![]() |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Some people who actually post here see it all the time. Some people expect their opinions, especially if correct, to not be deleted while others opinions fall to the bias of Alpha. It's understandable, as Alpha has proven yet again how little he knows about a sim he is talking about. The bias probably comes from the lack of knowledge on the subject. Either way, moderators should not be biased to anyone. He even PM'd me completely making up something that I said for his own agenda. If that's someone fit for a moderator, then I'm clearly living on the wrong planet. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
My understanding was same as Alpha's, CoD does not model "memory effect" for exceeding the structural limit. If 1c managed to put it in after the patches, this is a magnificent good news which has been omitted until now! ![]() ~S~ PS. Thanks for the videos IvanK, never seeing before! |
#44
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
The posts deleted in this thread should have been since they did not deal directly on the topic. However, I don't care anything about "who is the worst moderator" on these forums. I only replied in this thread to those of you who claim superior "experience" over others as a means to discredit someone you don't agree with. The fact that you are now pointing out the "moderate" as an issue is just another example of the above. Wotan
__________________
![]() |
#45
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Hi Josf, good to see you on these forums.
There are A LOT of folks on this site that don't/can't comprehend the concept of an "angles vs energy" fight. I've tried to make the argument many many times and it just falls on deaf ears. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In case there continues to be misunderstanding, despite repeating the same questions over and over again, here is a repeat of the same questions over again.
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=34290 That is the Original Post So as to reinforce the understanding that I am not unique, or alone, in the interest in Corner Velocity as one of the important measures of Energy Maneuverability here is the quote from the Original Poster: Quote:
http://www.aviation.org.uk/docs/flig...-FTM108/c6.pdf Here are what appear to be calculated Energy Maneuverability Charts done in World War II for the Spitfire and the 109: ![]() ![]() Here is the thread and the document that may be referring to those charts: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...t=33720&page=6 Here is the direct download from that thread describing what appears to be the production of those charts AND much in the way of how the British compared their Spitfires to the captured 109 they tested and reported on in that downloadable document: https://www.dropbox.com/s/wtmfqxlon7...ing%20test.pdf Here is a quote from that document concerning what may be those Spitfire and 109 Energy Maneuverability Charts: Quote:
There are 4 variables involved in Corner Speed and according to Robert Shaw and according to Math if you don't like Robert Shaw any 2 variables known can be used to calculate the other 2 variables. Those variables are: 1. Air Speed (true) 2. g Force 3. Turn Rate (degrees per second) 4. Turn Radius Mock combat was performed by British combat pilots when they captured enemy planes and there is documentation on those test. Mock combat was performed by German combat pilots when they captured enemy planes and there is very little documentation on those tests. We simulate combat, which is Mock combat in these games. Example of Mock Combat taken from the British document found on this site, downloadable because a forum member makes that document available - thanks. Quote:
I don't know everything. I think that the 109 Corner Speed is at around 350 km/h indicated and so that will have to do until there are any other offerings from anyone else who may be able to find a more accurate number. I can record the track file and find the time it takes to travel around one full circle. Math can then be applied in the determination of Degrees per second since I will then have the time and the known number of 360 degrees traveled in that time. Here, for any know it all people out there, not counterfeit know it all people, is a question on this topic that could help find a more accurate Corner Speed. Is it possible to get any other of the 4 variables required to have at least 2 of the variables known precisely, so as to then know all 4 variables precisely to thereby know at least one example of one pilot flying at Corner Velocity in the game? 1. Turn rate (easy to calculate based upon one 360 turn done in a specific amount of time. 2. Air Speed (the gauge on the airplane is indicated and it does shake around a bit) 3. g Force (If the game code is modelling a known pilot g force limit, such as 5 g, then this variable can be known for each plane being tested if the code is known, so if anyone knows if the code in the game has a known g force for any pilots simulated in any planes then please consider speaking up) 4. Turn radius (if there were search lights placed on the ground at known distances or pylons or if a track file can be viewed to some measure of scale relative to an aircraft wingspan, then this could be a possible standard of measure for turn radius possibility otherwise the other variables have to be figure out more precisely) If the turn rate is known then the length of the flight or circumference of the turn measure, if found out, can thereby be used to calculate air speed (true) and turn radius, and then g can be found out too. If you look at a Dog House Plot you can see that they are mathematically calculated as representations of physical reality. A dot on the graph is a specific air speed, turn rate, g, and turn radius, no question, it is a physical fact, and all that is need to get on the chart is two of the four variables known somehow. Then, without the math, or the charts, there is the reality that the game code offers, and if Corner Speeds can be known then the g Loads CODED for each pilot can be known too. Are Spitfire pilots coded with higher g loads? Are 109 pilots coded with higher g loads? Would anyone like to know? Is such information worthy of resort to personal attacks if such information were to be sought after by someone? |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I will try again. Not as expert, nor a rl pilot, but common sense applies by looking at the doghouse graph.
If you fly straight at top speed at sea level with full tank of gas conclusion 1: your are in the flight envelope if you then roll your plane 90 degrees left or right and pull back on the stick without exceeding the structural load limit conclusion 2 you will experience ever increasing g force you are still in the flight envelope if you continue to pull back on the stick in an ever increasing fashion conclusion 3 you will eventually hit the stall limit line via high speed stall. You are no longer in the flight envelope at that moment. you must pause the game at that moment in time, because you have just found the peak of the doghouse where load limit (g) line and stall limit line intersect at the maximum instantaneous turn rate of the plane you are flying under the current flying conditions. For practical purposes, The actual value of the turn rate is irrelevant. The actual value of the turn radius is irrelevant. The actual value of the g limit at that moment is irrelevant. Blackouts can be made irrelevant, if they are turned off for testing purposes. The IAS at that moment in your turn is relevant for the given flight conditions. As a player, that is the value you are after. You must sustain that speed for best cornering. Unless you are trying to “game” the game, so to speak. In that case, it is legitimate to call your motivations behind this thread into question, imho. If this information is incorrect, please, anybody, point it out. I would really like to know how it is off topic or incorrect or flaming or wth. This post, similar to what I made earlier today and was deleted. It is not my fault CloD failed (off topic). |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
And saying that experience doesn't matter only shows me how daft you really are. Your logic is very flawed. It's no wonder you think the way you do. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Nobody was questioning the actual facts presented. Unless Alpha deleted those as well? The people, such as myself, chimed in when those facts turned to opinions and very wrong ones at that.
|
#50
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Your entry into this thread (unless an earlier post has been removed) was IMHO haughty and smacking of pride, and you do them a disservice with that attitude. |
![]() |
|
|