Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY - For 4.11

[Romanator21]

I agree. On servers with outside view enabled, it's impossible to maintain any kind of surprise. I feel that F5, F6, etc should be lumped in with "no padlock on" difficulty, and that external views should have the option of being limited to friendlies only.

[Stealth_Eagle]

I found this link and I think it will be quite helpful for new aircraft cockpits.

http://www.world-war-2-planes.com/co...-aircraft.html

Hope this helps and please fix the Go-229 to be Ho-229 and able to carry a bomb load. Thanks

Eagle out.

[Juri_JS]

Please excuse me if this has been asked before. Are there plans to update the landscape textures of the old maps?

The newer maps like Slovakia or Bessarabia have very good looking textures and I think most of us would like to see the same quality on the other maps. Especially the Pacific maps look quite ugly and some have completely wrong textures (Chichi Jima).
In my opinion better map textures would be one of the biggest improvements for the game.

[Gryphon_]

Probably the oldest request of all, but after many months of holding back I have to ask you to look one more time at the low speed turn performance of the Spitfire, particularly the IX. In 4.10 the low speed turn performance of the IX was considerably improved, which was a surprise as it was widely regarded as too good to be true in 4.09. I have no issues with the Spitfire having a better turn rate than the 109 - it should - but when airspeed falls and AoA increases that big wing should produce a lot more drag than it does. But the Spitfire seems to retain energy very well, and pulls off high AoA turns that no other aircraft can follow. In short, the energy retention of the Spitfire isn't realistic, and as it's such an important aircraft in the game I think you need to look at it again.

[DK-nme]

Originally Posted by Gryphon_

Probably the oldest request of all, but after many months of holding back I have to ask you to look one more time at the low speed turn performance of the Spitfire, particularly the IX. In 4.10 the low speed turn performance of the IX was considerably improved, which was a surprise as it was widely regarded as too good to be true in 4.09. I have no issues with the Spitfire having a better turn rate than the 109 - it should - but when airspeed falls and AoA increases that big wing should produce a lot more drag than it does. But the Spitfire seems to retain energy very well, and pulls off high AoA turns that no other aircraft can follow. In short, the energy retention of the Spitfire isn't realistic, and as it's such an important aircraft in the game I think you need to look at it again.

Yes, yes, yes (standing ovation!)


DK-nme

[mceiras]

Any chance of 6DOF implementation for use with trackir and anothers similar devices ?

[Furio]

Originally Posted by Gryphon_

but when airspeed falls and AoA increases that big wing should produce a lot more drag than it does. But the Spitfire seems to retain energy very well, and pulls off high AoA turns that no other aircraft can follow.

This sounds obscure to me. As far as I know, there’s no reason a “big wing” should produce more drag in a turn than a small one.
As a rule of thumb, you look at wing loading (Kgs x square metres, or lbs x square feet) to evaluate stalling speed, but you must look at span loading (Kgs x metre, linear, not square) to evaluate efficiency and low drag in a turn.

My feeling is that Spit FM is pretty good, and that we should look with suspicion at our feelings without hard numbers.

[Gryphon_]

Originally Posted by Furio

This sounds obscure to me. As far as I know, there’s no reason a “big wing” should produce more drag in a turn than a small one.
As a rule of thumb, you look at wing loading (Kgs x square metres, or lbs x square feet) to evaluate stalling speed, but you must look at span loading (Kgs x metre, linear, not square) to evaluate efficiency and low drag in a turn.

My feeling is that Spit FM is pretty good, and that we should look with suspicion at our feelings without hard numbers.

Ok then lets look at some hard numbers. Take a Spitfire-F-IXc-M61-15 with full fuel and turn the engine off, and glide at 280kph (160mph). Measure the rate of descent passing thru 2000m (5.1m/sec). This aircraft weighs 3377 kg in game.

Now try the same with a 109G2, you'll find this lighter aircraft (2846kg) has a much higher rate of descent of 6.2 m/sec at 280kph.

That Spitfire wing is really something...

[Furio]

Originally Posted by Gryphon_

Ok then lets look at some hard numbers. Take a Spitfire-F-IXc-M61-15 with full fuel and turn the engine off, and glide at 280kph (160mph). Measure the rate of descent passing thru 2000m (5.1m/sec). This aircraft weighs 3377 kg in game.

Now try the same with a 109G2, you'll find this lighter aircraft (2846kg) has a much higher rate of descent of 6.2 m/sec at 280kph.

That Spitfire wing is really something...

If you want to compare minimum sink rate between different planes, you should do so at – you guess – their minimum sink rate speed, and the same you should do to compare best L:d.
Now considering that Spitfire has a wing loading of around 130 kg per square meter, while the Messerschmitt is around 190, the best glide and minimum sink speeds are surely vastly different. Your test, performed at an arbitrary speed, doesn’t demonstrate anything meaningful. Moreover, the data provided (just weight and speed) are not enough to attempt any comparison.

A serious evaluation of Spitfire’s energy retaining capability is beyond my competence and – I suspect – beyond yours. In any case, you can make your attempt and send your report to Daidalos Team.

[Azimech]

Originally Posted by Romanator21

I agree. On servers with outside view enabled, it's impossible to maintain any kind of surprise. I feel that F5, F6, etc should be lumped in with "no padlock on" difficulty, and that external views should have the option of being limited to friendlies only.

+1

Also I'd like to have the online scoring system reworked, instead of the last one that scores a hit gets the points, I'd rather see the number of hits and/or the total damage that has been done. Or maybe a style of distributing the points like the RAF had. I flew online yesterday, first time in ages, and was promptly irritated with the kill stealers. And when I was shooting a bf-110 a single bullet hit the B25 that was spiraling down without it's tail, so I was credited with a friendly kill. Pretty annoying!