Speed graphs for Spitfire and Hurricane

[addman]

On a side note, it's funny (and/or sad) how the discussions literally explodes around the topic of Spits/Hurries/109 FM's whilst really crippled planes like he G.50 (which is now closer to historical data) never gets neither flak or praise from the majority of the community members. Just a few of us enthusiasts of the lesser flown plane(s) have spoken up but in a constructive and helpful tone with minimal whining.

Remember, the G.50 is a flying brick , after roughly 3000 meters of altitude that thing sinks like a brick, 3000 meters! After 3000 meters is when the engine should start to perform better not degrade in to a 100 hp cessna engine. Also, getting it up to 350 km/h TAS in level flight is not easy when it should be doing around 400 km/h. Still, I and many others have flown the darned thing with love and without whining and I consider myself biased when it comes to the G.50. After telling the devs many times over it needs fixing and after supplying them with docs it is finally fixed, yaaay, I would still fly it happily even if they didn't fix it and struggle with it. Play with the cards given to you, stop whining.

The way some people behave and whine about the FM's tells me everything about them and why they are so "interested" in getting their favorite aircraft "fixed". I'm 100% for historical accuracy but I think most FM whiners have higher prioritized concerns, competitive edge online.

P.S Imagine if the Hurricane or Spit would degrade in to a barely flying brick after 3000 meters, would it even be possible to predict the magnitude of outcry on the forums then?

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by addman

On a side note, it's funny (and/or sad) how the discussions literally explodes around the topic of Spits/Hurries/109 FM's whilst really crippled planes like he G.50 (which is now closer to historical data) never gets neither flak or praise from the majority of the community members.

since when has the G50 been in any way relevant to the outcome to the battle of brittain ?

it isnt and it wasnt

the reason the performance of the 109's, spitfires and hurricanes (and to a lesser extent the 110) is so important is because they were the main fighter aircraft involved, and the outcome of the conflict largely depends on the balance of those aircraft

with the current performance of competing fighter planes being so unrealistic, the outcome would have been rather different

[camber]

Hmm, I am worried as the next MP guy about how ATAG will make a MP server post-patch that is balanced enough for both red and blue to want to populate it. When I fly there is rarely more than 10 people on, I tried flying around 20 000 feet on red, I listened to educational podcasts at the same time to compensate for the problem I never saw anyone else up there. Ever.

But just to add to the angst, aren't beta patches optional? Last time you could download the betas and still fly online alongside the unpatched. So a red with the beta will be enjoying the increased FPS but gazing jealously at the unpatched uber-retro-Hurricane dancing above him. Blues will be freaked out wondering what kind of Hurricane just appeared co-alt

Perhaps to get some kind of playable (I know, dirty word for co-opers ) MP ATAG could go counterfactual. The whole stock of 100 octane was accidently destroyed by Barnes Wallis in a secret failed experiment, which also manages to suck the Castle Brommich shadow Spitfire factory into a singularity (after only 10 Spit IIs were made). Barbarossa starts a lot earlier, there is only one squadron of E4s available (led by Galland) on the Western front. Italy steps up and clouds of improved G50s swarm across the channel to take on the 87 Octane Spit 1s and Hurricanes, while the E4s smoke cigars above and confidently await the limited Spit IIs.

camber

[ATAG_Septic]

Originally Posted by camber

Hmm, I am worried as the next MP guy about how ATAG will make a MP server post-patch that is balanced enough for both red and blue to want to populate it. When I fly there is rarely more than 10 people on, I tried flying around 20 000 feet on red, I listened to educational podcasts at the same time to compensate for the problem I never saw anyone else up there ever

But just to add to the angst, aren't beta patches optional? Last time you could download the betas and still fly online alongside the unpatched. So a red with the beta will be enjoying the increased FPS but gazing jealously at the unpatched uber-retro-Hurricane dancing above him. Blues will be freaked out wondering what kind of Hurricane just appeared co-alt

Perhaps to get some kind of playable (I know, dirty word for co-opers ) MP ATAG could go counterfactual. The whole stock of 100 octane was accidently destroyed by Barnes Wallis in a secret failed experiment, which also manages to suck the Castle Brommich shadow Spitfire factory into a singularity (after only 10 Spit IIs were made). Barbarossa starts a lot earlier, there is only one squadron of E4s available (led by Galland) on the Western front. Italy steps up and clouds of improved G50s swarm across the channel to take on the 87 Octane Spit 1s and Hurricanes, while the E4s smoke cigars above and confidently await the limited Spit IIs.

camber

Hi Camber,

Welcome to the server!

