drawbacks. It was slower than both the Spitfire I and II and the Messerschmitt Bf 109E, and the thick wings compromised acceleration, but it could out-turn both of them. In spite of its performance deficiencies against the Bf 109, the Hurricane was still capable of destroying the German fighter, especially at lower altitudes. The standard tactic of the 109s was to attempt to climb higher than the RAF fighters and "bounce" them in a dive; the Hurricanes could evade such tactics by turning into the attack or going into a "corkscrew dive", which the 109s, with their lower rate of roll, found hard to counter.

[Flanker35M]

S!

The start of the roll in Hurricane was more sluggish than Bf109E-4. Also the acceleration was far from Bf109E-4. Finnish test reports say that the thick wing had huge drag compared to Brewster, Fiat G.50 or other planes. Finns liked the performance above 3km(10kft) where the plane was better. But at low altitude considered too slow and sluggish due high weight and not so strong engine(Merlin III).

Another interesting thing is from the acquisition of the Hurricanes for FiAF. The Brits themselves said that most of their Hurricanes in squadron service were at average 20mph slower than published test data. For comparison the 5min power setting gave 450km/h at SL so the average plane would do some 420-430km/h.

Climb was on a new nice and dandy plane some 12m/s at SL, ~11m/s at 1km, 10m/s at 2km etc. Just for comparison.

But as said..Devs will work on FM etc. so after this we can see how it will be.

[Jaws2002]

I don't think it's buggy, I just think it reflects the limitations of the real system.

Jaws, what is the best configuration for best speed?

I agree. Remember this is the first auto prop pitch installed on 109, so I wouldn't expect it to be as eficient as the straight manual pitch.

I don't know the best configuration for speed, but I noticed the auto pitch keeps the revs too high most of the time. I usually keep it around 2100-2300RPM, unless i'm climbing, diving or turning, when i adjust depending on speed and angle of climb/dive. I usuall adjust it all the time depending on what I do and how cool is my engine, so can't really tell.

But remember I have limited time in 109. I spent a lot more time in 110 and even Hurricane, now that the teams are so ofter unbalanced.

There are plenty other people that fly alot more than me, specially in fly 109 and know the performance range much better.

I fly more for easy, quick fun, not performance or competition so doing what i do WILL get you killed all the time.:lol:

You know, that unhealthy, low flaps turnfight on the deck in 110, against Spits and Hurricanes. :mrgreen:

[katdogfizzow]

You joust with a 109 E4 at low level over your field.

You are flying a Hurricane...

He has the far better aeroplane...

You do a nice little barrel roll and drop on his six and paste him and he crashes...

You salute him in chat...

And he says...

"Gay game" and quits.

Oh so satisfying.

:cool:

hahaha

[Jaws2002]

I had one of those, flying 110 with bombs. I was picked up mid chanel by a Spitfire. I drop the bombs and we went at it for about 10 minutes. At the end I was going back home with a smoking engine and the spit was in the drink. For all my effort I got that priceless, Bull$hit uber Bf-110 and Crappy FM remark. :mrgreen:

That made up for all those countless times i got chewed to shreads in that 110.:mrgreen:

[Baron]

Biggest "problem" as far as amount of players online now is that since CloD was released Complex Engine Manegment/ "Full Real" is mandetory...apparently.


Whats up with that?

[JG52Krupi]

Biggest "problem" as far as amount of players online now is that since CloD was released Complex Engine Manegment is mandetory...apparently.


Whats up with that? (Concidering the known "buggs" an all. Dot visibillity, planes dissepearing in thin air, pp bug, Fm buggs etc etc.)


Is it cooler to "fly" with out map icons for ex? ( We wouldnt wanna do anything that would counter, be it in a small way, the dot visibillity/vanishing ac bugg for ex, would we)

There are plenty of arcade servers running, its not our fault that the majority currently fly full real.

[CaptainDoggles]

Biggest "problem" as far as amount of players online now is that since CloD was released Complex Engine Manegment/ "Full Real" is mandetory...apparently.


Whats up with that?

You're of course free to start your own server with whatever settings you like.

[CaptainDoggles]

I had one of those, flying 110 with bombs. I was picked up mid chanel by a Spitfire. I drop the bombs and we went at it for about 10 minutes. At the end I was going back home with a smoking engine and the spit was in the drink. For all my effort I got that priceless, Bull$hit uber Bf-110 and Crappy FM remark. :mrgreen:

That made up for all those countless times i got chewed to shreads in that 110.:mrgreen:

We should get Oktoberfest flying this game to show everybody what the 110 can really do. I remember seeing a track of him flying a 110 against a P-47, a Mustang, and I think also a 38, and coming home with 2 kills. Starting up in the stratosphere and ending up down on the deck.

[AKA_Tenn]

If you're being honest and not just being the master of self-proclamation, then its not bragging, its more smack talk to try to get people to fight you better.

and if you want a arcade game go play hawx...

[ACE-OF-ACES]

You joust with a 109 E4 at low level over your field.

You are flying a Hurricane...

He has the far better aeroplane...

You do a nice little barrel roll and drop on his six and paste him and he crashes...

You salute him in chat...

And he says...

"Gay game" and quits.

Oh so satisfying.

:cool:
The best aint it!

Was online when that went down..

