You're using historical flying techniques of course, you charlatan! Your kind is not welcomed here, and your common sense will not be tolerated!!!!

BURN THE WITCH!!!!

Sorry, couldn't help myself. :)

lol!!!


>icefire, whatever you take the time to write i will go through with a fine tooth comb. if im lucky i will find something that saves my (virtual) life one day :)

>whistlinggdeath, the same applies. maybe one day it will put me on your six!

Lets not start yet another "P51 won the war" versus " no it didn't that was just Hollywood" thread.

Somehow those debates always deteriorate and end up in a US versus rest of the world bun fight with no connection to historical WII facts and figures on either side.

I fly on a server where you can expect to have at least semi-historical plane sets - contemporary planes, from the proper sides. So I don't have to take it up against Spitfires and La-7's, only against Bf 109's, Fw 190's or Ki-84's.

Generally, I only engage if I have the advantage. I disengage if I don't. The good thing about the P-51 is that it is fast, and allows you to disengage very easily in a shallow high speed dive.

Also, it is great at high altitude, so if someone wants to deny me the altitude advantage, he'll have to climb up into my playground. There I can defeat him even without an altitude advantage.

I usually fly the P-51 loaded with about 50% fuel at 90% pitch, 99% power, rads closed at higher speeds. I open the radiator for extended low speed climbs over friendly territory. I go all out when I need to run, no use in getting shot down with a brand new engine. Better to rtb with a wrecked one. My convergence is usually set to 150 .. 200.

I know the opposition very well, I fly all planes frequently. I for instance know which planes I can outdive, which I can outclimb, which altitudes I am faster at and so on. I also know that the 109 manoeuvrability sucks at high speed, and that there's no way it can follow me through high speed scissors. Listing details like that is a bit too much to do here. I can only recommend to look at data given in il-2 compare, memorise it and use it.

In most cases, I fly like IceFire already described - hit and run or B'n'Z or energy fighting, with gentle control input. I try to maintain a high speed and a good altitude. I don't blow my advantage in order to follow a bandit through a tight turn, in which I'd only black out anyway. I rather use repeated passes, and if the guy is just too good at dodging repeated passes, I'll just leave him where he is going to look for an easier target.

Most people that realise that you're not pushing things will get lazy with their defence. Also many folks have a single favourite evasive manoeuvre, which they will perform every time you show up on their six. So with every pass you do, they'll be an easier target.

And now the fun fact - the P-51 can dogfight fairly well. If you're low on fuel, it is absolutely possible to beat a 109 or a 190 in a dogfight, I've done so numerous times. You shouldn't take on a 109G-2, but G-6 and later usually works out OK, as do 190ies. You have to be aware that once you have slowed down to the 109 speed, it can regain speed and altitude quicker than you, so if you need to disengage, dive. If you instead of going into a zoom climb go into a lag pursuit mode as IceFire said, you can come down on his 6 fairly quickly again. Usually, this catches the bad guy off guard, but even if not, your speed is still superior and with combat flaps, you should have little trouble following him through a number of manoeuvres. Don't get too close, you may overshoot, and abort when you still have a chance.

Anyway, all of the above may sound as if the P-51 was a killing machine for the lone wolf, but it is not. Most of my kills I achieve when cooperating with team mates, may they want that or not. A bandit focussed on turning with someone else, easy meat. A bandit zooming up in a fight with someone else, easy meat again. A bandit recovering from an evasive manoeuvre flown to dodge someone else's attack, easy meat. A guy flying straight while chasing a team mate, easy meat. You get the picture - fast planes all are OK on their own, but _extremely_ good when flown even loosely in some sort of team work. The P-51 is no exception. And in that kind of combat, it leaves the performances of Spitfires and La-7's far behind. Dive speed, high speed manoeuvring, high speeds - that's what counts and what the P-51 is clearly better at than the other two.

JtD > thanks for taking the time to write all that! i think im starting to see where the difference in flying styles is here.

it seems that both [icefire] and [jtd] fly significantly more horizontal than what whistlinggdeath describes. although you use energy tactics you stay fast. i get the impression that you keep your high yoyo's in a 45 to 60 degree plane of motion, whilst whistlinggdeath makes me think of vertical hammerhead turns when he talks about apex climbs.

icefire and jtd, you seem to fly team versus team.
whistlinggdeath, you seem to duel more.

if you know that there is only one enemy about you can afford to win the fight by holding in the vertical until the last possible moment. on a server with imperfect situational awareness this is risky.

apex climbs and hammerheads seem to be about the worst possible thing to do with an engine. your really slow for a very long time, whilst using high power levels. in a way you are stall fighting. the spitty needed very big radiators to be able to do that.

