Don't make performances secret this time

[Rama]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

Give the aircraft their real numbers and let the chips fall where they may.

Define what you mean buy "real numbers"... or your sentence is totally senseless..

When you will have defined what you mean, you'll see that "real numbers" isn't something unique and that among the different values for "real numbers" can be accepted universally... even when you can find sources (that could allow you to calculate "real numbers" in some very specific configurations)

Your proposal is totally unrealistic.

[Feathered_IV]

Originally Posted by Rama

Define what you mean buy "real numbers"... or your sentence is totally senseless..

When you will have defined what you mean, you'll see that "real numbers" isn't something unique and that among the different values for "real numbers" can be accepted universally... even when you can find sources (that could allow you to calculate "real numbers" in some very specific configurations)

Your proposal is totally unrealistic.

Rama, "real numbers" is a phrase or way of speaking in English. It means, accurate characteristics.

it would be the same story again...."My grandpas plane was better than ur grandpas plane cause my dad told me so"....or "I found on the web a reliable source for performance.......that my plane is too slow...." bla bla bla njak ser govna

cheers

[Rama]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

Rama, "real numbers" is a phrase or way of speaking in English. It means, accurate characteristics.

I understood...

And replace "real numbers" by "accurate characteristics" in my answer, and you'll get the same meaning.
"accurate characteristics" can't be defined universaly and uniquely.

[zapatista]

thankfully rama's opinion doesnt count any more than anybody elses opinion

so right now i'd say that makes it about 10 to 1 in favor.

[Rama]

Originally Posted by zapatista

thankfully rama's opinion doesnt count any more than anybody elses opinion

What are you talking about? What opinion?
I wasn't expressing an opinion but exposing a problem.

If you have the solution to this problem (defining what "accurate characteristics" for a given plane is, and attributing unique and universally accepted numbers to these characteristics).... then please share your solution, it will solve instantaenously the myriad of forum wars of the past, the present and the future.

I'm totally sure it's a brilliant solution, so I'm respectuously waiting to be enlighten.

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by Rama

Define what you mean buy "real numbers"... or your sentence is totally senseless..

When you will have defined what you mean, you'll see that "real numbers" isn't something unique and that among the different values for "real numbers" can be accepted universally... even when you can find sources (that could allow you to calculate "real numbers" in some very specific configurations)

Your proposal is totally unrealistic.

Well, your statement can be seen as a solipsist one - everyone has his own truth. I agree with such philosophy as far as it underscores the respect for the individual world of each of us. But I cannot look at the each of these truths as equal.
Can a plane have a wingspan of 10, 11, and 12,5 m at the same time? Can it have a max. speed of 480, 530, and 565 km/h at the same time?

'....even when you can find sources (that could allow you to calculate "real numbers" in some very specific configurations)'

Try here, you wont have to calculate anything:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/

These are original wartime test data for a nuber of important types.

[Rama]

Originally Posted by PE_Tihi

Can a plane have a wingspan of 10, 11, and 12,5 m at the same time? Can it have a max. speed of 480, 530, and 565 km/h at the same time?

Wingspan isn't FM data, it's structural data.
About max speed, for each plane type you can find different sources giving you different numbers, and even different reference altitude for max speed.
... and that's including different real flight test data.

Originally Posted by PE_Tihi

Try here, you wont have to calculate anything:

Ahah.... and do you think your link gives the only valuable and universal source??? you must be kidding...
Have you tried, just for ONE type of plane to gather all different performance sources and to compare them... you should try, it will help you to understand the problem...

[LEXX]

Phi::

Lots of people like that way of fight, BnZ, - like you [LEXX] obviously do. To my taste it is a bit disgusting to shoot down someone who doesnt know a thing about it- apart from being unsatisfactory - it doesnt tell me who flies better. Tastes are different, of course.

Yes, WW2 pilots of all nations chose to do it my way when they could. Having to enter a dogfight was considered a failure.

In my opinion, your [LEXX's?] FPS games are more popular for the same reason it is much easier to train an infantry soldier than a pilot- you do not need to know much to get a rifle pushed into the hands. So anyone can play a FPS without bothering to uderstand the flight behavior of a plane or many other things.

Same thing with air warfare. You have to learn the air war environment, even in peacetime, or you die. Clearly you don't know what the air war environment is, but I can't blame you, since no combat flight sim developer has ever modelled it, but have usually focused on arcade dogfight shooter gaming, and most people don't look at the sky and learn what's up there. So no offence intended here.

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by LEXX

Phi::
Yes, WW2 pilots of all nations chose to do it my way when they could. Having to enter a dogfight was considered a failure.


Same thing with air warfare. You have to learn the air war environment, even in peacetime, or you die. Clearly you don't know what the air war environment is, but I can't blame you, since no combat flight sim developer has ever modelled it, but have usually focused on arcade dogfight shooter gaming, and most people don't look at the sky and learn what's up there. So no offence intended here.

BnZ certainly was a best way to survive, and in a war situation I would be using it, too. But we are talking here about a game, not war. It is an adaptable game, it can be played in a number of different maners- you are free to choose one you like.
I am interested in flying skills, and that s the way I play it. You can teach one to BnZ in a short time- outmanoeuvring the opponent using the plane's qualities and energy to obtain a firing solution; shooting deflection from beam and all quarters, well it is quite a different matter, in spite of your derrogatory remarks about arcade dogfight. It is everything else but arcade )))
As said, a matter of taste and temperament.