Why don´t these figures match up?

[MusseMus]

Originally Posted by Toni74

less than 2%.

Thats right Toni -thank you for pointing that out
It's accually a typo on my behalf -indicated airspeed from the gauge was 310 kph. I have edited my original post now.

[Crumpp]

Also it's not an FM issue because even with a completely wrong FM (say if you do the calculation with the "FM" of a juggernaut, you should get the expected values).

So I'm getting the feeling that the speed gauges in CloD are a mess. It seems that they show an incorrect (too slow) speed.
15% too slow for the Spit and 5% too slow for the 109.

Would anybody be surprised?

I have been saying relative performance is correct, LOL.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Would anybody be surprised?

I have been saying relative performance is correct, LOL.

Yes you have been saying that all along.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

I have been saying relative performance is correct, LOL.

Problem is..

For each person 'saying' the relative performance is correct..

There is another person 'saying' the relative performance is in-correct..

Which is why the old saying of 'talk is cheap' rings so true with regards to what you are 'saying'

As I pointed out..

The only thing we know for sure..

Is that no one has provided any proof one way or another..

That is to say

Based on the few tests done by a few people of a few things..

It is just not enough testing to say with any certainty how accurate the flight simulation is with regards to the performance of each plane, let alone the relative performance of any two planes.

Hope that helps! S!

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by Ribbs67

why couldn't 2 people get on comms then jump into a server and fly side by side. Once speed is matched, both look at there gauges and report the speed that is indicated...

Agreed. Seems to me this is an absolute no brainer, before the conversation can go any further.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by Ribbs67

why couldn't 2 people get on comms then jump into a server and fly side by side. Once speed is matched, both look at there gauges and report the speed that is indicated...

Yep!

And to run together at full rated combat output (ie Spitfire 1a 100 octane @ 3000 rpms/11 lbs boost; 109 E4 at Full WEP) for 15 minutes at, say, 5000 feet for 15 minutes -- one vs one. This would prove Crumpp's assertion that the two fighters have the same relative performance.

[JtD]

Neither the Spitfires nor the 109's WEP setting were cleared for 15 minutes, wouldn't it be wiser to do a longer time test on combat/climb settings? Then go on to check if the engines can be run at WEP settings with a duration representative for the limits listed in the handbooks and only then check out what the aircraft will gain from WEP? It's fairly pointless to find that WEP performance is accurate, if one plane can fly it forever, and the other one will lose power after a few seconds.

[ATAG_Snapper]

Originally Posted by JtD

Neither the Spitfires nor the 109's WEP setting were cleared for 15 minutes, wouldn't it be wiser to do a longer time test on combat/climb settings? Then go on to check if the engines can be run at WEP settings with a duration representative for the limits listed in the handbooks and only then check out what the aircraft will gain from WEP? It's fairly pointless to find that WEP performance is accurate, if one plane can fly it forever, and the other one will lose power after a few seconds.

Sure. Whatever is acceptable.

But I believe each and every Red pilot, to the last man, would vehemently disagree with your "pointless" statement about demonstrating how one plane can run for an extended time at full WEP, long past its "clearance" while its opposing aircraft overheats and loses its engine after less than a half minute. All the while it's being stated that "the two are equal in relative performance" or the FM's are equal -- the problem is simply an erroneous air speed gauge.

Those of us who actually fly the sim online know this is simply wrong, but don't have the clever scripting, the mathematical formulae, nor the aeronautical engineering certifications to demonstrate otherwise. But we have eyes. And what we see and what the armchair experts are telling us is wrong. There are some Blue pilots that see this as well who HAVE flown online with their Red counterparts and QUICKLY saw --- and said, "Wow, you guys have a problem!". And it was NOT an erroneous air speed gauge. And these same Blue pilots didn't need complex mathematical equations or nifty scripting to show them that the two opposing aircraft, in this beta version 1.08, are NOT equal in relative performance.

[NaBkin]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Problem is..

For each person 'saying' the relative performance is correct..

There is another person 'saying' the relative performance is in-correct..

Which is why the old saying of 'talk is cheap' rings so true with regards to what you are 'saying'

As I pointed out..

The only thing we know for sure..

Is that no one has provided any proof one way or another..

That is to say

Based on the few tests done by a few people of a few things..

It is just not enough testing to say with any certainty how accurate the flight simulation is with regards to the performance of each plane, let alone the relative performance of any two planes.

Hope that helps! S!

You are right, talk is cheap. So don't talk, act! I did the test I'm not just "saying".

-> Go ahead and and start the FMB, let any given plane fly for 3minutes on autopilot at your prefered speed and check the distance they've traveled afterwards on the map with icons on.

If any of the planes Give you the expected and correct value of distance +\-500m come back and share the results.

Otherwise stfu and let people talk who did some efford to the topic. Looking forward...

[JtD]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper

But I believe each and every Red pilot, to the last man, would vehemently disagree with your "pointless" statement about demonstrating how one plane can run for an extended time at full WEP, long past its "clearance" while its opposing aircraft overheats and loses its engine after less than a half minute.

You're disagreeing with something I didn't say. I said accurate performance on WEP setting is pointless if some planes have it available forever, while others have a hard time sustaining combat power - pretty much the same statement you are making.

(I don't fly CloD online because I think Il-2 1946 is much better at this point. Doesn't make me an armchair expert. I also don't think you need clever scripting, math or engineering degrees. Only losers focus on that. I think eyes and brains are much more important and I appreciate the information shared by those who take the time and make the effort to actually test in game performance. Very much.)