Nerfed flight models or control surface range limitations?

[fuzzychickens]

Anyone else experiencing this? Even in sim mode and online, the La series turn like dogs, even late model 109Gs can out turn them.

Any 1946 players care to comment on this? I used to man the 109G6AS and the one thing I would never try was turn fight the LA series planes - I would always boom n zoom.

So far online, it seems I can outturn the La-5 or 7 players with a 109g loaded with gunpods - screwy!

Someone ether nerfed the flight model on these planes or something is seriously wrong with my gamepad and stick.

EDIT: I'm now thinking that the control surface deflection (at least on the elevator) isn't the same range as in the PC - rather it's reduced for all planes possibly. For planes I would expect a violent stall from yanking the stick back in sim mode at 300-400kmh, the stall doesn't occur until it bleeds a certain speed off - where as in the PC version the stall could come instantly and more violently.

[Soviet Ace]

Well I think it's a bit screwy as well. But depending on your altitude, (You've gotta keep it low.) The La-5FN or La-7 should work better. But even then, I can see it not being what it should be, and what it was in real life. So yeah, the flight model is a bit messed up.

[towman]

In the PC version the La5, especially the La7 was a monster, always felt like easy mode turned on flying those two. I wonder if those were more accurate flight models or these in BoP are the correct ones.

[fuzzychickens]

Oleg's flight model certainly agrees with history and I would trust his judgement.

A 109g6 with underwing cannon pods should NOT be outturning an la5 or La7 in this game and that is exactly what I see online in arcade, realistic and sim mode.

Something is screwy. I don't see any point to flying the La series in this game with the borked turn performance.

I just want to know if the flight model was messed with or if it's maybe a bug that can be fixed. It seems as if you can't even get full deflection in elevator on these two.

I can't be the only one who thinks something is messed up.

[fuzzychickens]

Ok, did some "testing" in simulator mode.

A 109g6 with cannon pods on the wings will loop at 450kmh in about 17 secs.

A la5fn will do the same in 17 secs.

To me, it seems if they have just given "counterpart" aircrafts the same turn performance to dumb the game down or "equalize" for balancing purposes.

Anyways, something was screwed with and it's becoming apparent that trying to utilize historic advantages/disadvantages of aircraft (even in sim settings) will be pointless for online gameplay.

The only planes with obvious performance differences are the earlier fighters like the I-153 and I-16.

I'm seriously dissapointed if this is the case, hope it's just a bug.

[H Lecter]

I'm seriously dissapointed if this is the case, hope it's just a bug.

+1

I could not tell if the flight model is off, but I would hate to know that it is.

[Soviet Ace]

Ok, did some "testing" in simulator mode.

A 109g6 with cannon pods on the wings will loop at 450kmh in about 17 secs.

A la5fn will do the same in 17 secs.

To me, it seems if they have just given "counterpart" aircrafts the same turn performance to dumb the game down or "equalize" for balancing purposes.

Anyways, something was screwed with and it's becoming apparent that trying to utilize historic advantages/disadvantages of aircraft (even in sim settings) will be pointless for online gameplay.

The only planes with obvious performance differences are the earlier fighters like the I-153 and I-16.

I'm seriously dissapointed if this is the case, hope it's just a bug.

Actually, the Yak-3 has a performance difference in BoP. That plane turns on a dime, and never stalls on me. Maybe it's because I've flown them for so long, but the La-5FN and La-7 do not act like they should or did in BoP.

[fuzzychickens]

Haven't unlocked the Yak3 yet, what mission does that?

[Soviet Ace]

First mission in Campaign in the Battle of Berlin.

[David603]

Ok, did some "testing" in simulator mode.

A 109g6 with cannon pods on the wings will loop at 450kmh in about 17 secs.

A la5fn will do the same in 17 secs.

To me, it seems if they have just given "counterpart" aircrafts the same turn performance to dumb the game down or "equalize" for balancing purposes.

Anyways, something was screwed with and it's becoming apparent that trying to utilize historic advantages/disadvantages of aircraft (even in sim settings) will be pointless for online gameplay.

The only planes with obvious performance differences are the earlier fighters like the I-153 and I-16.

I'm seriously dissapointed if this is the case, hope it's just a bug.
I tried repeating your test in Il2 1946. Same two aircraft, La5FN and a Bf109G6 with 20mm gunpods.

Started each test flying flat and level at 450km/h at 1000m, full fuel and ammo in both planes. Bank hard right, no flaps, and see how long it takes to reach the starting heading after flying a 360 degree circle without losing altitude.

