luthier, the historical performance btw 109/spitfire/huricane is NOT simulated in CoD

[Nephris]

Kwiatek dont get me wrong and this is for sure no offend, but I know you from Il2 times in Ultrapack and I got the deep impression that you are trying to push your finds for whatever there comes.I really have deep respect for your work and time you put into it.
An affinity to red planes was very obvious through your development and I am sure you can remember the discussions in the Ultrapack forums about FM which were sometimes more than hot.
I fly both sides so I actually dont care, as there will always be a plane for me I am satisfied with and I like to take the challenge even in an unbalance mix (e.g. vs a Spit 9 in Il2)

Those copied documents are fine for sure, but it is not the evangelium.

Do you suppose the developers did no research and adjusted the FM from the hip and just those documents posted here are the correct and not doubtable ones? This would be indeed pretentious.

Besides that, hold your breath until the beta patch got public and test it yourself to make a decent statement. Each disussion before is just heating things up for nothing.

[CaptainDoggles]

I'm sorry, is the purpose of this thread to argue that zapatista does not want historical performance?

Blue pilots aren't flying the way he likes, so he's asking luthier to make his favorite plane better?

If you're getting chewed up in furballs on the deck then STOP FLYING ON THE DECK.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

I'm sorry, is the purpose of this thread to argue that zapatista does not want historical performance?

Blue pilots aren't flying the way he likes, so he's asking luthier to make his favorite plane better?

.

you seem to have a problem grasping simple concepts, re-read the thread and this time try to comprehend it

i dont care if it is blue, red, green or black, what i am asking for is that the figures used to simulate aircraft behavior in CoD are openly provided (like they were in the il2 compare series), and that the correct historical strength/weakness of each aircraft is correctly represented so we can use historically accurate maneuvers and tactics.

the example i gave is for the spitfire, which currently have some significant problems in this regard, and has just been threatened to be neutered even further. there might be (? are) probably some similar issues with some of the blue planes, i have no idea. my CoD install runs very poorly on my mid end pc, so i mostly so far have only limited experience with the spitfire

then again this whole concept might be beyond you, after all in order to "contribute" in a forum thread all it takes is a keyboard, not comprehension of the topic under discussion.

[Kwiatek]

Originally Posted by Nephris

Kwiatek dont get me wrong and this is for sure no offend, but I know you from Il2 times in Ultrapack and I got the deep impression that you are trying to push your finds for whatever there comes.I really have deep respect for your work and time you put into it.
An affinity to red planes was very obvious through your development and I am sure you can remember the discussions in the Ultrapack forums about FM which were sometimes more than hot.
I fly both sides so I actually dont care, as there will always be a plane for me I am satisfied with and I like to take the challenge even in an unbalance mix (e.g. vs a Spit 9 in Il2)

Those copied documents are fine for sure, but it is not the evangelium.

Do you suppose the developers did no research and adjusted the FM from the hip and just those documents posted here are the correct and not doubtable ones? This would be indeed pretentious.

Besides that, hold your breath until the beta patch got public and test it yourself to make a decent statement. Each disussion before is just heating things up for nothing.

Im flying all side planes also and i not familair with any side. I like flying the same Spitfire 109 or Fw 190. If you have some more knowledge in WW2 fighters performacne you should be know that i fixed also blue side planes e.x. i fixed acceleration problem in all Fw 190 planes, i made more close to RL data 109 E performacne ( stock IL2 109 E was too slow and too worse in turn) and many other fixes. You should ask Hades who is Ultr@pack founder and mostly blue side pilot what he thinks about my FM work.

And Yes i think 1C didnt make fairly reserch in BoB planes performacne. Just look at actual performacne planes in CLoD. Most people who have some knowledge in these knows these.

And Yes i after reading Luthier new's about FM changes i have big DOUBTS that they made it in fair way again.

I dont write which plane should be better but i just expect that they at LEAST use reliable and i think no mystery data and AT LEAST they will do it in fair and historical way.

Most needed data are here and i think that there will be really hard to find better one:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20110

I dont ask nothing more.

[335th_GRAthos]

Originally Posted by Robo.

The reason the LW failed was that the British kept calm and carried on.

Hmmm... historicaly inacurate assumption (pressumption)

Hadn't that stupid German bomber pilot dropped his bombs in the town (due to navigational error), thus causing the RAF bomber raid to Berlin, thus causing Hitler to order the bombardment of the British towns (instead of the industry and airfields), you would probably be speaking German as first language now...


And hadn't the Greeks kicked the Italian army thus obliging Hitler to invade Greece and have his airborne division massacred in the battle of Crete, probably the Russians would be speaking German, too...


irrespective how well the Spitfire turned (or didn't).

~S~

[335th_GRAthos]

Originally Posted by zapatista

i dont care if it is blue, red, green or black, what i am asking for is that the the figures used to simulate aircraft behavior in CoD are openly provided (like they were in the il2 compare series)

Originally Posted by zapatista

, and that the correct historical strength/weakness of each aircraft is correctly represented

100% percent behind you, on both points!

~S~

[whoarmongar]

It will be interesting to see what changes the new patch FM will entail.
To my mind the changes should reflect the commonly held views that

1, In no way at anytime should the hurricane outclimb the Spit. at the moment fly a Spit1a in company with a rotol Hurricane and it will just outclimb you, this is just plain nonsense and its shocking that it was ever allowed into the game.

2 The Spit and 109 were roughly (depending on altitude) equal in speed. This if implemented would make 109 v Spit combat much more competetive and basically more of an equal contest and more fun for those unbiased majority of players out there.

