Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-12-2012, 04:58 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by macro View Post
I want realism same as you. I like flying the 109. I don't want "fantasy" fms on any plane.
Bingo!

The problem with accepting 'relative performance' is it can change the sim in un-expected ways such that it is no longer a representation of reality

For example

Take a WWII P-51 and Fw190 and scale up (multiply) the Top Speed, ROC, and Roll Rates of both planes by say 1.5

In doing so you have maintained the 'relative performance' of both planes..

But now the accuracy of the performance of both planes is off by that amount..

For example the tops speed of the P51 goes from around 426mph to around 639mph..

Due to the inaccuracy of the planes 'performance' it can change the style of dog fighting..

In short you have made this WWII 'prop' flight sim act like a KOREAN 'jet' sim..

Where the sim users will more than likely adjust their style of flying accordingly..

Which in turn will more than likely change the tactics from WWII prop style to KOREAN jet style..

All because of something as simple as an inaccurately simulated top speed..

Same is true if the speeds are scale down..

Only in this case, you have made this WWII 'prop' flight sim act like a WWI 'prop' sim..

In short we should not set the bar so low that we accept 'relative performance'..

In that it is just an excuse for not taking the time to do right..

But if that is all that you require..

Than there are plenty of Xbox WWII shoot-em-up flight sims out there for you to choose from..

But for us hard core simmers..

I think we can all agree that we 'require' a bit more 'realism' than that!

Quote:
Originally Posted by macro View Post
As i wonder how you come to this conclusion
That is just it..

With regards to flight modeling performance accuracy let alone relative performance..

The only thing we know for sure is that no one has provided proof to say one way or another..

All we have thus far are a few tests of a few things done by a few people that hint at some errors in accuracy of flight modeling..

But nothing that anyone would or could say is conclusive let alone complete..

Heck even 1C has stated the flight models have issues that they are working to resolve..

In summary, the user testing thus far and the fact that 1C admits there are issues should be enough to cause all to take pause before making any statements of FACT on how accurate the flight model is simulating performance let alone relative performance!
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-12-2012, 08:05 PM
macro macro is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 217
Default

seen that vid before, brilliant.

I seen the question in the community communication thread asking if fm's would change but not seen an answer to say they had been worked on.

hope they have
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-13-2012, 03:04 AM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
WWII 'prop' flight sim act like a KOREAN 'jet' sim..
Not at all, power producers and thrust producers have completely different aerodynamics as well separate methodology for determining most performance parameters.

The whole premise is completely ludicris regarding a computer game.

Who cares how fast or slow a virtual gameshape is going as long as the it acts in relation to the other objects in the game in a reasonable facsimile of what it is trying to simulate.

In otherwords, it must behave somewhat like the real thing.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-13-2012, 03:40 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Not at all
That is your opinion and your welcome to it..

But the point your missing is this..

The only thing we know for sure is that no one has provided proof to say one way or another..

All we have thus far are a few tests of a few things done by a few people that hint at some errors in accuracy of flight modeling..

But nothing that anyone would or could say is conclusive let alone complete..

In summary, the user testing thus far and the fact that 1C admits there are issues should be enough to cause all to take pause before making any statements of FACT on how accurate the flight model is simulating performance let alone relative performance!

Hope that helps! S!
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-14-2012, 05:43 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
That is your opinion and your welcome to it..


It is not my opinion that power producers and thrust producers use completely different formulation to determine performance and have completely different aerodynamic properties.

It is just a fact.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-14-2012, 05:49 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
It is not my opinion
No, it is your opinion

And again, your welcome to it!

I and others just don't agree with it

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
that power producers and thrust producers use completely different formulation to determine performance and have completely different aerodynamic properties.

It is just a fact.
Ah, now I see where you are confused..

Note I said nothing about the 'powers'..

That was your tangent topic to take the focus off what I was talking about..

That being the 'speed'

Referring back to my post, note that I was talking about the relative speed, and how scaling it up or down can change the way the game is played

Which is why the attitude that accuracy does not mater as long as everything is relative is in error

Hope that helps
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-17-2012, 05:46 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default



Wow.....
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-17-2012, 05:53 PM
macro macro is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 217
Default

i see what you mean ace, but its not relative anyway.

wondered how long it would be before he bumped this thread.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-17-2012, 10:16 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by macro View Post
i see what you mean ace,
S!

Quote:
Originally Posted by macro View Post
but its not relative anyway.
Maybe.. maybe not.. All I know for sure is no one has provided any proof to say for sure one way or another.. The few test done by a few people of a few things is just too few to say eitherway!

Quote:
Originally Posted by macro View Post
wondered how long it would be before he bumped this thread.
Oh that is easy.. When ever he makes an error in a thread, he simply bummps a bunch of 'other/old' threads, like this one, to take the focus off the error he made in another current thread.. In short muddy the water to take the focus off the error.. SOP for him.
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.

Last edited by ACE-OF-ACES; 09-17-2012 at 10:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-18-2012, 01:45 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
When ever he makes an error in a thread,


OMG, what error? Please point it out so it can be addressed.

Otherwise, it has nothing to do with this conversation.

My reply is based on the fact you don't have a clue about thrust producer aerodynamics and are not someone who can be shown anything different.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.