Turn time in the La5FN was almost exactly what you achieved, my average of three tries was 17 seconds.

The G6 with gunpods produced an average time of 18 seconds.

Results are close enough that I don't think the flight model has been changed.

[fuzzychickens]

I tried repeating your test in Il2 1946. Same two aircraft, La5FN and a Bf109G6 with 20mm gunpods.

Started each test flying flat and level at 450km/h at 1000m, full fuel and ammo in both planes. Bank hard right, no flaps, and see how long it takes to reach the starting heading after flying a 360 degree circle without losing altitude.

Turn time in the La5FN was almost exactly what you achieved, my average of three tries was 17 seconds.

The G6 with gunpods produced an average time of 18 seconds.

Results are close enough that I don't think the flight model has been changed.

That's my point, a 109g with GUNPODS should be anywhere close to the turn time of an la5fn.

Try this, get a friend online flying a g6 WITHOUT gunpods and see if you can keep on his 6 in a turning circle when you are in la5fn or la7.

The turn performance is WAY off on these two planes.

[Soviet Ace]

I my book "Lavochkin's Piston Engined Fighters", it says that the turning ability of the La-5FN was about 10-12 seconds, and the La-7 was about 14 seconds (depending on altitude as well). Just thought I'd share that little tidbit with you all :D

[David603]

That's my point, a 109g with GUNPODS should be anywhere close to the turn time of an la5fn.

Try this, get a friend online flying a g6 WITHOUT gunpods and see if you can keep on his 6 in a turning circle when you are in la5fn or la7.

The turn performance is WAY off on these two planes.
In what way are you saying the turn times are off? You should be able to out turn a La5FN with a Bf109G6 in stock trim. Therefore the way a Bf109G6 with gunpods is not at too much of a disadvantage at sustained turn rates does not surprise me. If you were saying a Bf109G6 with gunpods could match turn rates with a Yak-3, now that would surprise me.

[David603]

I my book "Lavochkin's Piston Engined Fighters", it says that the turning ability of the La-5FN was about 10-12 seconds, and the La-7 was about 14 seconds (depending on altitude as well). Just thought I'd share that little tidbit with you all :D
At what starting speed, altitude and loadout? And with or without flaps? Just thought that if your book does have that kind of detail, I could try to replicate it.

[Soviet Ace]

At about 5-8,000 ft. the La-5FN turns about the same. With full fuel, weapons (no extra gun pods or anything like that.) The La-5FN turns about the same, but obviously with less fuel, it can turn much more since it's lightened.

The La-7, has it at about 6,500-7,500 feet. Same fuel amount and weapons. Bot speeds are at about 80% maybe a bit less, the book doesn't give an exact number, but try it at about 75-80% throttle, and then at Higher altitudes do the same. I'm going to actually go try this myself. I'm going to try it at 90% throttle also, just to see what it's like?

[David603]

Ok, I thought I would try out the turning circles of a few more planes just because I have never done this before. Same use of Il2 1946, same starting at 450km/h at 1000m with full fuel and weapons, 90% throttle and no use of flaps. Went from average of three to best of three for the final result though. Redid the tests for the two planes I tried before as well.

La5FN 17 seconds
La7 18 seconds
Yak-3 14 seconds
Bf109F4 14 seconds
Bf109G2 15 seconds
Bf109G6 16 seconds
-20mm pods 18 seconds
Bf109G10 17 seconds
Bf109K4 18 seconds

All these aircraft are available in Birds of Prey, so it should be possible to repeat these tests there. I'm sure you will agree Oleg Maddox as a Russian is not going to be biased towards the German aircraft, though I have faith that he would not have favoured the Russian aircraft either.

[fuzzychickens]

Ok, I thought I would try out the turning circles of a few more planes just because I have never done this before. Same use of Il2 1946, same starting at 450km/h at 1000m with full fuel and weapons, 90% throttle and no use of flaps. Went from average of three to best of three for the final result though. Redid the tests for the two planes I tried before as well.

La5FN 17 seconds
La7 18 seconds
Yak-3 14 seconds
Bf109F4 14 seconds
Bf109G2 15 seconds
Bf109G6 16 seconds
-20mm pods 18 seconds
Bf109G10 17 seconds
Bf109K4 18 seconds

All these aircraft are available in Birds of Prey, so it should be possible to repeat these tests there. I'm sure you will agree Oleg Maddox as a Russian is not going to be biased towards the German aircraft, though I have faith that he would not have favoured the Russian aircraft either.

