I hate the wrong data in Il2 strmovik 1946

[ZaltysZ]

Some strange numbers can be just a very dirty workaround for curve fitting problems or just expression of Effect = coefficient * real world value.

For example: suppose you have made a parametric FM; have blueprints, engine data and charts; need to apply your FM (by choosing parameters) to this specific aircraft model. After choosing parameters (wing span, weight, power ant etc.) you notice that you get performance way to different from the one in charts. Probably your FM lacks something minor which gives major influence to this difference. You can rework all FM (and remodel all previous aircrafts) or to choose parameters in such way that performance will comply with charts while minimizing side effects. Such workaround is very attractive solution for consumer level product, especially when there are lots of problems for determining model accuracy.

By fixing those numbers in IL2 you may get something which you were not expecting (UFO, brick and etc).

P.S: there is nice saying in scientific community: No one, except the author, believes in new theory, however everyone, except the experimenter, believes in results of experiment. This should be also applied to test result of aircrafts.

[Kwiatek]

Originally Posted by ZaltysZ

Some strange numbers can be just a very dirty workaround for curve fitting problems or just expression of Effect = coefficient * real world value.

For example: suppose you have made a parametric FM; have blueprints, engine data and charts; need to apply your FM (by choosing parameters) to this specific aircraft model. After choosing parameters (wing span, weight, power ant etc.) you notice that you get performance way to different from the one in charts. Probably your FM lacks something minor which gives major influence to this difference. You can rework all FM (and remodel all previous aircrafts) or to choose parameters in such way that performance will comply with charts while minimizing side effects. Such workaround is very attractive solution for consumer level product, especially when there are lots of problems for determining model accuracy.

By fixing those numbers in IL2 you may get something which you were not expecting (UFO, brick and etc).

P.S: there is nice saying in scientific community: No one, except the author, believes in new theory, however everyone, except the experimenter, believes in results of experiment. This should be also applied to test result of aircrafts.

Unfortunately and suprisly many of these bugs if were fixed to correct value, data etc casue more accuarate FM and peformance of some plane. Just they are simple mistakes, wrong writed numbers etc. It is possible that some of them was done to create a willing effect of performance some planes but many of them are just simple mistakes which hasn'nt corrected. Imagine that when you correct these values the plane start to fly like should

[ElAurens]

Wait a doggone minute here.

The Bf109G2 is actually lighter than it should be? Is this true?

By how much?

Is it on the same order that the Lagg 3 was underweight?

This has profound implications for mission makers.

[Kwiatek]

Wooalla :

G-2 - 2830 kg(game) - ~3100 (IRL)

F-2 - 2880 kg ( game) - ~2728 kg (IRL)

F-4 - 2900 kg ( game) - ~2890 kg (IRL)

[ElAurens]

Thanks!