3 The roll rate of the Spit, The Spit was conceived in the 1930s as a bomber interceptor when the doctrine that "the bomber will always get through" was prevailent. For this reason speed and height were the predetermining factors. roll rate was never a priority.
The roll rate of the Spit at best matched the 109 and was probably inferior but was not considered a problem due to the spits superior turn rate and better sustained turn performace v the 109, it only became a problem when the Fw190 appeared hence the emergence if the clipped wing Spit to counter the 190s superior roll rate.

3 The 109s better power to weight ratio hence its better climb performance. This is essentialy the 109s get out of jail card and for historcal as well as gameplay reasons should always be implemented within the game.

In truth as we stand today whilst the !09 and perhaps the hurricane ( although personally i have problems with the Hurries rudder responses) seem to fly as i would expect the Spit just doesnt "feel" right. I know this is subjective but the reports i have read over many years have all been similar and I trust the integrity of these reports and place great trust in the uniformity of them. "extremly sesitive especially for and aft", "the slightest touch on the stick and she would respond" and "would give early warning when on the edge of a stall with buffeting, caused by the inner wing stalling whilst the outer wing still provided lift" are all very well documented. This doesnt feel much like the CoD Spitfire.

finally diving. The 109 was superior in the initial dive due to the spits carbs. however in a sustained dive the spit was probably superior to a very small degree. the 109s controls became very unmanagable in a high speed dive making it very difficult to pull out of the dive. is this implemented in CoD ?

The Spit admittedly wasnt much better. I remember reading how i think it was Closterman after a high speed dive from a great height had to use the trimmer to pull out of the dive. again is this "stiffening" of the controls modelled within the game ?

I really hope the devs get the FM better in the next patch we await with interest the result. In truth I feel they have been rather unsympathetic to the RAF aircraft up till now I can understand the reasons. First of all and I will whisper this very quietly at the time of the BoB Russia was actually aiding and was vertually an ally of Nazi Germany.

Secondly the Lufties have been numerous long established and extemely vocal and partisan in support of there favorites in il2, added to the fact that that the future of this franchise will involve germany v Russia so development will involve Russian and German aircraft. After the next patch I dont expect any further development on British aircraft at least for the foreseeable future, so this it appears is BoBs last chance I just hope they get it right.

[zapatista]

just came across this information on the 100 octane fuel issue some people had been raising for the spitfire and hurricane. seems this is more important in aircraft performance then i had previously thought.

Gavin Bailey concluded that "The actual authorisation to change over to 100-octane came at the end of February 1940 and was made on the basis of the existing reserve and the estimated continuing rate of importation in the rest of the year." 33 As of 31 March 1940 220,000 tons of 100 octane fuel was held in stock. 34 The Co-ordination of Oil Policy Committee noted in the conclusions of their 18 May 1940 meeting with regard to the "Supply of 100 Octane fuel to Blenheim and Fighter Squadrons" that Spitfire and Hurricane units "had now been stocked with the necessary 100 octane fuel". 35 The Committee recorded that actual consumption of 100 octane for the 2nd Quarter 1940 was 18,100 tons. 36 Jeffrey Quill recalled:

It was only shortly before the Battle of Britain that we changed over to 100 octane. It had the effect of increasing the combat rating of the Merlin from 3000 rpm at 6 1/2 lb boost (Merlin III) or 9 lb boost (Merlin XII) to 3,000 rpm at 12 lb boost. This, of course, had a significant effect upon the rate of climb, particularly as the constant speed propellers (also introduced just before the battle) ensured that 3,000 rpm was obtainable from the ground upwards whereas previously it was restricted by the two-pitch propellers. It also had an effect upon the maximum speed but this was not so significant as the effect upon rate of climb. 37

and ........Wood and Dempster wrote in their book "The Narrow Margin":

As it turned out, aviation spirit was to prove no worry for the R.A.F. By July 11th, 1940, the day after the Battle of Britain opened, stocks of 100 octane petrol used in the Merlin engine stood at 343,000 tons. On October 10th, twenty-one days before the battle closed, and after 22,000 tons had been issued, stocks had risen to 424,000 tons. With other grades of aviation spirit total stock available on October 10th, 1940, was 666,000 tons. Oil reserves were 34,000 tons. 38

source: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

[Sutts]

Originally Posted by zapatista

just came across this information on the 100 octane fuel issue some people had been raising for the spitfire and hurricane. seems this is more important in aircraft performance then i had previously thought.



and ........Wood and Dempster wrote in their book "The Narrow Margin":



source: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html

+100

Agreed, I don't know why there was ever any question of front line BoB fighter squadrons using 100 octane. There were some very early initial worries about supply which I think have been blown out of all proportion. In the event there was more than enough 100 octane to go round and I've seen those stats before - stocks actually rose throughout the battle.

There is not a chance in hell that the air ministry would have risked losing the battle by withholding 100 octane from the fighting units. What use would the stuff have been under nazi occupation?

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos

Hmmm... historicaly inacurate assumption (pressumption)

Hadn't that stupid German bomber pilot dropped his bombs in the town (due to navigational error), thus causing the RAF bomber raid to Berlin, thus causing Hitler to order the bombardment of the British towns (instead of the industry and airfields), you would probably be speaking German as first language now...

Wrong.

Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos

And hadn't the Greeks kicked the Italian army thus obliging Hitler to invade Greece and have his airborne division massacred in the battle of Crete, probably the Russians would be speaking German, too...

Wrong.

Originally Posted by 335th_GRAthos

irrespective how well the Spitfire turned (or didn't).

~S~

Agreed.