The g6 NEVER could stay in sustained turning circles with an La5fn in 1946 on realistic settings, it can and the some in BOP.

The 109g6 was NOT a turn fighter.

[David603]

The g6 NEVER could stay in sustained turning circles with an La5fn in 1946 on realistic settings, it can and the some in BOP.

The 109g6 was NOT a turn fighter.
The La5FN is not really a turn fighter either, and the Bf109s can always surprise you with their turning circles, despite their bad reputation in this regard. I have all the realism settings turned on in 1946, that is the way I always fly and that's how those results were obtained.

[teambayern]

How big are the problems here? I've always wanted to get into flight sims (got pretty deep into Falcon before my computer died) and was hoping to finally make the plunge now that a real sim has come to the xbox. I'm reading up on things like propwash, adverse yaw, ect. and it seems like that's all there. But next I'm reading up on the specific planes and their advantages and disadvantages. Is it even worth it? Are we talking about minor inconsistencies or serious problems?

[David603]

How big are the problems here? I've always wanted to get into flight sims (got pretty deep into Falcon before my computer died) and was hoping to finally make the plunge now that a real sim has come to the xbox. I'm reading up on things like propwash, adverse yaw, ect. and it seems like that's all there. But next I'm reading up on the specific planes and their advantages and disadvantages. Is it even worth it? Are we talking about minor inconsistencies or serious problems?
I haven't seen anything in the way of major inconsistencies, the flight models seem to agree with those in Il2 1946 which are generally regarded as being very accurate.

[Soviet Ace]

The Yak-3 number is correct. Not sure about the 109s since I'm not a total 109 buff. :cool:

[David603]

The Yak-3 number is correct. Not sure about the 109s since I'm not a total 109 buff. :cool:
I'm not 100% sure either but the figures sound about right to me.

I was a bit surprised the F4 could match the Yak-3's turn rate, knew it as agile but I didn't think it was that agile, so I ran that test back a couple of times for both planes and came out with the same results.

Might try and add some more planes like the earlier Yaks and LaGGs to that list.

[Soviet Ace]

It would have been so much fun if they had added a LaGG-3 to BoP!! "Laminated Coffins" are AWESOME!! *Joke*

[David603]

I added a couple more aircraft to the turning rate table. Some more older Russian and German aircraft, plus some aircraft known for their turning circles.
LaGG-3 15 seconds
La-5FN 17 seconds
La-7 18 seconds
Yak-1 14 seconds
Yak-3 14 seconds
Yak-9D 16 seconds
Bf109E4 15 seconds
Bf109F4 14 seconds
Bf109G2 15 seconds
Bf109G6 16 seconds
-20mm pods 18 seconds
Bf109G10 17 seconds
Bf109K4 18 seconds
I-16 11 seconds
Hurricane MkI 12 seconds
A6M5 Zero 12 seconds

[fuzzychickens]

I'm starting to wonder if it isn't the flight model but maybe some reduction in the amount of control surface deflection allowed in the console version.

In the PC game you could (at speeds below 350kmh) yank the stick all the way back on stall prone planes and get a violent reaction followed by a stall.

Like with a 109, 190, P51, or even spitfires, The reaction in this game just seems "softer" if I had to put a word to it. The p51 for sure should be able to pull harder at high speed with combat flaps - it just doesn't feel the same in BOP.

Not sure what the deal is - but something is off in simulator mode. Again, "soft" would be the word I would use to describe how the planes feel.

[fuzzychickens]

Ok, now I am certain control throw is reduced or something messed with in flight model.

I tested the 109G2 in 1946. If you go full power (WEP) and max turning without stalling on the deck, your plane will keep losing speed and until you are low and slow. Just about every plane did this if you kept turning at max AOA.

In BOP in sim mode, you can keep throttle at WEP, max stick deflection and it will even accelrate back up to 330kmh.

First off, max stick defelction in 109G2 in 1946 would result in a violent stall - you could even get a violent stall in the La series in 1946, secondly you would keep losing airspeed until you had to stop turning to get airspeed back.

This is on sim mode in 1946 and BOP.

So either the flight model is messed with or the control surface deflection range has been limited for whatever reason (maybe to dumb it down for consoles?).

Essentially, the planes are not flying the same as in 1946. I'd like to know what was changed. I was under the impression the flight models were not messed with. If so, then was the max deflection reduced?