[18:25:24] Chat: BlitzPig_EL: S
[18:25:29] Chat: FootAK: gay game

Thank god for log files! ;)

[Insuber]

The auto pitch is too lazy. Don't be surprised you couldn't outrun a manually flown Rotol Hurri.
If you fly the 109 on manual, the Hurri can't get anywhere near you.

Don't blame the game for that. It was all you.:)

My God, another unknown genius. Did you test that, or it's just your general impression? And how that relates with the historical data? I'm eager to learn from you.

[Masi67]

The Molders quote is about the onset rate of rolling. I've recently read that once it reached it's full rate of roll, the Hurricane rolled faster than the 109. My memory is terrible, I can't remember where I read that, I'll have a look.

<edit>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Hurricane#Battle_of_Britain

I think you missed the point here. Ofcourse 109 could not counter corkscrew in this case because of speed after boom, too fast in this case, simple as that :)

[Madfish]

The issue still remains:



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You joust with an AI 109 E4 at low level over your field.

You are flying a Hurricane...

The AI has the far better aeroplane...

You do a nice little barrel roll and drop on his six and paste him and he crashes...

You salute him in chat...

And he says...

"Gay game" and even the last AI quits. Game ends up completely dead.

Oh so satisfying.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Because the real issue is that no one plays that game. Yes, a hand full - but that's not enough. Not enough for cool servers and other gameplay modes other than "oh yeah I studied this crap for ages and now I'm gonna kill you, frustrate you and make sure the game ends up dead.



The core issue is that this sim needs to be more accessible. If SIMs can't come up with ways to pull this off they'll be dead in a few years. And THIS is far from satisfying, even though it's not really your fault. (Although posting this rubbish here is)

[JG52Krupi]

My God, another unknown genius. Did you test that, or it's just your general impression? And how that relates with the historical data? I'm eager to learn from you.

Come on insuber there is nothing historical about this it just doesnt work well atm that's a simple fact, the auto prop we have in the e4 is terrible i was doing circles around a guy that had it enabled... he just couldn't keep up with me and since there was no button set he couldn't turn it off until he landed.

I have been using the auto prop since it arrived but until it's fixed I'm back to using manual there is something wrong with it if I can go 50kmh faster without even trying... If I did try I would be around 100kmh faster than someone using the auto prop wtf!!!

@madfish clearly this game is too hard for you so go buy hawx2 that seems like the perfect game for you.

[Insuber]

Come on insuber there is nothing historical about this it just doesnt work well atm that's a simple fact, the auto prop we have in the e4 is terrible i was doing circles around a guy that had it enabled... he just couldn't keep up with me and since there was no button set he couldn't turn it off until he landed.

I have been using the auto prop since it arrived but until it's fixed I'm back to using manual there is something wrong with it if I can go 50kmh faster without even trying... If I did try I would be around 100kmh faster than someone using the auto prop wtf!!!

@madfish clearly this game is too hard for you so go buy hawx2 that seems like the perfect game for you.

Thx Krupi, it was exactly my point, I just reacted to someone who said that we shouldn't blame the game, but "ourselves" ... LOL!
It's like saying that in 1940 the auto prop pitch was adopted by the silly German engineers to slow down the 109 and match the Hurri performances ... :D

[fruitbat]

Thx Krupi, it was exactly my point, I just reacted to someone who said that we shouldn't blame the game, but "ourselves" ... LOL!
It's like saying that in 1940 the auto prop pitch was adopted by the silly German engineers to slow down the 109 and match the Hurri performances ... :D

one of the main reasons it was adopted was to ease pilot workload.

i'm sure that somewhere i read an account of a 109 pilot saying that the auto pitch wasn't as good as manual in terms of absolute performance with a good pilot used to manual, i just can't remember where i read it, poss 'Spitfire on my tail'

but how much worse, who knows.

[IvanK]

Come on insuber there is nothing historical about this it just doesnt work well atm that's a simple fact, the auto prop we have in the e4 is terrible i was doing circles around a guy that had it enabled... he just couldn't keep up with me and since there was no button set he couldn't turn it off until he landed.

I have been using the auto prop since it arrived but until it's fixed I'm back to using manual there is something wrong with it if I can go 50kmh faster without even trying... If I did try I would be around 100kmh faster than someone using the auto prop wtf!!!

@madfish clearly this game is too hard for you so go buy hawx2 that seems like the perfect game for you.

So exactly where and how are you getting 50Kmh more in manual ? Krupi.
What is the max IAS you can get at sea level In AUTO and at Sea Level in Manual and what RPM are you using then ? .... Then tell me how you would achieve 100Kmh more ?

How about a test start at 300Kmh at Sea level Go max ATA (without WEP) and Prop auto, Both RADS Full open... wait till all acceleration stops ...tell us your end IAS
Then repeat it in manual same Max ATA (without WEP) Both Rads full open ... Any RPM you choose.... wait till the acceleration stops ... tell us your end IAS and RPM you used.

[ElAurens]

and now I'm gonna kill you, frustrate you and make sure the game ends up dead.




So you are ssaying I should have let this guy survive after attacking me?

Excuse me?

[MoGas]

So exactly where and how are you getting 50Kmh more in manual ? Krupi.


Because the autoprop is not working! In many cases you are stuck at 2000RPM or lower in a climb, and finally in the level flyt too, and if you use "notleistung" it is given you even lower RPM, and not rising it for the proper RPM what would be needed now.

As Krupi said, if youre wingy dosent have the manual switch key on his joystick or keyboard, you fly away from him, simple.

I had many situation, where I followed E4 flyers with a E1, where I had to ask "what is going on with youre speed" and the answer was "FULL THROTTLE" lol.

[David198502]

Because the autoprop is not working! In many cases you are stuck at 2000RPM or lower in a climb, and finally in the level flyt too, and if you use "notleistung" it is given you even lower RPM, and not rising it for the proper RPM what would be needed now.

As Krupi said, if youre wingy dosent have the manual switch key on his joystick or keyboard, you fly away from him, simple.

I had many situation, where I followed E4 flyers with a E1, where I had to ask "what is going on with youre speed" and the answer was "FULL THROTTLE" lol.

+1...
use manual prop pitch properly, and you leave every 109 which is using auto prop behind you...poor guys who are not aware of that
i prefer the E4 because of its Minengeschoss, but always fly with manual prop pitch in every situation.flying with the E1 before we got the E4 got me used to it anyway.
auto prop is definitely bugged

[ZaltysZ]

Auto works fine for me. However, I always take off on manual, and engage auto only at max throttle and max permissible RPM. If I engage it earlier, it simply sticks later.

[ATAG_Snapper]

So exactly where and how are you getting 50Kmh more in manual ? Krupi.
What is the max IAS you can get at sea level In AUTO and at Sea Level in Manual and what RPM are you using then ? .... Then tell me how you would achieve 100Kmh more ?

How about a test start at 300Kmh at Sea level Go max ATA (without WEP) and Prop auto, Both RADS Full open... wait till all acceleration stops ...tell us your end IAS
Then repeat it in manual same Max ATA (without WEP) Both Rads full open ... Any RPM you choose.... wait till the acceleration stops ... tell us your end IAS and RPM you used.

Excellent idea!

@Krupi: Krupi, old bean, when you're done with that would you mind doing the same with the Spitfires 1 & 1a, and perhaps the two Hurri models as well? Might as well throw in the Spit 11a so we can see how over modelled THAT is. We'll have a bottle of claret (or what's left of it) waiting for you in the mess -- the rest of us will have long headed for bed............

[klem]

The issue still remains:



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You joust with an AI 109 E4 at low level over your field.

You are flying a Hurricane...

The AI has the far better aeroplane...

You do a nice little barrel roll and drop on his six and paste him and he crashes...

You salute him in chat...

And he says...

"Gay game" and even the last AI quits. Game ends up completely dead.

Oh so satisfying.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Because the real issue is that no one plays that game. Yes, a hand full - but that's not enough. Not enough for cool servers and other gameplay modes other than "oh yeah I studied this crap for ages and now I'm gonna kill you, frustrate you and make sure the game ends up dead.



The core issue is that this sim needs to be more accessible. If SIMs can't come up with ways to pull this off they'll be dead in a few years. And THIS is far from satisfying, even though it's not really your fault. (Although posting this rubbish here is)

No one plays what game?

..die and disconnect? Some do, not too many.
..play CoD at all? More than a 'handful' do.
..play CoD in full switch? More do than don't.

As for 'accessible' this is a simulation not a console game. It will always attract less players than a console game created to be more 'playable' than 'interesting/immersive' and needing some study and practice (and if that meant paying more for it I would). Console games are also tied to a fixed hardware platform making it easier to develop for, unlike PC Games trying to bridge several generations of technology. On the other hand the fact that we are forced to buy new console platforms when the old ones are no longer supported and in order to gain the use of new techniques/technologies, does help support the argument that new PC games should perhaps do the same and not try to reach back too far, e.g. in CoDs case XP. That might make PC games more 'accessible' with less technology differences to try to accommodate.

If by gameplay modes you mean ways of making it more 'accessible', as in 'easier to play', there are many settings that can 'dumb it down'. If you mean Maps/Theatres there are already several (which lend themselves to easy play settings and instant dogfights) and the series will have more when it expands. Many people have become used to the wide-ranging theatres and aircraft of IL-2 1946 and overlook the fact that IL-2 started in the same way as CoD with a limited map and plane set before being developed across new theatres over the following 10 years.

It sounds like console games are more your thing.

[JG52Krupi]

So exactly where and how are you getting 50Kmh more in manual ? Krupi.
What is the max IAS you can get at sea level In AUTO and at Sea Level in Manual and what RPM are you using then ? .... Then tell me how you would achieve 100Kmh more ?

How about a test start at 300Kmh at Sea level Go max ATA (without WEP) and Prop auto, Both RADS Full open... wait till all acceleration stops ...tell us your end IAS
Then repeat it in manual same Max ATA (without WEP) Both Rads full open ... Any RPM you choose.... wait till the acceleration stops ... tell us your end IAS and RPM you used.

Okay John, Snapper I will test this when I get home :D

[ATAG_Snapper]

Okay John, Snapper I will test this when I get home :D

And I shall try to remember not to finish off this passable bottle of red wine....... ;)

[Insuber]

one of the main reasons it was adopted was to ease pilot workload.

i'm sure that somewhere i read an account of a 109 pilot saying that the auto pitch wasn't as good as manual in terms of absolute performance with a good pilot used to manual, i just can't remember where i read it, poss 'Spitfire on my tail'

but how much worse, who knows.

