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

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 01-20-2011, 08:44 PM
steppie's Avatar
steppie steppie is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 78
Default the P47 "the Unbreakable"no more

the new G loading on aircraft has wreak the P47
you can't dive bomb in the 47 no more with breaking or damaging the aircraft were it will not fly properly.It that bad i can dive bomb in a spit and not break up and try and do the same in a p47 break my wings off. in some of my test did i don't even get blackout before the aircraft is breaking up.
Because the way the G loading is model it hasn't taken in account for aircraft like the P47.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 01-20-2011, 08:48 PM
Sven Sven is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Netherlands, Zeeland
Posts: 787
Default

Interesting I thought the "Jug" has a very high dive speed. It also looks like it could withstand enormous G load. I think it has something to do with the bomb load as well Steppie.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 01-20-2011, 09:31 PM
swiss swiss is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Zürich, Swiss Confederation
Posts: 2,266
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steppie View Post
i don't even get blackout before the aircraft is breaking up.
Welcome to the club.
Same goes for the 190.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 01-20-2011, 10:29 PM
[URU]Amraam [URU]Amraam is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3
Default

This video shows the dive restrictions of the P-47, I think it´s a good source to compare.


Last edited by [URU]Amraam; 01-28-2011 at 11:43 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 01-21-2011, 01:29 PM
KG26_Alpha KG26_Alpha is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 2,805
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by [URU]Amraam View Post
This video shows the dive restriccions of the P-47, I think it´s a good source to compare.


No snap rolling and no inverted flying !!!

Dive speeds from the video max 500mph IAS under 5000ft
Attached Images
File Type: jpg p47 dive.jpg (15.4 KB, 59 views)

Last edited by KG26_Alpha; 01-21-2011 at 01:34 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 01-21-2011, 02:49 PM
Bricks Bricks is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Online
Posts: 51
Default

The real problem is not the damage-model as it is now, but that it simply wasn't there before.

This allowed a lot of people to grow some habbits, especially with BnZ that allowed them to rule the skys and defy the laws of physics. Now somebody flipped the switch and those who mastered using the gameflaws before, now have a hard time to adapt.

It's not the modelling, that's porked. It's the habbits some people nursed for 10 years.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 01-21-2011, 04:34 PM
robtek's Avatar
robtek robtek is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,819
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bricks View Post
The real problem is not the damage-model as it is now, but that it simply wasn't there before.

This allowed a lot of people to grow some habbits, especially with BnZ that allowed them to rule the skys and defy the laws of physics. Now somebody flipped the switch and those who mastered using the gameflaws before, now have a hard time to adapt.

It's not the modelling, that's porked. It's the habbits some people nursed for 10 years.
QFT
should be posted in the bomb fuzing thread also!
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 01-21-2011, 05:22 PM
DrJet DrJet is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8
Default Game play vs. Accuracy

Well, it's the matter between playability and historical accuracy, isn't it? I was flying 190 with 500 kgs bomb and got bounced by p51. In a gentle turn with speed less than 350 km, I heard air frame wracking sound yet again, which forced me dropping my bomb and started one on one fighting with p51. I managed to survive and get a kill but I had to fly back to base to bring another bomb that wasted 20 minutes. I would greatly appreciate if anyone can provide any historical proof that this could happen in real plane and why Oleg had not introduced this feature for the last 9 years!
Salute,
DrJet
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 01-21-2011, 05:32 PM
Bricks Bricks is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Online
Posts: 51
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJet View Post
Well, it's the matter between playability and historical accuracy, isn't it? I was flying 190 with 500 kgs bomb and got bounced by p51. In a gentle turn with speed less than 350 km, I heard air frame wracking sound yet again, which forced me dropping my bomb and started one on one fighting with p51. I managed to survive and get a kill but I had to fly back to base to bring another bomb that wasted 20 minutes. I would greatly appreciate if anyone can provide any historical proof that this could happen in real plane and why Oleg had not introduced this feature for the last 9 years!
Salute,
DrJet
If I may remind you: There are many things that were introduced with numerous patches and addons. The IL2-1946 was by far more than the original IL2 was!
We always begged for more realism, Luftwaffe and Allied pilots the same. Just remember the numerous Spitfire-complains about unrealistic maneuvers and stuff like that. The same way FW190 was claimed to be uber.
Now both are more realistic and you still whine? What's the point?

And about that example you made: Sorry, but the FW-190 is not an A-10. If you don't think a simply 500kg-Bomb would make that much of a difference, maybe you should read some books. The FW empty weight was only 3 tons!
That means you added 1/6th of it's total weight + a lot of drag and wonder why you can't dogfight with it any longer? Are you kidding?

The more I read about these complains, the more I'm remembered to this (slightly changed) famous quote:
Crowd: "I want the truth!"
OM: "You can't handle the truth!"

Seems some people really can't. IMHO it's alright, but they shouldn't come here and tell people IL2 was more realistic without taking weight and structural integrity into account.

Last edited by Bricks; 01-21-2011 at 05:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 01-21-2011, 05:43 PM
Arrow Arrow is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 48
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJet View Post
Well, it's the matter between playability and historical accuracy, isn't it? I was flying 190 with 500 kgs bomb and got bounced by p51. In a gentle turn with speed less than 350 km, I heard air frame wracking sound yet again, which forced me dropping my bomb and started one on one fighting with p51. I managed to survive and get a kill but I had to fly back to base to bring another bomb that wasted 20 minutes. I would greatly appreciate if anyone can provide any historical proof that this could happen in real plane and why Oleg had not introduced this feature for the last 9 years!
Salute,
DrJet
Even in F-16 when you hang bombs on it you are limitted to 5.5G. If you have a 500kg bomb on a bombrack and you are pulling 3Gs the weight of the bomb is 1.5 tons that the bombrack and the airframe has to hold.
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 10:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.