4.09 - Support & Bug Reporting

[udidwht]

Updated.

Possible bug.

When choosing from within the 'Single missions' USN>F6F-3>Carrier take-off mission the aircrafts main gear set slightly above the deck. Not sure if this is happening with any other mission/s. Running version 4.09m no mods clean install. Just to add I confirmed this issue only appears with the F6F-3 aircraft within the Single missions>aircraft take-off.

System specs:

WinXP Media Center 2005 Service Pack 3 (fully updated clean install)
Pentium D 930 3.0Ghz
2GB RAM PC2 DDR2-5300 667mhz
DirectX 9.0c Aug 2009
Gigabyte Radeon HD 4670 512mb (CCC 9.9)
Sound Blaster Audigy SE (drivers are current)
32in LG LCD
Thermaltake 430w PSU
DVD/CD-RW DL Lightscribe
DVD-ROM

[Ritchie]

Still referring to that voice bug.
Almost forgot to thank all you guys for pointing me to the right direction.
The mg_snd and mg_snd_sse dlls...exchange trick just did it for me. V 4.09m over 4.08m is now running smooth & fine.
A bit strange though that nobody can be more specific about the possible "side effects" of the twist - but then, I haven't noticed any so far. Has anybody else?

Now I don't feel like insisting on problems I do no longer or not yet have, I'm just glad the mill is grinding round again, and that's it for me.

Seems to be a real expert forum here! Will drop in in from time to time, for some exchange or just a chat.
CU

[IvanK]

There are plenty of references both modern and from WWII evaluations of most BF versions describing pitch response versus airspeed.

Out of interest in game BF109G2 at 500Kmh IAS you can obtain 6.8G and maintain it in a descending spiral.

Now where does that fit into the Porked index scale ?

We all know the in game 109 gets heavy on the stick at the higher speeds. Its been that way since IL2 hit the shelves many moons ago. The attempt to recreate the known pitch heaviness of the real aeroplane. Now if you think its overdone then at least detail what you expect. References to support your argument will also help.

There is some reasonable achievable G versus Airspeed data for late model BF109 available, and slightly more detailed than Pork ratings...

[JG27CaptStubing]

Originally Posted by IvanK

There are plenty of references both modern and from WWII evaluations of most BF versions describing pitch response versus airspeed.

Out of interest in game BF109G2 at 500Kmh IAS you can obtain 6.8G and maintain it in a descending spiral.

Now where does that fit into the Porked index scale ?

We all know the in game 109 gets heavy on the stick at the higher speeds. Its been that way since IL2 hit the shelves many moons ago. The attempt to recreate the known pitch heaviness of the real aeroplane. Now if you think its overdone then at least detail what you expect. References to support your argument will also help.

There is some reasonable achievable G versus Airspeed data for late model BF109 available, and slightly more detailed than Pork ratings...

Ironically nobody tends to complain about the G2s elevator response. It's all the other 109s.

You would be incorrect about the 109s behing heavy on the stick since it hit the shelves. I think it was 4.04 that introduced the cement elevator. Regardless of references most other planes in the game don't have this problem.

If it's supposed to be modling accuracy then I would ask the same from you. What references were used to support the idea of heavy controls at certain speeds. I can't find any so far. Most of what I have seen said it had excellent handling through out the entire flight regime but then again these aren't tests.

[Hood]

This is a bug reporting thread, not a flight model whine (even if that whine may be justified) thread. Take the argument elsewhere fellas.

[IvanK]

Hood I am a DT member.

Capt Stubbing try ANY of Eric Browns or the RAF's evaluations of the 109. There are numerous discussions of all 109 variants and elevator pressures and pitch response.

Get a copy of Wings of the Luftwaffe by Eric Brown or Augsberg Eagle by William Green which contains numerous reproductions of RAF evaluations.
Another good source is Peter Caygill's "Flying to the limit Testing World War II Single engine fighter aircraft". Messerschmitt BF109 at war by Armand van Ishoven also contains large junks of RAF evaluation reports describing BF109 control forces etc. Just about every single evaluation of the 109 makes reference to heavy elevator loads.

[JG27_brook]

Please explain about what to the 5000 or so Germans that flew the 109 in WW2 , and Oleg bases 109 on a brit that never even flew it in combat ?

Me 109 G-6:
Me109 was almost a dream come true for a pilot. Good controllability, enough speed, excelent rate of climb. The feel of the controls were normal except when flying over 600km/h - some strength was needed then.
- Erkki O. Pakarinen, Finnish fighter pilot, Finnish Air Force trainer. Source: Hannu Valtonen, "Me 109 ja Saksan sotatalous" (Messerschmitt Bf 109 and the German war economy), ISBN 951-95688-7-5.

Well 1/3 faster than what we now have in Olegs IL2 . HOPE you will be doing better in BOB !!

[IvanK]

Go and read the Evaluations then come back, they are a little more technical than the narratives you quote

[JG27_brook]

Originally Posted by IvanK

Go and read the Evaluations then come back, they are a little more technical than the narratives you quote

Maybe we should be basing the spit on German reports with that logic

[IvanK]

Most of the evaulations are quite complimentary on the 109 in a number of areas in handling etc .... but as you say these were written by a "brit that never even flew it in combat" ....so should we discard these nice bits as well ? Just about every source available both Allied and axis is used in an attempt to make the in game aeroplane as accurate as possible.

You are being silly Brook. Make the effort read the reports, it might alter viewpoint though I doubt it.