Fruitbat, my friend! I'm very interested in this kind of accounts. The only drawback is that they are subjective and qualitative. But that's the nature of WWII aviation discussions, and maybe the reason why we love them so much!

The main point however is that the FMs are flawed (ceiling, top speed, no Vne and G stress, no G stall ... God knows what else), pretty much in accordance with the unfinished nature of the game.

Btw, Luthier said 6 months ago that he was dreaming the day we will stop complaining about graphics and bugs, and start complaining about FM and DM ... maybe we aren't there yet, but almost ...

[MD_Titus]

...when they type try that in *insert inferior plane*

[Baron]

You're of course free to start your own server with whatever settings you like.



Never said i fly arcade/WW view. If i did, heaven forbid, i wouldnt be allowed to post in cool threadhs like this one. ;)


Hopefully there will be more options for beginners, mediums once CloD works satisfactory for more people. As it is now its quite depressing seeing the number of players online compared to IL2 and Hyper Lobby, even though that was a almost 10 year old game at the time i flew it last.

Sry for the OT btw.

[Jaws2002]

My God, another unknown genius. Did you test that, or it's just your general impression? And how that relates with the historical data? I'm eager to learn from you.

I did try the e4 enough to know the auto pitch is not exactly the way to get most out of your aircraft. Just like other people posted, I also flew alongside players that were using auto and the difference is very noticeable.
While this may not be historically accurate, the fact remains. You didn't fly the E4 to it's "in game" potential.

[ElAurens]

Insuber, no disrespect, but there are a lot of people who are really good at IL2 and CLOD who never post here, and whose names you don't know.

In fact I'd go so far as to say that most of the best virtual pilots could care less what we say and do here. They just fire up the game and get on with it as best they can. They take the tool they are given and make the most of it and leave the whining about historical data and outcomes to the chart monkeys.

And I'm not saying that I don't care about historic accuracy, I most certainly do. But that stays here. When online you just have to do the best you can with what you have.

[MD_Titus]

Biggest "problem" as far as amount of players online now is that since CloD was released Complex Engine Manegment/ "Full Real" is mandetory...apparently.


Whats up with that?

I know what you mean, there's a real lack of servers that have full damage, flight and weapon realism but are more relaxed on view options. I see most disregard anthropomorphic limits, experienced problems myself with that and slightly fluttering trim wheel input...

[TheGrunch]

El, I was gonna leave it until December or something like that before I picked this game up in earnest again, but your online accounts are making the prospect more and more tempting...

I was well impressed with the many small improvements since the last time I played when I had a look at the new patch.

[ElAurens]

I even have our biggest nay sayer, and former RAF jet jock, flying online again.

:cool:

But all is not a bed of roses, be sure.

Still lots of niggling issues, but when you get in the air it's worth it. CLOD really does make IL2 look like a children's toy.

[Continu0]

Whatever you are discusing here:

I SCORED MY FIRST ONLINEKILL TODAY!

Sat in a Hurricane, managed to shoot down 2 bf109 and 1 bf110! What a day!

Those were unexperienced pilots i guess, and i have to admit that I crashed into the first bf109 after it emergency-landed, but i am proud:)

Strange enough i have smoother performance online, so I hope some of you guys will see me at 6 o´clock high once in a while...;-)

Good night

[TheGrunch]

I can't seem to work up as much enthusiasm for Il-2 1946 anymore, that's for sure, I've been playing RoF a lot instead ("HERESY!" I hear you cry). The day that 1C crowbar a campaign engine like that into CloD I will be a happy man indeed, especially since CloD's SP and MP missions are by design interchangeable if I recall. Dynamic online campaigns in a cutting-edge WWII sim? Yes please! That and concentrate a lot of effort on the FMs and I will definitely be a convert for all time.

Good work Continu0! I think I've only shot down my brother and my old man so far, hahaha.

[ElAurens]

I hope the offline side improves a lot. While I'm not an offline player in the least, there are a large majority of players that are, and I want all of us to be satisfied with the sim. The more that like it, the more it will improve over time for all of us.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Congrats, Continu0! There's no kill like an online kill! :D

[TheGrunch]

I hope the offline side improves a lot. While I'm not an offline player in the least, there are a large majority of players that are, and I want all of us to be satisfied with the sim. The more that like it, the more it will improve over time for all of us.

Agreed. I prefer the offline side of the sims I play to be good because I use the offline portion a lot to practise deflection shooting and systems management of the aircraft before I venture online in a frequent manner. Even when I had a lot of time I didn't play Il-2 online a lot really, so I think you can imagine that now I've started a job in online retail and with Christmas coming up I don't really have time for lengthy MP sorties at the moment, which is a shame!
In fact I'm beginning to live up to my avatar. Bloody Christmas.

[ATAG_Snapper]

I hope the offline side improves a lot. While I'm not an offline player in the least, there are a large majority of players that are, and I want all of us to be satisfied with the sim. The more that like it, the more it will improve over time for all of us.

+1

Well said!