i also get the impression that you are working different height bands. the air at 20000 feet is 40 degrees celsius colder than at ground level. from what i have read IL2 models outside air temperature effects.

since 4.11 every plane is a little bit slower. there is a greater difference between peak speed and max sustained speed. from playing about offline it seems like both the tempest and spit25 are about 30 to 40 kph slower. speed is life, height is life-insurance but temperature is offensive capability.

i remember a quote;
"The engine is overheating, and so am I. Either we stand down or blow up"
i think that was from a bunch of p51's sitting on the runway waiting to take off. if the p51 overheated at idle on the runway, a power-on minimum speed apex turn is going to get hot real quick.

in a fair match any of you guys could beat me. i win online because im sneaky. i either use stealth or fool people into thinking i pose less of a threat than i actually do. i consider you all far more knowledgeable about the p51 than i am. my personal interest in this thread is because i think il2 is an incredible simulator and i want to see it keep developing. there are some modern 'simulators' that still cant model stalls, spins and sideslips properly.

i guess the questions are;
what changes are we asking for?
what suggestions do we have for the developers with regard to engine temperature?

The link below is for Swiss and Icefire (and others interested). The methodology is simple; I load up 4.11, start the QMB on the Okinawa map, start in the TA 152 H1 at 1000m of height, and fly for exactly one minute (so that the random number generator of 4.11 does not start my engine hot or cold), and then slowly ramp up power from 90% to 110% (all this on auto prop pitch) and put it into a combat dive and then semi-steep climb. I achieve overheat on a brand new fresh engine in ~15 seconds. And I am no where close to the apex of the climb or stalling.

Sorry, WTF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did I just say 15 seconds. Wow !

Load it for yourself:

http://www.mediafire.com/?sy2wk0y2b2d71ca

Now Team A can quote their esoteric figures from historical manual C, while Team B quotes their figures from manual D, but in no manner, shape or form did the TA 152 (or the P51, or the FW or the, etc...) overheat a brand new engine in 15 seconds in a dive.

Now, repeat this simple test for yourselves with the Spits 25lbs. Ya know it is coming right..........

....wait for it.....

NO OVERHEAT in the apex climb portion. NONE. In fact I can do several loops in the Spit 25lbs with nada, nothing happening, while the P51 engine or TA engine is long gone. (they even removed the need in the spits to engage boost, you simply just push your throttle up past 100 percent, ... could it get any simpler for the open pit newbers ?)

And the P51 and late Spits have the same engine right ? The Merlin Rolls Royce thingy, correct? That is why, despite his sound testing in the very first post of this thread, JG27 Papa, did not capture the essential point, I am making: The combat climb portion of the overheat model, which is so essential to BnZ planes (but not to TnB ones) widens an already noticeable gap in favor of the UFO fliers and is by far inaccurately modeled (and incorrectly applied to two planes that use the same engine). Not only that, but the source code changes to the flight models of several FWs, and the TA show several reductions. In particular, the TA 152 has been downgraded, point blank. ...........Who did this patch once again ?

It's true, shauncm, I usually do not go up into hammerhead turns. Sometimes I do, but that is supposed to be the exception. Like you say, going that slow on a dogfight server is quite risky.

I'm not necessarily fighting team vs. team, I duel, too. But I don't duel until one side is dead, I usually duel as long as I am comfortable doing so. I try to stay alive, and only thereafter to achieve a kill.

Regarding the air temperature at high altitude, yes, it is colder, but it also is thinner. This about evens out for water cooled planes. If you look at cooling data, you'll find the differences between high and low altitude are not that big.

Being sneaky is a valuable skill, it's never good to offer the enemy a fair fight, he might win that one. ;)

Btw JtD, your notes above on P51 use are pretty much dead on. Post that in a thread over at Mission4Today.com in the tactics and gameplay section to help out all the other North Americans wondering why the vaunted P51 does poorly in IL2.

no need to follow their rule. it is just game and made by russian, just quit, no one plays german side anymore. let this game's online play die out.

I think your track doesn't show anything! :(

Works just for me. I even downloaded it to make sure manually.

I do play German side and there are a lot of guys playing quite professional on the German side!

Hahahahaha, I remember Oleg getting it from all angles, the russians saying the blue planes were to good, the blue fliers saying red was to good.

everyones an expert.

I meant it doesn't prove anything! I never dive in a Ta at full throttle!

the following is wrong. please disregard. there was an error in the manual, it confuses the oil and coolant gauges...





ok, i had a look at the track and im starting to see what you mean.

the overheat message is triggerded by the oil temperature being too hot, the coolant is fine.

for most planes you can reduce this problem by lowering the revs, but the 190 d9 and ta152 seem to have some major problems here.

you have to take the engine off auto prop pitch and fly with prop pitch set to zero! this seems dumb.

rad is closed too. :confused:

I think all the guys complaining here just need to do some reading on how to implement tactics in this simulator and find a person to form up a team. One thing is for sure: the lone wolf era is gone!!

