Thursday Update Speed graphs

[IvanK]

Thanks for the graphs. Could we see the charts for Spit I, Spit IA, Spit IIA and Hurricane DH and ROTOL please ?

[ATAG_Dutch]

See post #38 here mate! ;)

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=411311#post411311

[Kurfürst]

I have gut feeling that most Red pilots will have a heart attack when they see them...

[Jatta Raso]

I have gut feeling that most Red pilots will have a heart attack when they see them...

if the Spit 1a gets a notch more power and the Hurries are downgraded below the Spit, as the devs have said, then with the massive jump of reds onto more powerful Spits, i think blues will have the heart attack...

can't wait :mrgreen:

[5./JG27.Farber]

if the Spit 1a gets a notch more power and the Hurries are downgraded below the Spit, as the devs have said, then with the massive jump of reds onto more powerful Spits, i think blues will have the heart attack...

can't wait :mrgreen:

I just hope they are ALL closer to reality than what we have now.

[JG5_emil]

I just hope they are ALL closer to reality than what we have now.

This

[ATAG_Snapper]

I just hope they are ALL closer to reality than what we have now.

+1

[SEE]

Would be nice to see the graphs but, to avoid disappointment (and possible heart attacks...:grin:), all I expect for the allied fighters is what was stated in the last two updates - a Reduction in speed at all altitudes for the Rotol Hurri/Spit Mk2, a correction for the speed drop in the Spit Mk1's at 6K+ and correction to the indicated climb rate for Spit2 and Rotol Hurri .


What is there to have an heart attack about?.....:rolleyes:

Now where did i put my pilot notes for the G50 and 109? :grin:

[Jatta Raso]

I also hope they ALL become much closer to reality; that's WHY hurries should be downgraded and Spits upgraded, well that's what i meant from the start..

haven't been flying 109s for long but seems to me they need a speed increased but not that much, the gap between the speed performance of Spits and 109s should be narrowed IMO..

[CWMV]

Seems that the new graph for the 109 dosent show much of an increase.

[David198502]

if they can do it for the G50(which really seems close to the pilot manual), they should be able to do it for all the other planes as well....we will have to wait for the RAF graphs to judge, but at least the 109 graph shows still a pretty big gap between the ingame performance and the pilotmanual curve.

if they get all the planes as accurate as the G50, then im happy...

[Buchon]

I saw something in those graphs, a common pattern in all planes graphs, that unveil that they reached the limits of the coded FM simulation, specially at high altitude.

Looks that they are trying to deal with it, trying reach the point close to reality as is possible, until the next FM code revision that is mentioned to be in BoM.

[VO101_Tom]

I just hope they are ALL closer to reality than what we have now.

+1
Promising the known graphs, there is no reason to think that the British aircraft performance will be less accurate. IvanK, thank your time and effort, and the Devs that willing to change it. :cool:

[addman]

They'll never show the red planes graphs, this place would implode if they did.

[JG52Uther]

G50 FTW! Who wants a 'statwhore' plane when you can fly a Fiat!

[klem]

Would be nice to see the graphs but, to avoid disappointment (and possible heart attacks...:grin:), all I expect for the allied fighters is what was stated in the last two updates - a Reduction in speed at all altitudes for the Rotol Hurri/Spit Mk2, a correction for the speed drop in the Spit Mk1's at 6K+ and correction to the indicated climb rate for Spit2 and Rotol Hurri .


What is there to have an heart attack about?.....:rolleyes:

Now where did i put my pilot notes for the G50 and 109? :grin:

How about no mention of an increase in Spitfire MkI/Ia performance as reported in the Bug Tracker as Feature #84, not to mention a myriad of posts?

Are we still to be stuck with an underperforming Spitfire? I'm not blindly speculating, the Thursday update reported the specific changes and that was not one of them.