[Codex]

I must be the worst pilot on CoD then cause I can't even beat the Hurri's driven by the AI :P

They've obviously got no stomachs because I get sick just watching them dance around in front of me when they're trying to evade. lol

[IvanK]

Okay John, Snapper I will test this when I get home :D

In my tests as I suggested:

"How about a test start at 300Kmh at Sea level Go max ATA (without WEP) and Prop auto, Both RADS Full open... wait till all acceleration stops ...tell us your end IAS
Then repeat it in manual same Max ATA (without WEP) Both Rads full open ... Any RPM you choose.... wait till the acceleration stops ... tell us your end IAS and RPM you used."

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=354126&postcount=57

I get the exact same end game speed whether in AUTO or Manual. 440-450Kmh IAS.

There is NO way I can get 50Kmh better in manual.

What you obviously can do in manual is set up your own ATA/RPM combinations that might be beneficial in say a 1.25ATA climb. AUTO at 1.25ATA throttle position will give you 2100RPM where you might do better manually selecting 2300RPM. Personally I use MANUAL for any long term type situations with less than max throttle position. In Combat or any time I have full throttle AUTO.

RPM is tied to throttle position NOT ATA. Below FTH ATA is also directly proportional to throttle position.

[JG52Krupi]

I will do it tonight didnt get the chance last night.

P.s. I'm sure some can get ~500kmh out of a 109 buts it's quite hard.

Also who flies with rads full open!!!! I will just do it with the rad settings I always use.

[Insuber]

In my tests as I suggested:

"How about a test start at 300Kmh at Sea level Go max ATA (without WEP) and Prop auto, Both RADS Full open... wait till all acceleration stops ...tell us your end IAS
Then repeat it in manual same Max ATA (without WEP) Both Rads full open ... Any RPM you choose.... wait till the acceleration stops ... tell us your end IAS and RPM you used."

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=354126&postcount=57

I get the exact same end game speed whether in AUTO or Manual. 440-450Kmh IAS.

There is NO way I can get 50Kmh better in manual.

What you obviously can do in manual is set up your own ATA/RPM combinations that might be beneficial in say a 1.25ATA climb. AUTO at 1.25ATA throttle position will give you 2100RPM where you might do better manually selecting 2300RPM. Personally I use MANUAL for any long term type situations with less than max throttle position. In Combat or any time I have full throttle AUTO.

RPM is tied to throttle position NOT ATA. Below FTH ATA is also directly proportional to throttle position.


Good test, thanks. So AUTO PP doesn't handicap the top speed, as it should be.

[Winger]

I will do it tonight didnt get the chance last night.

P.s. I'm sure some can get ~500kmh out of a 109 buts it's quite hard.

Also who flies with rads full open!!!! I will just do it with the rad settings I always use.

430 hrs of almost exclusive 109 flying. No way to achieve 500 kph IAS permanently in level flight. Not even with emergency power. With a slight dive its possible. But as soon as you go level you can maintain the speed a small time but it WILL drop below. Maybe 470-480 is possible WITH emergency power.

Winger

[JG52Krupi]

430 hrs of almost exclusive 109 flying. No way to achieve 500 kph IAS permanently in level flight. Not even with emergency power. With a slight dive its possible. But as soon as you go level you can maintain the speed a small time but it WILL drop below. Maybe 470-480 is possible WITH emergency power.

Winger

Well we will see to tonight and it's more like 480 not 500 my bad :)

[Winger]

Whatever you are discusing here:

I SCORED MY FIRST ONLINEKILL TODAY!

Sat in a Hurricane, managed to shoot down 2 bf109 and 1 bf110! What a day!

Those were unexperienced pilots i guess, and i have to admit that I crashed into the first bf109 after it emergency-landed, but i am proud:)

Strange enough i have smoother performance online, so I hope some of you guys will see me at 6 o´clock high once in a while...;-)

Good night

While the undetected low six is my place:P

Winger

PS: Congrats to your first kills. Even if it were virtual comrades of mine:)

[Flanker35M]

S!

The Bf110C-7 was mine Continu0. Annoying was that my reargunner did NOTHING, just sat there with gun in transit position. And before I could take control was too late and took a swim in the Channel :) Nevertheless, a kill is a kill :) Grats on the first ones and let there be a lot more! ;)

[IvanK]

Krupi I suggested Rads both full open to keep things common to all who test and ensure the conditions are exactly the same for each test. Playing with some in between rad setting will compromise the validity of the comparison as no one else can exactely match any other setting. Keep things simple and constant. I proposed the test and stated the conditions. How about just flying it as suggested. Then repeat it using whatever Rad settings you want. document both.

The purpose of the test is to determine the difference between AUTO and MANUAL prop pitch... nothing else. The claim made by Krupi was that you could achieve at least 50Kmh better in MANUAL. Exact top speed is not important in this test just the difference (if any ) between AUTO and MANUAL.

[JG52Krupi]

In level flight yeah the figure of 430-440 are correct but that's not where the auto prop starts to fail its climbing and diving that it is really slow on compared to manual.

So my humble apology John, Sapper you are correct... I just wondering where i got that 500kmh figure from :oops:

[IvanK]

Propeller Blade Pitch rate of change as seen by the clock gauge is identical in both Manual and Auto. At present it represents 1 degree per sec blade angle change. 1 Hour of clock movement takes 6 seconds Manual or Auto... timed using stopwatch.

