Well, maybe so, if any of those documents survived the war. The point of importance is that the evaluations made by the English test pilots were absolutely clinical in their accuracy because of the work they were doing. It was about both improving the British aircraft to compete, and about giving the British pilots accurate information on their opponents' aircraft. Propaganda has no place in these tests.

B

There is such a thing as a dive back then, since the context in which he describes 600km/h isn't clear - one can't rule out that he was refering to the plane when diving from altitude.

Also, pilot accounts really shouldn't be turned into performance data. The data collected when these pilots test aircraft under controlled conditions are much better than making a plane do 600km/h level based on "X" pilot's account.

For me and I did read A LOT on it quotations from both camps are more or less the same - anegdotal. I yet have to see somebody showing some technical evidence for this phenomenon. What is it?

I mean heavy controls - so OK, heavy for who? Take it to the daily basis, although rare if not extinct today there was a time when not every car or even truck had a servo steering wheel. Anybody ever tried to drive such a car or even a truck? It's damn harder to pull some "stunts" you do in your new car with two fingers while typing an SMS to your gf every day.
Both hands on the wheel buddy, and if you are not quite used to it it will take what will seem like A LOT of strenght to do it(LADA NIVA parking anyone?) Yet people that were/are used to it can still do it with one hand while typing an SMS!

Let's get back to airplanes, my point is that pilots that learned to fly and flew for years even in combat a plane which needs like 5lbs of power for pitching will surely get totally suprised and find it unpleasant to fly a plane that needs 20-30lbs or even more than that.
Does that mean that only Superman, Governer of California and Shaq O' Neal can fly that plane on the whole planet? I don't think so, and that's why I find this invisible force questionably realistic, yes not completely because I surely do not know all the details, but as things are now - I am not quite convinced...

Happy to see you here talking about the 109 FM, Brain.

OK, let's take a good start. DT is obviously more open minded about FMs and DMs issue that Oleg lately, and I'm sure that with good quotations and arguments, it will be possible to fix the issues that we've seen for the last years on the 109. The KI61 thread linked by another forum user comes to my mind.

Now, for DT, I would politely ask you about one thing to do about the 109s FMs : Can you verify if some datas where not misused when the 109's FM was "fixed" with 4.04 ?

The issue 109 pilots obviously face is that the elevator becomes concrete at higher speeds than 350 kph. It's contestable that this speed is very low to have a concrete elevator, but here is not my point. It seems that the speed taken to make concrete elevator was TAS and not IAS as it should be. With this possible mistake, the 109 keeps being relatively manoeuvrable at low to mid altitudes, but becomes uncontrolable at high altitude.

Over 7000 m, the 109's elevator don't respond at all anymore when you have around 220 kph indicated in IAS. In fact (and I could test it extensively), the Bf110G2 is better in manoeuvrability than the 109K at speeds above 250 kph at that altitude (from my POV, but I flew the 110G2 extensively the last years).

I'm sure Brain, that has a large collection of documents about various 109s will be able to deliver you the documents he has about the aircraft in a structured manner, but could you please check that first issue first ? (mixing between IAS and TAS for locking of the elevators at high altitudes) ?

Thank you very much.

I, and a few others, have had a problem with the 4.09 Server Patch. After applying the patch to a working 4.08 Dedicated Server, on startup the server crashes to desktop with no error messages, before completely finished loading.

In my own case, I have resolved this problem by replacing the following new .dlls with the old ones from the working 4.08 server:

il2_core.dll
il2_coreP4.dll
mg_snd.dll
mg_snd_sse.dll

I did not individually test to see if any one of those was the only culprit.

My server runs Win2KPro and AMD Athlon 1.6GHz.

So have a lot of the FM's been altered? Planes I've flown for years are flopping and stalling. Even the MC205 seems much more spineless. :(

If so, do you have a report listing the planes that underwent FM modifications and why? I'll apologize now if this has been discussed and hope some one can link me to the answer and/or the list of altered planes.

Thanks!:)

report on SM-79
 

I ran into a weird thing;

Playing a track of sm-79, the skin has been changed from the track.
When I change the skin in the original mission in the FMB ,it also changes the skin in the track??? after recording?

When I belly-land the SM-79 , the engines (propellors) keep on turning.

And is it possible to make the instrument lights somewhat brighter? for better reading?:rolleyes:

No FM work was done by Daidalos except the minor issues listed in readme. Yet ... :cool:

I know that many don't think highly of the 185, but it seems that something has definitely changed. It does nothing but stall. The MC205 also seems a lot more unstable.

Could it be stick settings? I have always used Crazy Ivans stick settings. Would this, some how, be different in 4.09?

Is your "yet" a polite indicator that recent FM changes have Maddox finger prints on them?:o It is what it is.....it's ok if the FM has been changed, but I would like to know before I go ripping into my stick configurations.

Can't say anything regarding Maddox Games. I - personally - don't think they touched anything (since they're up to their elbows in work for SoW) so I'm not sure where the effects come from. I just don't know ... maybe placebo rearing its ugly head again? :mrgreen: