SOW: your thoughts on clickable cockpits and realistic start-up

[Rama]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

Too simplistic a reason to add such an aircraft...

To say that, you must have missed all pre-release and post-release communications around IL2 fm by Oleg. You also must have missed all endless ORR wars around fm particular points, at the time Oleg still answered on forums... before getting so bothered he stopped answering..

For Oleg, fm fidelity is a major communication argument... and even more a reason to be proud (everybody as an ego).
For sure it is for him a sale argument, and one of the main.... is he right or wrong to think that?... that's another point.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by Rama

To say that, you must have missed all pre-release and post-release communications around IL2 fm by Oleg. You also must have missed all endless ORR wars around fm particular points, at the time Oleg still answered on forums... before getting so bothered he stopped answering..

For Oleg, fm fidelity is a major communication argument... and even more a reason to be proud (everybody as an ego).
For sure it is for him a sale argument, and one of the main.... is he right or wrong to think that?... that's another point.

As far as I know, Oleg has never said "why" the SU-26 in any comments anywhere. I remember the speculation threads on "why" such a aircraft would be included. The vast majority of those posting were not pilot's, and really not qualified to judge fm, or to speculate that the SU-26 would provide a proof. Oleg is a pilot, he is already comfortable with his product. And he must get a good chuckle from time to time, reading the whine post on fm. I am also a pilot, and the fm in game represents the four force's acting on flight very well. He has said (quoted) that he would like to attract the MSFS users and developers, so I believe the SU-26 is included just for that goal. I'm sure someday Oleg will reveal his reason, we will just have to wait for that.

[Rama]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

so I believe .../...

As long you say it's your oppinion and not a fact... no problem with me.
Based on all Oleg's interventions on forums, I stand on my oppinion.

[Sutts]

OK, I've read this entire thread and I think that most folk would like to see more complex systems management but not necessarily through mouse clicking.

I think the arguments arise because there are 2 distinct camps of people:

1. Those that primarily enjoy the combat and the skills and strategy required to down the bad guys. For them complex systems may be seen as an unnecessary and unwelcome delay in getting at the enemy. I respect these guys and acknowledge that many have incredible flying skills and a great knowledge of air combat tactics. However, flying skills and tactics were only part of the real mission.....

2. Those that want to engage with the full reality of WWII flying, as they may have read in first hand accounts. Re-living those accounts and getting the real experience of the air war, yes, including the boring bits.

I'm not ashamed to admit that I fall into this second group. I believe that IL2 is very good at giving us the rush of air combat. However I don't believe it is so good at replicating the true work load of a WWII pilot. For many of us, immersion comes from learning an aircraft the way a WWII pilot would have been required to - this includes the flight characteristics AND knowing the procedures required to keep the engine from quitting on you when you're over water 300 miles from land.

To me, it should matter how you handle your fuel load, so when the fight comes you have an aircraft capable of responding. It should matter how you use your mixture controls, boost and prop pitch on a long mission to conserve fuel and get you to the target and home again. Can you imagine the tension these guys felt in the pacific when flying distances over water and the urgency of watching fuel consumption and the health of the engine? As of now you really don't feel any of that urgency and respect for the engine that is keeping you from potentially a watery grave. That is the element that is missing for me - I know we'll never feel the true terror of life and death combat but with a good simulator you certainly can experience the mission tension and some of the thought processes and feelings that the real pilots recount in the many books available.

I really am impressed with what Oleg has given us already with regards to CEM, incredible really. All I'm asking is that proper consideration be given to the things that worried real pilots in the war - essentially fuel state, the health of the engine and life support systems and navigation. I'm not necessarily after every last switch (although I wouldn't complain), I just want to feel more like I've been there and done that when I'm reading these first hand accounts. Giving us things like fuel master switch, primer, battery switch and proper mixture and turbo controls (on US planes anyway) would go a long way to allowing us to follow procedures fairly closely.

Hitting the I key and going to full throttle was not the way it was done in the war and since this is a simulator, shouldn't we have an option that requires a good knowledge of the procedures required to fly a real mission?

I hope this doesn't come across as over demanding or a rant. I just want to express what I think the second camp of simmers might be looking for in SOW, including all the guys coming over from FSX etc.

[=815=TooCooL]

No thanks for me.

[P-38L]

I hate to use the mouse to click on some switches in the cockpit.

A good joystick, pedals and TrackIR. no more.

I don't want clickable cockpits, instead of that use a real joystick to select and switch the options of the cockpit.

I have a Saitek X52Pro you can setup it with 202 buttons and 7 axis, I think is enough. When you use the TrackIR (my case) is not easy to focus on some areas to use the mouse to click.

NO, I DON'T WANT A CLICKABLE COCKPIT

But I DO WANT a complex engine management, more real, all the necesary steps to start the engine, to take care and not exceed in maniful pressure and all that.

[nearmiss]

This thread was started a year ago and every time you look at the forums someone has resurrected it again.

No clickable, if you want clickable and full sequence controls go to MSFT Flight Simulator or Falcon. You can get all that time wasting stuff to give you the whole banana.

Most Falcon users create a one button programmable switch for start sequence.

Take real flight training flight lessons they are not that expensive. You can get all the feel and click you want, and it will actually mean something.

Lookup the CHPRODUCTS MFP and other control devices. You just program them. They beat heck out of trying to shake the hun on your bum, while trying to locate the flaps on the screen to click it. LOL