[JG52Krupi]

Propeller Blade Pitch rate of change as seen by the clock gauge is identical in both Manual and Auto. At present it represents 1 degree per sec blade angle change. 1 Hour of clock movement takes 6 seconds Manual or Auto... timed using stopwatch.

Yes the movement might take the same time but when climbing and diving it messes up the auto prop...

I don't know a single person online that uses the auto prop... It sucks until they fix it.

[CaptainDoggles]

Yes the movement might take the same time but when climbing and diving it messes up the auto prop...

I don't know a single person online that uses the auto prop... It sucks until they fix it.

I use it online. If I'm trying to out-climb the RAF fighters equipped with CSP's I usually have to go into manual unless I'm zooming above them but other than that I leave it in auto pretty much at all times.

Tracking the target seems to be the hardest thing for me in CLOD so anything that keeps my eyes off the instrument panel is a bonus for me.

I get pretty good results with it, too. Tonight was the first time I've been shot down in many weeks.

[SlipBall]

You joust with a 109 E4 at low level over your field.

You are flying a Hurricane...

He has the far better aeroplane...

You do a nice little barrel roll and drop on his six and paste him and he crashes...

You salute him in chat...

And he says...

"Gay game" and quits.

Oh so satisfying.

:cool:


Nice piloting there El

[IvanK]

Yes the movement might take the same time but when climbing and diving it messes up the auto prop...

I don't know a single person online that uses the auto prop... It sucks until they fix it.


With Full throttle selected the only thing that is going to cause a prop pitch change is the change in TAS. This same TAS change is going to affect you (and the RPM/Prop) at the same rate whether you are in MANUAL or AUTO. In both cases blade angle needs to be changed ... either by you in MANUAL or by the aeroplane in AUTO. In both cases it can only be done at the same Blade angle change rate. IMO it copes exceptionally well with the TAS changes even in rapid descents.

So I don't see how it messes up the prop. Be specific exactly how do you think it messes up the prop ?

Its no good just saying it "sucks until they fix it up" If you think there is something wrong that needs fixing then be specific Test/Prove and document the issue. So far you have not done that. The level speed tests proved beyond doubt that AUTO was as good as Manual. I believe exactly the same for climbs etc.

I use AUTO On line in combat .... and at any time I have max throttle selected. All my Squadmates do the same. If I need/want a differrent RPM to what AUTO will give me when less than full throttle like in a 1.25ATA climb with 2300RPM then I select Manual. As soon as Full throttle is selected I go back into AUTO. Same in combat.

So lots of people are using AUTO quite successfully to reduce workload and still get as good performance as you can get in manual. Its a tool to be used as and when required. Key to using it properly is understanding how it works and then applying that knowledge to the task.

[Insuber]

With Full throttle selected the only thing that is going to cause a prop pitch change is the change in TAS. This same TAS change is going to affect you (and the RPM/Prop) at the same rate whether you are in MANUAL or AUTO. In both cases blade angle needs to be changed ... either by you in MANUAL or by the aeroplane in AUTO. In both cases it can only be done at the same Blade angle change rate. IMO it copes exceptionally well with the TAS changes even in rapid descents.

So I don't see how it messes up the prop. Be specific exactly how do you think it messes up the prop ?

Its no good just saying it "sucks until they fix it up" If you think there is something wrong that needs fixing then be specific Test/Prove and document the issue. So far you have not done that. The level speed tests proved beyond doubt that AUTO was as good as Manual. I believe exactly the same for climbs etc.

I use AUTO On line in combat .... and at any time I have max throttle selected. All my Squadmates do the same. If I need/want a differrent RPM to what AUTO will give me when less than full throttle like in a 1.25ATA climb with 2300RPM then I select Manual. As soon as Full throttle is selected I go back into AUTO. Same in combat.

So lots of people are using AUTO quite successfully to reduce workload and still get as good performance as you can get in manual. Its a tool to be used as and when required. Key to using it properly is understanding how it works and then applying that knowledge to the task.

I agree with Ivank, with E-4 I use AUTO most of the time, but it is most useful in rapid descents and subsequent climbs, when it coarsens the pitch quickly down to 8:30 and increases back to 11:30 during the zoom up. The AUTO is now very effective to keep your rpm constant, e.g. at 2300 at full throttle.
The only issues I have regard the weird behavior before doing the auto - manual - auto sequence described above. After that it keeps pace finely.

Cheers,
6S.Insuber

[Robo.]

I don't know a single person online that uses the auto prop... It sucks until they fix it.

That's certainly not true, Sir. The auto prop pitch is modelled OK and if used correctly, it's very effective. Correctly means just what IvanK wrote. I use it online and never had a problem with my performance being inferior to the on manual. The key is understanding how it works and use it accordingly. I don't think what you say is fair or true at all. :rolleyes:

[Robo.]

I rarely cruise at full 1.35ATA, prefer to keep the boost down to 1.16 or lower. How should the AutoPP respond to that in RL vs what it does in game (which is drop the PP down to 8:30 gradually)? I find it extremely unrealistic to dart around with the pedal to the metal all the time a la 1946. In manual mode, I tweak the rpm to around 9:30-10:10 to maintain a decent cruising speed, but the auto simply assumes I want the prop pitch backed off all the way, regardless of my planes attitude (dive or climb). Is that the way it worked historically? I know this isn't as sophisticated as the later Kommo systems.

