109 elevator trim

[irR4tiOn4L]

Originally Posted by Robo.

Fair enough, what you wrote makes sense. I agree the changes should be systematic.

Just re 109 trim - I have mentioned it was quite different in both design and operation to the 'other' trims. That's why the 109 has been primarily spoken of.

Re ''now incorrect modelling of carburetors and dont have to deal with mechanical guages'' - could you perhaps explain further? I don't know what you mean and from my online experience I'd say the neg-G cutouts are quite harsh and unforgiving.

To be honest I'm not an expert on the realities and FM's of this sim, I repeat what I have read here and experienced myself ingame.

The carburetors and mechanical guages however, which mostly affect the RAF, were changed in a prior patch to more stable electric versions (apparently people didnt expect mechanical guages to bounce so much) and to a simplified/eased carburetor cut out model that allowed some negative g's, even negative g loops, and didn't swamp the engine if negative g's were sustained.

I'm not saying these are game changers, but I'm just saying that things can go backwards if people's feedback from online play is the metric used.

So often, people complain about online balance based on inadequacies in server setup or particular incidents they are angry about - and their views take on a veneer of objectivity with more and more discussion. Which is not to say their views lack all objectivity, but it does point toward the danger of using their views to set the patch agenda.

I mean hell, the beta patch out now looks to be the last for Clod, and i'd say there's a hell of a lot of things that i'd like to see changed above trim.

EDIT: Fair point Osprey, but many here talk with a view that seems to want far more than just personal investigation. But even if trim is not accurate as is, its probably about 1/2 the real time anyway and in my view isnt nearly as important as control heaviness, black out resistance modelling, etc, let alone the actual FM's which continue to display much more fundamental problems.

This discussion is interesting, but I wouldn't expect (or want really) it to lead to many changes until greater issues were remedied and adequate data on all planes was collated.