I'm going back to bed Swiss, but you dont need the rad open for only one dive. Set PP to manual and then to zero ?!!! ? Wth ?

No TA 152 ever overheated a brand new engine in 15 seconds !!!

What this amounts to is plane and simple (lets put all the little distractions to the side),

THE OVERHEAT MODEL IS MESSED UP, ..... BADLY.

Did you just smash your keyboard? How old are you lol

If you don't like the patch, don't install it. If you are trying to get something improved, be reasonable :???:

WD, you didn't answer two questions: what's your nickname on grijdedicado and where is your WD famous server?

Baato, - Okay, just to for your sake, I will again ask nicely then;

Kindly, dear sirs, what 'engineer' (s) made this patch ?

Snake - My server is up from roughly 7 PM to 12 AM PST (Pacific Time -US), Monday thru Friday and sometimes weekends. It is not famous and many dont like it because it is full real, some very hard opponents and most people get their azz shot clean off when they show up (and that includes me as well :) ). My callsign on Grij is of course WhistlinggDeath, and some special ones I use when I am testing something out.

More folks will likely follow with their historical manuals in tow, but for me, it is bed time gents. GN

Just tried the Yak9U, it overheats just as fast.
Now reminding the Ta is easy to fly while the 9 is one mean SOB, I think is fair enough.

With every patch this game gets a lot more difficult, in the beginning it's always a pita, but once you adapt you'll love it.
It also requires you to constantly change your style. Trust me, you have no idea how p.o. i was when they introduced the 2sec fuses.
Made me switch to BK, today I'm an export on it. Guess I should say; thank you TD.

WD does have a point. MW50 should be able to be running for 10 minutes continuously. After that the engine should rest for at least 5 minutes to prevent potential damage. Then the MW50 can be engaged for another 10 minutes.

All aircrafts equipped with MW50 have the same overheating problem as the TA.

ok, sorry, i didnt realise that the manual is actually wrong. it seems that in the aircraft guide the coolant and oil temperature gauges are labeled back to front. the left gauge is actually coolant, not oil...sorry!

once i realised that it was the coolant overheating rather than oil, i opened the radiator and backed off on power.

whoops!

when i said fly at zero prop pitch i was talking about the H model with the variable pitch propellor, the C model is different.

Unless you exceed max RPM allowed. 10 minutes MW50 limit doesn't mean that some of the other limitations will not kick in first( engine or coolant temperature, revs).

For those who judge people by their nationality I can only say that there is more Germans than Russians in DT, ratio is something like 4:1.

FC

No matter what other limitations might be, engines equipped with MW50 should not be damaged within 10 minutes. But try yourself in game, every engine with MW50 enabled will be damaged within 5 minutes, no matter how you fly.

You're probably right. I would have called it fighting in the vertical but ... some may consider it still a more horizontal flight. I never do hammerheads and high angle maneuvers in a Mustang. I shouldn't say never... usually when I do is when they get me :) Staying fast is much more important.

I watched your track and I repeated the same experiment. Basically the same overheat in the Ta152H-1. Mine took longer every time by several seconds but that may be random variability. I repeated the same experiment on some of the colder maps (i.e. Moscow) and it takes quite a bit longer to overheat... I also noticed that the Spitfire's auto radiator opened sooner than the Ta152H. Both overheated but the Spitfire did take longer and was at a much lower speed when it did overheat.

The Spitfire WEP modeling is now correct. It was incorrect before. There is no WEP button in a Spitfire...instead you push the throttle to 100%. After 100% you can engage WEP but it requires breaking a wire on the throttle to push it past that point. The Mustang throttle in IL-2 behaves the same way and always has...the inaccuracy was the Spitfire. It doesn't make it a UFO or a "noob machine". You need to stop talking like this as it reflects poorly on any legitimate points you're bringing up.

You are wrong that the Spitfire (I tested a few different models) does overheat in a climb just like the others. It takes a fair bit longer... that said...repeating the same test in a Ta152H-1 without MW50 boost (so normal WEP) and the Ta152H-1 was able to climb and maneuver without the overheat message much in the same way that the Spitfire did. I did some loops in a Ta152H-1 at 110% (non MW50) and it behaved just like the Spitfire did.