Same here, in RL and also in game, your RPM will drop proportionally if your keep your MFP at say 1.16ata. If you encounter your prop pitch coarsening all the way down to 8:30, you probably have the glitch mentioned in this thread:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=27201

make sure your pp lever is in neutral position when you spawn (that's an issue online) and also make sure you take off at fine pitch. The PP drop is easy to overcome and that way, you get auto PP just as it worked in RL including it's behaviour under 1500RPM. ;)

[CaptainDoggles]

I rarely cruise at full 1.35ATA, prefer to keep the boost down to 1.16 or lower. How should the AutoPP respond to that in RL vs what it does in game (which is drop the PP down to 8:30 gradually)? I find it extremely unrealistic to dart around with the pedal to the metal all the time a la 1946. In manual mode, I tweak the rpm to around 9:30-10:10 to maintain a decent cruising speed, but the auto simply assumes I want the prop pitch backed off all the way, regardless of my planes attitude (dive or climb). Is that the way it worked historically? I know this isn't as sophisticated as the later Kommo systems.

You must be experiencing that glitch that I posted a thread about, because on automatic mode I routinely cruise around at 1.1 ATA and though the system decreases my RPMs to about 1800 or so, it never goes all the way to 8:30 unless I'm in a monstrous dive.

The only time I use manual is when trying to do sustained climbs at low speed. Even then, not always. With WEP/overboost and at a shallow angle you can still outclimb the RAF guys. Maybe not the Hurri if you're way up high.

[Continu0]

S!

The Bf110C-7 was mine Continu0. Annoying was that my reargunner did NOTHING, just sat there with gun in transit position. And before I could take control was too late and took a swim in the Channel :) Nevertheless, a kill is a kill :) Grats on the first ones and let there be a lot more! ;)

Well, it wasn´t meant personally;) I hope I didn´t piss you off too much as it seemd that you tried to fly over the channel(and that takes a while).

Not the way you want, but you made my day! Hope to see you another time in the air:grin:

[IvanK]

I rarely cruise at full 1.35ATA, prefer to keep the boost down to 1.16 or lower. How should the AutoPP respond to that in RL vs what it does in game (which is drop the PP down to 8:30 gradually)? I find it extremely unrealistic to dart around with the pedal to the metal all the time a la 1946. In manual mode, I tweak the rpm to around 9:30-10:10 to maintain a decent cruising speed, but the auto simply assumes I want the prop pitch backed off all the way, regardless of my planes attitude (dive or climb). Is that the way it worked historically? I know this isn't as sophisticated as the later Kommo systems.

As I said in my post if you want some different ATA/RPM combo than Auto gives you then drop in to MANUAL and go for it. I dont know exact values for the DB601 but these are the values the DB605 uses ... this comes from a known DB605 experten (Schwarzeman)

2100/1.05 900PS Economic cruise
2300/1.15 1075PS Max continuous
2600/1.3 1310PS 30Min Climb and combat
2800/1.42 1475PS 3Min Emergency

Obviously differrent values to the DB601 but it will give you an idea of the sort of relationships between ATA and RPM in AUTO. Remember AUTO RPM is determined by throttle lever position NOT ATA. Obviously below FTH then ATA is also determined directly by throttle lever position so in effect they are the same.

The numbers I have seen in CLOD DB601 (below FTH) for the AUTO ATA/RPM relationship are:
1700/1.00
1800/1.1
1.2/1900
1.25/1950
1.3/2050
1.35/2300
1.42/2350

We know the min governed RPM on the DB605 is 2000RPM. This effectively the Min RPM pitch stop. I suspect the DB601 in real life is the same (yet to confirm). If this is the case then it does suggest the CLOD ATA/RPM relationships for 1.0 to 1.2 are a bit low. If some one has documented DB601 values it would help getting this tweeked.

The bug on spawn in the E1-E3 and on the E4 when you select MANUAL of the prop winding back is a known bug and hopefully will be addressed. The fix is a quick blip to stop the windback. Re set 12:00 and then you are good to go. I do this this every engine start. I take off in MANUAL (12:00) I select AUTO once I get airborne. Using this technique I have never seen the prop slowly winding back to 8:30 and getting stuck.

[Robo.]

Nice one IvanK!

Is it known if the DB 601 'Aa' or 'A' engine is modelled in the E-4? Unfortunately, I don't know what the min governed RPM for 601s was, might as well be lower than 2000RPM. It is great to see all these small issues being addressed and fixed (mind you we started with a E-3 with lever not returning to the central position and now we have got a working Luftschrauben-Verstellautomatik ;) )

In order to fine-tune the FMs, it would be great to know which engines and which propellers are being modelled for each subvariant. Easy enough with the propellers - 9-11081E for E-4 and 9-11081A for E-1 and E-3, but the engines in E-4s did quite a difference regarding max ATA / RPM, from which appropriate RPM drop could be calculated as the pilot moves the throttle back gradually.

[CaptainDoggles]

Ok, still getting my head around it, so if you disable the autoPP, pull the throttle back, fiddle with the PP to get the ratio you want, then re-enable the PP, it will give you a sort of relationship from the throttle to the actual PP based upon the combination at the time the PP is set? So setting a lower throttle position (say 50%) and fining the PP to still give you 2200rpm, would give you an AutoPP that tries to keep a fine PP as you increase the throttle, until you reach a safety point when it would automatically coarsen the pitch?