The server population fluctuates quite dramatically over the twenty-four hours. Subjectively, for me it's better in the early hours as that's when many of the ATAG chaps from across the pond log-on, there's often fifty-plus on at that hour. I often share your experience of lonely flights when there's twenty-odd on and teamspeak is quiet. I could go and find trouble low down but my skill-level demands defensive tactics and a height advantage if I am to survive.

ATAG typically runs the Beta patch as soon as its possible and you will need the same release version to join. It would provide hilarity and angst in equal measures if not.

Your scenario made me smile, as likely a scenario as any that would lead to the feared outcome post the beta patch

I can understand why people, including me, like to play a simulation as close to the generally understood historical facts. Which, as the battle was so closely fought, would perhaps provide the all important gameplay balance (although accurate depiction of the strategy and tactics that produced the outcome is unlikely). You rightly observe it is essential that balance is somehow provided by Cliff of Dover, if it is to succeed as a multiplayer game.

I have to remember its only a Beta patch.

Cheers

[Osprey]

I don't wish to take anything away from ATAG here but it's not the only server, and the missions aren't historically based (unless that has very recently changed). I like ATAG for what it offers when I'm in that type of mood but (no fault of theirs I am sure) it turns into a warpfest when 40-50+ get online - It would be nice if the love was shared about a bit to the other servers, quiet a few of which run historical missions with historical bases and offer something different.

@ATAG, this really is not an insult to your server or the work gone into it, but rather an observation (although OT)

[SEE]

On a positive note, if the patch brings the RAF fighters into their correct relative performance characteristics then that will at least address a major flaw with what we currently have in CloD. What remains after is the relative performance between the axis and allied ac. That will be determined after release.

Whether any glaring issues will be addressed at some point in the future is uncertain but Servers can at least help balance the 'play'. It may well be that the Spit2a, after revisions, is actually closer to the historical FM of the Spit Mk1a and thus server admins may remove any restrictions. Some of the AI Axis Bomber groups can be set to fly at higher altitudes, and escorts will thus be engaging interceptors at altitudes where the FM is 'less questionable'.

I agree with Wolverine, whatever the changes, in terms of MP - both player and server admins will have to adapt to what we are given irrespective of the correct historical facts - that is not their fault but something imposed upon them.

[Ataros]

Some interesting graphs and historical quotes and references were posted here. Please make sure they are available at the bugtracker for easier access.

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by SEE

It may well be that the Spit2a, after revisions, is actually closer to the historical FM of the Spit Mk1a and thus server admins may remove any restrictions.

Indeed. IMHO a 100 octane Spitfire I is not necessarily needed as we have the Spitfire II, which I assume is running at 100 octane and probably has +12 emergency boost* (boost and rpm might be wrong, but it's the performance that matters). So each server can decide to use 87 octane (Spitfire I) or 100 octane (Spitfire II).
Hurricane I has of course a problem ... a Hurricane II (sequel??) would solve it.

*historical cleared or not ... DB601 WEP is not historical as well

Of course all this would be sad from a historical point of view, as 25%-50%-100% (depending on believe) of the Spitfire would have to be Mk. II, which is of course much exaggerated.

[klem]

Originally Posted by BlackSix

More correctly: we didn't have official flight tests for Spits and Hurris between 0 and 3000m for this test.
I don't know how our FM programmer made this planes for game in 2011.

BlackSix

This page gives sea level to 29,000 feet figures for the Spitfire with Merlin III @ 6.25lbs boost:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html
and this gives it for the Hurricane:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...rricane-I.html

I've placed your Patch Data on top of these and projected the sea level speeds (see attached) and both are looking too slow from sea level to 20k and 16k respectively. At sea level the Spitfire is looking to be 255mph instead of 283mph (28mph slow) and the Hurricane 240mph instead of 262mph (22mph slow).

Can you please confirm that the patch FM is still being adjusted to RL data (or that it will be)?

[41Sqn_Banks]

Originally Posted by klem

BlackSix

This page gives sea level to 29,000 feet figures for the Spitfire with Merlin III @ 6.25lbs boost:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit1vrs109e.html
and this gives it for the Hurricane:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...rricane-I.html

I've placed your Patch Data on top of these and projected the sea level speeds (see attached) and both are looking too slow from sea level to 20k and 16k respectively. At sea level the Spitfire is looking to be 255mph instead of 283mph (28mph slow) and the Hurricane 240mph instead of 262mph (22mph slow).

Can you please confirm that the patch FM is still being adjusted to RL data (or that it will be)?

Thank you klem. This is so far the best post in this thread.