Only when pushing to the maximum and injecting MW50 does it increase the overheat. I also notice that the ATA is quite a bit higher and I wonder if going to 110% WEP in a Spitfire is really equivalent to 110% with MW50 boost. Someone else may know? Certainly on the speed charts the MW50 gives a bigger speed increase from 100% than 110% WEP on a Spitfire or Mustang.

Does anyone here ever been thinking about ... the Fokker DXXI ... for example? :rolleyes:

As a Dutchman I fly it all the time and am very grateful for it. I noticed it hasn't been affected at all by the new patch.

In 4.09 it had some weird overrev/overheat charactistics, but it pretty hard to overheat at all since 4.10 (and lets keep it that way ;) )

Once again, you seem to be conveniently disregarding that track I posted. I went 10 minutes with MW50 and full WEP without any ill effects.

Also, MW50 can be engaged without having to go to maximum boost. I'm not sure that the manuals factor in slow turning and apex-climbs and hammerheads at 110% power. Remember, they say "maximum" of 10 minutes (assuming everything else with the plane is in tip-top shape), not "at least" 10 minutes.

Thanks for the campaign, and the plane guys ;) It's one of my favorites.

Ah.. a 'flying dutchman'! :D Very well then. It should by default have the same treatment regarding the overheat issue as every other plane, since its a global change. If its not hard to handle, fine. Must be because of its radial engine.

Paarthurnax has awoken from a long slumber atop Throat of the World to look down on the realm of mortal man as they sully along, historical aviation manuals in hand, and shout out to Joor' avi:

You are missing the forest for the tree. Download my track and you will see the Ta 152 H1 with a brand new engine overheat in 15 seconds (and I did not even use boost). No plane overheated in 15 seconds, except maybe something from World War 1, with a gas tank that a war horse nearby accidentally pizzed in. Furthermore, I can ride around in the UFO clown wagons for several climbs without overheat coming on. This patch mun is a gift to UFO fliers.

You what ?

Say again, you what?

Not even to dive down on a fighter below you, or to escape a Spit who might have come into the theater above you ?

I know this does not happen much with the AI of the QMB. Are you aware of how BnZ planes are to be used ?

Believe it or don't WD, it's actually faster to dive with retarded throttle and p-pitch. ;)

+1

You don't need to publish source code,
you only need to post the differences here to support your opinions.





.

Gents, I am the guy who published a well read (and correct article) about the use of PP in IL2. Yes, I know that, thank you, but I just wanted the simplest test possible, and for most situations, the TA does better on auto than manual prop pitch.

And it does not negate my main point,

THE OVERHEAT MODEL IN 4.11 IS MESSED UP, .... BADLY

Sure, KG26 Alpha, no problem. However, if I could just put the source code out, you could see the very large way in which the TA 152 has been neutered.

I think this has turned into a comedy. I should probably stop caring about now for my own mental health :)

It's not about overheat... it's about clown wagons! :D :cool: :evil:

If we're not careful they will haunt us in our sleep!

WD, if I knew nothing whatsoever about aircraft, I would discount everything you have to say, based solely on your obviously swollen head. You have given not a shred of evidence beyond your own expertise.

My only interest in this thread is that DT does not listen to you. I'm sure at this point that they are not that stupid (they can't possibly be).

You didnt see the Ntrk ?

Swollen head indeed, ... and filled with astute observations.

JG27 Papa, - Snake pointed out a good point, it is Tzon I am talking about in the earlier posts, not Tazzu (no disrespect to him). I always get em confused but it was Tzon I am talking about.

Page 82 of this seems relevant:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/34811808/N...raining-Manual

This is why I don't fly late war planes, and really why I almost never fly at all anymore.

This thread is a perfect example of one of the reasons why combat flight sims are a dying breed.

In our quest for ever greater realism, counting every rivet, hitting the exact half a degree of temp to obtain overheat, pretending to be "Masters" and "experten" you have taken all the fun out of the experience.

In short, you have made it a job.

I hope you are all happy.

Talked to Mr Holcomb (actually, Captain Holcomb) on the phone and it was very interesting and informative. Found out he did not get credited with any kills but did have several run ins with the Luftwaffe fighters. My secretary Maria will get this typed up and I will print it here for all the history buffs.

I got bad news for Team D though, he indicated that the P51 D with the Packard V 1650, took several minutes under WEP to get to a dangerous situation. The way he describes the P51 is very different from the model we have in 4.11 (or even 4.10.1).

Let us wait for Maria to finish it, you guys will find it interesting.

Be sure to include the exact questions you asked including how often he flew a P-51 the same way that you do. Perhaps he says the state of his cooling system before he started to run on WEP, a detail I have yet to see you make. He may be talking apples but I think you are making apple sauce.

You've been calling yourself expert since almost you hit the forums years ago and started your publishing yet I see you advocate a lot of very non-expert things... still.