If you re-enable auto, it behaves like it always does.

[IvanK]

Ok, still getting my head around it, so if you disable the autoPP, pull the throttle back, fiddle with the PP to get the ratio you want, then re-enable the PP, it will give you a sort of relationship from the throttle to the actual PP based upon the combination at the time the PP is set? So setting a lower throttle position (say 50%) and fining the PP to still give you 2200rpm, would give you an AutoPP that tries to keep a fine PP as you increase the throttle, until you reach a safety point when it would automatically coarsen the pitch?

No. As Doogles said once you select AUTO it will always give you the ATA/RPM relationship AUTO has been calibrated to. (Being nit pickky remember RPM demanded is a function of throttle position). If you dont like the combination AUTO gives you then select MANUAL and Set whatever combination you desire.

[IvanK]

I am not sure if this VDM chart helps the discussion. I hope might give the desired ideal AUTO RPM relationship ?

Not being a German speaker means I am in the hands of On line translators.

http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/706/vdmdhzr99518b.jpg

The various Engine and prop combinations are there.

[Insuber]

Great info there Ivank! Thank you mate!

[TomcatViP]

IvanK are you time travelling ?

[Robo.]

IvanK are you time travelling ?

Not quite sure what you mean, but the 601A + 9-9518B is legit in 1940.

[TomcatViP]

sry I was jocking making fun of the ability of Ivan to dig out interesting material.

What I see on this chart :

Prop pitch value in function of engine rpm corrected by the speed regulator that hve a f=1-kx² law.

My guess : x² stand for the dyn pressure and k stand for the ro correction

That way basically we have the linear rules btw eng rpm and blade pitch that lead to the throttle only ctrled characteristic of the automation system. Clever ...

WHat it means for us (speculation again )?

you might hve to reset the syst one way or another in certain conditions. Wasn't there a reset button or a mention to a certain procedure in the manual like throttling full back ?

[Robo.]

Oh yeah TomcatViP, got it now, and thanks for the info, makes sense! ;)

Regarding the auto mode as we talk about it - it would be worth testing if the revs increase above 5500m automatically:

''The devices for the automatic regulations of the revs
hitherto used will be modified by Messerschmitt and VDM as quickly as
possible so that the short period increase in revs to 2600 for the
DB 601 A and 2800 for the DB 601 N permissable above the full pressure
height can also be made by the automatic device.''

The maximum permitted RPM for DB 601A-1 was 2400, which could be exceeded for short period of time above 5500m - up to 2600RPM.

[Flanker35M]

S!

No worries Continu0 ;) This is just a game and I lost my SA for a while. Hope to see you in the air!

Great stuff IvanK :) Documentation like this = less whining :)

[IvanK]

Oh yeah TomcatViP, got it now, and thanks for the info, makes sense! ;)

Regarding the auto mode as we talk about it - it would be worth testing if the revs increase above 5500m automatically:

''The devices for the automatic regulations of the revs
hitherto used will be modified by Messerschmitt and VDM as quickly as
possible so that the short period increase in revs to 2600 for the
DB 601 A and 2800 for the DB 601 N permissable above the full pressure
height can also be made by the automatic device.''

The maximum permitted RPM for DB 601A-1 was 2400, which could be exceeded for short period of time above 5500m - up to 2600RPM.

Here is the original source document to that statement Robo. This is an allied translation of a an original German source document. The exact provenance of this document is unknown, though it came to me by way of Schwarzeman. The document provides some interesting other details. The hand written date is I guess the only real point of debate.

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/6518/bf109eautopitch.jpg


On the subject of the ideal AUTO RPM versus ATA (Below FTH) Relationship I think we can deduce from various RAE test documents, A set BF109T pilots notes (DB601n though) that the most likely relationship would be.

1.4ATA/2600 (DB601N) .... 2400 DB601Aa
1.3ATA/2400
1.23ATA/2300
1.15ATA/2200
2000RPM min governed valued (now confirmed for DB601 from RLM docs).
Remembering of course that the actual determinant of RPM is throttle position :)

One further point is that in game a Static runup at 1.3ATA will only get you 2000RPM. You should be able to get 2300RPM at zero forward speed.

With these values in mind the Sim needs a little tweaking. Easily done from an instrumentation/animation point of view but the power output would need to reflect these values as well.

[Robo.]

On the subject of the ideal AUTO RPM versus ATA (Below FTH) Relationship I think we can deduce from various RAE test documents, A set BF109T pilots notes (DB601n though) that the most likely relationship would be.

1.4ATA/2600 (DB601N) .... 2400 DB601Aa
1.3ATA/2400
1.23ATA/2300
1.15ATA/2200
2000RPM min governed valued (now confirmed for DB601 from RLM docs).
Remembering of course that the actual determinant of RPM is throttle position :)

One further point is that in game a Static runup at 1.3ATA will only get you 2000RPM. You should be able to get 2300RPM at zero forward speed.

With these values in mind the Sim needs a little tweaking. Easily done from an instrumentation/animation point of view but the power output would need to reflect these values as well.

Great stuff IvanK, you're a star mate!