Spit sabotaged, Goering releieved

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by JtD

"The characteristics of the control free lateral oscillation were determined by trimming the airplane for steady flights and then deflecting the rudder and releasing the controls. Records were taken of the subsequent variations of sideslip angle. The measurements were made in the curising condition at 125 and 200 miles per hour. The damping of the oscillation satisfactory met the requirement of reference 1. At 200 miles per hours, one oscillation and at 125 miles per hours 1.5 oscillations were required for the motion to damp to one-half amplitude."

Taken from NACA wartime report "Measurements of the flying qualities of a Supermaring VA airplane". Feel free to compare to in game.

If real life reference is not your point, I'd recommend you go to the difficulty panel and switch off torque effects.

This report is not about torque effects but about the static stability about the vertical (yaw) axis.
If you want lower damping so that the planes get nastier to fly and aim, please do apply that to ALL of them, AND NOT THE SPIT ONLY. I am just trying to imagine the general outcry in such a case.
Now, you can feel free to compare all the other planes to the NACA report. Or do you think the Spit was an especially unstable and unpleasant plane?

[PE_Tihi]

Please, whoever writes expecting my answer, do spare me the bs of the local senior member kind here.

[BadAim]

Thi, The main problem is that your raving about what is at worst a bug like it's something that matters. It's not. Then you accuse the developer of doing this or that to ruin your favorite plane on purpose. That's the stupidest bloody thing I've ever heard of. I really can't believe reasonable people are wasting their valuable time trying to explain anything to you.

If you have an issue with something, bring it up like an adult, air your grievance like an adult, then move the hell on like an adult.

You can call me a fanboi all you want, but it pisses me off when I see people that I respect and who work their butts of (often for free) to provide us a passtime abused like this.

No one is saying that you shouldn't say your piece, just that you should try showing a modicum of respect. Is respect that out of style?

Alternatively you can go make your own bloody flight sim and fly it by yourself. This also goes for all the rest of your whining buddies.

To the ignore list with you!

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by BadAim

Thi, The main problem is that your raving about what is at worst a bug like it's something that matters. It's not. Then you accuse the developer of doing this or that to ruin your favorite plane on purpose. That's the stupidest bloody thing I've ever heard of. I really can't believe reasonable people are wasting their valuable time trying to explain anything to you.

If you have an issue with something, bring it up like an adult, air your grievance like an adult, then move the hell on like an adult.

You can call me a fanboi all you want, but it pisses me off when I see people that I respect and who work their butts of (often for free) to provide us a passtime abused like this.

No one is saying that you shouldn't say your piece, just that you should try showing a modicum of respect. Is respect that out of style?

Alternatively you can go make your own bloody flight sim and fly it by yourself. This also goes for all the rest of your whining buddies.

To the ignore list with you!

I ll make an exception of answering to another senior member bs. Dear senior member, the amount of work and creativity that has flown into this game EVEN BEFORE DT CAME TO EXISTENCE is enormous. To my eyes, this could never justify the outright lying of Mr Maddox about the plane performances. Making the Spit the only plane with quite unpleasant flying qualities is simply another dishonesty OF THE SAME KIND, with all the due respect for the enormous work DT has done. So don't turn to me. I simply don't mince words, that s all.

[Falke]

Belligerent

[fruitbat]

i've already told you that what your arguing about is fixed in the bug fix patch.

so this is largely a waste of time, but hey ho.

[FS~Phat]

Some interesting facts about known instability of spitfire mk V in 1942 due to field operations ignoring advice about careful placement of equipment in the field. It appears the instability was "cured" by some elevator modifications and some sort of mass balancer changes. But a significant number of spits were officially documented as "dangerously unstable"...

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/pol...e-3406-22.html

I love both the spit and 109 and flew the 109 almost exclusively for the first 3-4 years of my 10years with IL2. I have to say I was one to recently whinge about the latest FM changes but after a lot more research have come to the conclusion that TD's intent is admirable to replicate the documented "real life" not theoretical flight behaviour of the spit.

I do wonder though if they may have over done it, as it would appear these instability issues were well documented and addressed before the end of 1942.

I would like TD to consider some compromise on the stability changes in the new patch in favour of more stability as the problems did indeed exist if only for a year or so. Or is there some other way to allow us to compensate in the weapon/fuel loadout screen to gain more stability?

I do still think the elevator trim is overcooked a little too, as it definetly limits the ability to pull best possible radius turns if trimmed for level flight.

Thanks for listening!

FS~Phat

[JtD]

Torque effect is what is giving you the instability you can't deal with, so if you switch it off, you can stop whining.

The NACA report is not about the static stability. Damped Oscillations are not static.

Why would it be useful to compare all planes to the Spitfire NACA report?

If you have the resources to research, check and if necessary reprogram lateral stability for all planes currently present, I'm sure TD would be more than glad to have you among them.

[PE_Tihi]

Originally Posted by JtD

Torque effect is what is giving you the instability you can't deal with, so if you switch it off, you can stop whining.

The NACA report is not about the static stability. Damped Oscillations are not static.

Why would it be useful to compare all planes to the Spitfire NACA report?

If you have the resources to research, check and if necessary reprogram lateral stability for all planes currently present, I'm sure TD would be more than glad to have you among them.

I am not going to explain the difference between the static and dynamic stability to you here. I repeat , the NACA report is on the static stability about the yaw axis. The torque is only a complicating factor; what has been changed is the stabillity and damping factors and not the torque.
It is only the Spitfire and the Spitfire only to get this kind of a flight model with the low damping factors about the vertical and lateral axes ( yaw and pitch)
Even if we proclaim these values realistic, all the other planes fly with the much stronger damping factors. Now, do you really beleive the Spitfire had by far the least static stability and most unpleasant flying qualities of all the WWII fighters?

[JtD]

Originally Posted by PE_Tihi

I am not going to explain the difference between the static and dynamic stability to you here. I repeat , the NACA report is on the static stability about the yaw axis.

OK, whatever - and you're complaining about what?

The torque is only a complicating factor; what has been changed is the stabillity and damping factors and not the torque.

Produce a test, show the results.

It is only the Spitfire and the Spitfire only to get this kind of a flight model with the low damping factors about the vertical and lateral axes ( yaw and pitch)

OK, so how much lower is the damping about the vertical and lateral axis on the Spitfire than say on a P-51?

Even if we proclaim these values realistic, all the other planes fly with the much stronger damping factors. Now, do you really beleive the Spitfire had by far the least static stability and most unpleasant flying qualities of all the WWII fighters?

If the Spitfire is correct and all other planes are wrong, all other planes should be fixed and not the Spitfire be porked. As I've said before, if you have the resources to research and check all planes and make the necessary changes, you're effort would certainly be welcome.