Try telling how long to go from engine temp to engine temp while in a steady flight regimin and what that is, not this "hit WEP in stall climb or level flight and start counting". You leave too much out for direct comparison.

Added: in fact it would be much better information from Mr. Holcomb to find out all the flying practices that can affect engine temperature of a P-51D and how they do so. Be sure to ask about rookie mistakes and assumptions.

Your test method is severley flawed. The charts I've posted on page 1 of this thread prove that there is no "random number generator" starting your engine hot or cold. Engines have exactly the same temp at mission startup, and that's why the time-to-overheat is so reproducible in my experiment.

My tests unmisakably show that the TA's only problem is the auto rad being a little sluggish. Flown with manually opened radiators, it overheats after the spit25lbs during a full power climb at slow speed (260IAS). In fact, the TA152-H1 can maintain a constant 260kph IAS climb at 95% power above 4000m on the crimea map, without ever overheating. That's very very good IMO.

No wonder, you're on an extremely hot map. That proves nothing.
What were the oil and coolant temps of all tested planes the moment you applied full power?
Given the relation between time-to-overheat and speed, what is the speedprofile for every plane tested?
I'm sorry WD, but your methodology is no good. One track proves nothing, you need to deliver a thorough test if you want to be taken seriously. You're not helping your case at all. All i see are politics, allegations with no proof. Only fools will nod, everyone knowledgeable will shake their heads at your "data".
As I've stated in your other post, you must design an experiment in such way that everyone can reproduce it. We have no idea whatsoever what speeds, flight attitudes, oil and coolant entry temps you had in your one experiment. There are no average values, no error bars, but strong allegations.

Look at my data at the bottom of my first post: the spit overheats considerably faster than the TA during a combat climb (260 kph IAS) on the crimea map.

I've clearly shown you how such test are to be done in order to be taken seriously. Feel free to test several planes the way i did at different constant speeds, and we might have a complete profile showing the relation between time-to-overheat and speed for those planes. Yes, that would be a lot of work. It's much easier to throw a flawed "test" into the discussion, flown on a different, much hotter map, to support your case.

Yes, and I'm very glad about that.
There's a reason why people choose ancient Il-2 over more modern, but wacky, Sims.

BTW, Thank you for your tests PapaFly. Lots of valuable, verifiable information, with not a shed of ego stroking.

See post #148. That is how a proper testing should be performed.

Then you ought to know that a full-power dive in any plane even with kommandogerat is going to over-rev it and shorten the time to an overheat condition.

It's hardly a "Simple" test because you can't make any reasonable comparisons with a full-power dive and then apex-climb with different aircraft unless you can reproduce the flight path exactly. Otherwise, it's just "feelings" which are useless in a scientific comparison.

So yes, it completely negates your main point.

The overheat model in 4.11 is fine...what's bad are your flying habits and attitude.

Papa - Here is another test (and the last one I will be doing), with the TA 152 H1 on the Crimea map, with rad set full open, auto pitch, from 1000m full dive on WEP, and then semi-steep combat climb. Reached overheat condition by the apex (in one climb):

http://www.mediafire.com/?dzxqgfh1gbducwd

I do not reach overheat in one climb on this map with those conditions with the Spit 25lbs or M185 71. Not even close.

As to the rest of you (or the majority), it reminds me of debating an ardent Democrat or Republican here in the States. You strike them down on one topic or prove how silly it is, and they change topic and attack from a different direction. Your need for an exact reproducible experiment is something I strongly support (I am a university educated engineer in real life, and I cherish the scientific method above almost all else except for good sex or great surf). And I have done so, twice now. And under very easy to reproduce conditions.

Dont wanna listen to me cause you cant see past your personal animosity because I blow up people online without being apologetic about it.

That's cool.

As I said, there are like 150 guys a week flying online at any of the decent servers. The online portion of the game is all but dead. I will fly 4.10.1 on my own rig and use the 185 M-71 when I visit the clownwagon contests that are predominately left today (and using 4.11).

Planes with brand new engines did not in WWII come out of a dive and then overheat on boost in one climb.

Period.

No how. No way.

The interview with Capt Holcomb, will be put up at Mission4Today.com in a few days. If interested, make your way there and enjoy. His comments about so many things that deal nothing with P51 engine performance are entertaining in their own right.

End of this thread for me. Good luck Team D, however you decide to guide future patches. S! Gents.

Online game is not dead at all, its just most people who do fly, don't fly on airquake servers that you seem to think is all il2 is.

Most will instead like myself fly with there squad and do historical stuff instead.

I can't think of anything more dull than going on a airquake sever, and yes just cause its locked pit and no icons etc, its still airquake, if your just racing around in la7's fw 190d9's spit25lbs etc.... Yawn.....

Currently i'm flying in a internal online squad event set in N.Africa 1940 flying Gladiators and bleinhems vs the other half flying cr42's and sm79's. Guess you've never even been in any of those planes since there not late war uber planes, oh expert.

+10000

Wonder what the good Captain said when WD told him he nosed over his p51 into a dive at full throttle plus WEP? The sound of silence or laughter must have been something to behold. Some of our experten are gonna have to learn to fly, at last.

If you really are an 'university-educated engineer', then you should know that you have to back up each and every claim with hard facts. Also, academics strive to stay as objective as possible. Bending reality in order to stay superior in one's own favourite mount doesn't fit the picture in a way.
Looking forward to that interview, too :-P

Hey that's entirely a personal thing, dude. Your love life is none of our business.

Good one, BadAim!!!!
:grin::grin::grin::grin::grin::grin::grin:

This is one video I am not interested in looking at.......and this is going to be a legendary quote for many years in the IL2 community and will be echoed as much or more than "slider on a stick"....

And you learned more about the IL2 patch 4.11 in a 30 minute lunch than the guys who worked on it for many months? you are a genius.

Why would you use above 90% pitch when in the 4.11 readme there is a long text on the new overheat models and sentences specifically talking about how pitch management and engine rpm is important?

You don't seem to understand that IL2 4.11 is a different flight sim than IL2 4.10.

JG27 and Team Daidalos post solid facts and test results that not only show you do not know what you are doing with testing, but show every single one of your claims to be in error.

I remember on Hyperlobby there was a nice online pilot named VSO that quit flying when IL2 Forgotten Battles came out because he said it was far worse than the original IL2. He could not adapt to the new features and flight models etc..
Anyone can see that over the last ten years Oleg and Team Daidalos and everyone else that worked on IL2 made incredible and vast improvements in it over the years, they have done a stunning job. It may not be apparent from patch to patch, but if you load up the original IL2, or an early patch of Forgotten Battles etc. you will absolutely not want to go backwards.

I have seen other pilots actually quit flying IL2 simply because they were not good at it and could not stand being shot down over and over again, they just did not have the aptitude for it.

As IL2 continues to improve and it offers more historical and complicated features, and flying a WWII aircraft WAS a complicated task and took a lot of intelligence to do well, I think we will see more and more people either not able to grasp all the concepts and methods needed to use all of it's Hard Settings, or complicated features just as in real life, not everyone has the aptitude to fly a real WWII aircraft or any aircraft at all.

If someone does not like the new features that IL2 4.11 offers, like WhistlingDeath, then they can simply turn them off in the control panel, or start their own server flying the version of the sim they are most comfortable with, or also like WD, simply hack the flight sim and make aircraft to suit his individual wet-dreams of WWII aviation history.

I was never the best or smartest IL2 pilot and I never will be, but I have always really enjoyed IL2 and was always thrilled with the gift of new free and paid for patches.

When a patch has changed the way IL2 or my favorite aircraft has worked, in ever single patch over the last ten years I have been able to practice and figure out a way to get the same job as always, shooting down opponents, done.
I and a long, long list of others always welcomed new features that took IL2 on hard settings further from being a Game and deeper into Flight Sim territory. There are a LOT of real pilots that fly IL2 that have praise for it.

I am sure that this long list of IL2 faithfuls are very glad for 4.11 and welcome it's changes, and also know that in any future patches that minor flaws and bugs will be worked out.....

Well said.

Do you realize that you are contradicting yourself in your posts? I had to read this paragraph twice just to be sure you actually wrote this.

University educated engineer? Everything you posted screams otherwise. An engineer backs up his statements with solid facts, instead you started by throwing out insults (especially with the first post over at SimHQ) and as a reply to all the data and testing provided here you did what? Posted two miserable tracks that show absolutely nothing.

Even the dumbest pilot can realize TD will further refine and polish the overheating introduced in 4.11. Nothing can be done perfectly out of first attempt. Had you chosen the engineer's approach you might have influenced TD them "fixing the problem" and further help this patch become ever better. But that would require providing solid data and info. Yeah...

Even the math is all against you. When 100 people say one thing and you are the only one saying otherwise, it is logical to conclude that you are doing something wrong or should start over. Thats how engineers do it.

And last, about the dying online community. Lately, ever since 4.11 came out I see people crawling out from nowhere just to test the 4.11 because they heard it is great. If indeed it is dying, than its your breed mate. Somehow don't feel bad about it at all.

Found this for WD, "How to Fly the P-47: High Altitude Flight and Aerobatics", USAAF training film:-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=db0mE...eature=related

Take note of throttle settings when diving.

and this, you need to register to download this:-

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/oth...ual-22715.html

Contains diagrams of high speed diving and speed limits.

Manual states WEP under 5000ft has no effect and should not be used.

Final comment then:

I am quite unliked (usually) online for being one hard charging aggressive person, and I think that has turned off many who cannot see past that dominating (but artificial) facade I use online to the deeper mechanics of possible flaws in 4.11. Hence, I represent an obstacle to deeper debate from the many aerospace engineers who dwell here, so I will leave you to it. Many of you seem to love 4.11 and feel it represents your version of what you wish IL2 to be (or become). As no one (including the members of the development team or IL2 original programmers) is a certified WWII warbird pilot with time in unrestored warbird frames, the rest boils down to a particular interpretation of historical data. And that is just it, ... it is an interpretation. Many seem to voice strongly for the 4.11 interpretation. I dont agree with ya, but I am happy to remain in the minority and continue using 4.10.1 for online use for our lab server. For those that enjoy 4.11 greatly, more power to you then, and I wish you guys well as you continue flying with the new patch you clearly enjoy. S! Gents

You're disliked for being boastful, arrogant, and FULL OF YOURSELF. Most people around here appreciate an aggressive pilot, and most will overlook any number of character flaws in someone who has something to say, but we've seen nothing but mental masturbation from you here, buddy.

As the old saying goes, "it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it."

Well, I certainly am not the most active poster here in this forum, rather a silent reader. and maybe in a few days I'll wish I hadn't posted this.
But I have an honest question to you, WD, no offence intended.

University's offsprings are a broad variety of engineers.
The fact you presumably know quite well to read and handle source code lets me think software engineer.
The way you judge others and yourself here makes me think, maybe rather social engineer.
What kind of engineer are you and maybe you even reveal what your major was ?

As said, it's an honest question and I think many are interested in the answer.
Please clarify.

And yet Bad Aim, I would be surprised if you could win one in seven combat sorties versus me, in a same plane, same fuel load, co-altitude starting duel (in full real). I have a feeling I could masturbate with one hand, drink coffee with the other, and blow you out of the sky with my left foot (the bad one) on the keyboard :) (joystick use , much, much too powerful for you)

$25 bucks says you cant or wont show up for a fair co-altitude duel and win a best of seven. You do, and you win fair and square, I'll publicly kiss your azz in this forum and give you the 25 bucks (thru Paypal). You will talk trash behind others' backs and spout hate, but when the bullets start flying, you will turn tail and crash into the sea. Prove me wrong patsy.

WD Fights, (full real), Jan 30th, at 7 PM PST, Xfire. (and we will use 4.11, since you are clearly a master of its CEM) Server is crt=2. I will make an Ntrk track, whether you show up or dont. Mediafire will be happy to host an ntrk of your absence out of fear. Bring Thor with you too. You need a witness.

Show or no show, I will be posting that Ntrk here for all to see. :)

Any excuses you spout in this forum = cowardice. (even one tiny one). Time to man up and let us see your awesome 4.11 CEM. I cant wait.

:rolleyes:

Infantile....

That is not going to delay the posting of the ntrk showing that backstabber not showing up to an honest fight (or getting blown from the sky if he does).

Yes, I doubt few of you self-proclaimed experts can match up against WD in a duel.

And I wouldn't call a private online match or coop a part of online community.

The online playing is dying. It is definitely true. Back in 2005, I wouldn't have to search Xfire for hours but failed to find a decent server to play in.

Sent from my Milestone using Tapatalk

LOL! You should have taken my advice! I'm quite sure that you will beat me in your silly little contest. You will have proven nothing of your expertise in WWII airplanes though. How 'bout we have a go in my area of expertise? Pistols at 25'.

Woah what are you doing wrong?
Spits V 109's always has someone on it, and there were around 40 on the last ghost skies test mission last night.

The only ones that are dying are the stock servers, as no one wants to play a 10 year old game in its pure (obsolete) form.

You miss the point.

If anything, being good online means you must be prioritizing gaming over historical reality.

Hence having good skills online means either nothing at all, or worse that you are biased towards the gaming aspects of the sim and hence LESS qualified to make comments on the historical correctness of flight models.

So many broad brush statements now.

So, all online virtual flying is just "gaming" because it's online?

You know better.

That is not going to prevent me from posting the link to the Ntrk, that has you as a no show for a formal duel. I previously served in the Marines after college NROTC (in fact the Marines helped me make it thru college), and I am not sure you would win the pistol competition either.

You want to banter with someone good naturedly, or poke a bit of fun, I'm all for it (even if I am the target). But the personal attacks have no place. I'm glad you like 4.11 and think everything associated with it is gravy on your tators, but just bc someone else does not agree with you, is not a reason to start a personal attack. Stick to the facts, use data like Papa or put up your own ntrk showing where I went wrong, and you will see I am actually pretty humble at times, and more than willing to admit if I feel I am wrong.

I'm trying to get onto Xfire, but I'm having trouble, as I don't usually use it. As far as you being a Marine I have a hard time believing it as I have several close friends who are Marines and they would be deeply embarrassed by your behavior in this forum.

Again I reiterate, your expertise in playing a video game has no bearing on your expertise in anything else.

Edit: Oh, and by the way, I don't give a flying F**k what you or any one that cares about you opinion thinks about me.

As far as I remember, Oleg and team indeed had ex-WWII pilots for flight testing their stuff. But that's just off the back of my head, so I hope that scheme (and the marine thingy :cool: ) doesn't fail like your "university-educated engineer" one did :rolleyes: .

Still looking forward to that interview with hallowed Capt. Whatshisface! :grin:

Save the Xfire excuses for your Mama's breast. If you can tell others how CEM in 4.11 should be used, installing Xfire should be a cake walk.

Ntrk coming tomorrow evening. I suggest you show up and fight with honor.

I guess you've found your ultimate excuse. I reiterate that I don't care what you or your followers think of me. I am quite willing to face you in whatever you call a fair fight. Retarded software aside. I maintain that the outcome of the fight is entirely irrelevant to the argument at hand. I'm not sure what you intend to prove, besides penis length.

You remember ? Sorry, say that again?

Provide a definitive link backing up your facts please. No remembering, ... just the facts.

As to engineering, what is it with the personal attacks in this forum ? You disagree with someone, simply state your idea or data and let it ride. This must be about the tenth personal attack I have taken in this thread. And for what, bc I dont agree that 4.11 is the best thing since sliced bread.

Since you are obviously an engineering whiz, I am more than happy to entertain you. Here is a simple one which any engineer learns at the end of year one in multi-variable calculus;

The partial derivative for some function f(x,y) that is shaped like an inverted bowl at the apex of the bowl is:

(go ahead, you answer, ... we will wait for your wisdom....

This is too funny :)

Here is another great one Red, and one which truly any engineer must know in year two:

The simple equation F=ma is a difference equation of what type ? Its order is what ? Its simple solution is ? Do you use integration by parts here or another method ? If so, what method ?

Well, I've been unable to get on the indicated server through xfire, so I'm sure that that proves whatever you wish to prove. I doubt that there will be any other chances, so I bow before your greatness Oh great Whistling Death, and I acknowledge your superiority in that which means nothing.

TY, now kindly just debate the argument with data as Papa is doing. If you have good data, I will look at it closely, despite the past personal attacks.

In YEAR 2?!
This ist stuff we learn in high school, in 11th class, that means your still 2-3 years away from any university stuff.

:eek:

Yes, let's agree once and for all that WhistlingDeath is the perpetual all-time eternal supreme champion of vacuous egotism, and we must all grovel in his presence - and then ignore him entirely, as a waste of time, space, effort, and bandwidth...

(And before you respond WD, I'm quite sure you could beat me in an online dogfight. Hell, if they cloned six of me you'd probably beat the lot. So what? I've not wasted the best part of a decade establishing bragging-rights over something that 99.9% of humanity hasn't heard of...)

Trying to think of some great classics that all disciplines of engineering must use. Here is another great one that we (electrical engineers) have in common with mechanical, chemical, systems, etc...,

The heat equation is what type of equation? Its 3D solution is ? It is linear or non-linear when used to solve an anisotropic material ?

Excellent, provide the answers then. The UK is more advanced in maths than is common in the USA.

WD, how do you expect us to join you if you're using 4.101? ;)

lol

I reset server one hour ago to 4.11 with crt =2. Server is full real with full CEM enabled. Your welcome to come join us for our weekly fights. We get some very tough opponents though (including many good Russians that I can never find thru Hyperlobby).

Swiss, ...

... answers please. Take the load off poor Red.

Holt crap! I've never met a more egotistical example of a classical engineer in my life! As it is written "You are out of your mind, WD! Your great learning is driving you insane."

I tried to join not too long ago and got 4.101 + UP...

Here is a great one that ALL electrical engineers must know:

Resistance in series is: (for any given R1, R2, .... Rn)

A capacitor in parallel to the resistors, gives ?

No, you didnt, it is not up on Xfire (as can be seen publicly) for tonight. And my server name is not WB Flight Ops.

A bright blue flash, and a smell of burnt insulation. Not because of anything to do with the circuit layout, but because it has lost the will to live... ;)