Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper (Post 465058)

Well, to put a positive spin on the friendly shooting thing....I thought my marksmanship was quite good...... ;)

Originally Posted by Kupsised (Post 465064)

I've not had time to try anything other than the Su26 yet, but in that, yes you definately can. Machinegun fire makes a loud, nasty bang when it hits you now. I was so used to it being quiet or non-existant that the first few times getting hit I thought I'd taken serious damage.

Originally Posted by epoch (Post 465073)

Hmm I guess the hit sound issue may be plane specific? I definitely heard nothing last night. I was also shot down in a Blenheim over Oye Plage - I don't recall hearing any hit sounds then either.

Originally Posted by AT AG_Snapper (Post 465019)

One thing that puzzles me is, do the devs actually FLY their own sim? I'm dead serious on this, and not being facetious whatsoever. My reasoning?

1) First thing I did after installing the new beta patch was to run some quick (VERY quick) tests on the Spitfire 2a and 1a 100 octane. Went into Quick Mission, selected Cross Country Flight.....and took off and climbed. Easy peasy. In this case I noted it took 20% throttle to start both aircraft. Take off roll at 9 lbs/6.25 lbs (full throttle resp), 3000 rpms, 100% rad (full open). On wheels up I held to level flight, coarsening pitch to 2850 rpms and closing rad to 50%. Watching oil & glycol temps, increased climb to maintain 185 mph IAS. All fine temps-wise, maintaining this combat climbout. At 18K feet (2a)/22K feet (1a 100 octane) the engine began sputtering, losing power, with rpms jumping wildly between 2400 and 3000. No damage reported in Damage Window; temps OK (ie oil < 95, glycol < 110 for both aircraft). The only way to smooth the engine vibrations and get partial climbing power back was to go Fine Pitch -- 300O rpms, but temps climbed with rad fully opened. Aborted climb, engine resumed normal operation below 16K feet with no apparent damage.

Each test here took about 10 minutes, but clearly no dev has done this, otherwise why wasn't it fixed OR reported in the readme? Sloppy.

2) I didn't do any tests on the Hurricanes. But how long would it take a dev to jump in the cockpit and discover the wretched thing wouldn't start? (Especially when the same problem had occurred in beta 1.07 and fixed in beta 1.08 ). Again, sloppy.

I'm baffled by the testing protocols, or rather, the lack thereof. If such ridiculously simple performance issues such as these are missed, how on earth are more complex issues dealt with?

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper (Post 465019)

One thing that puzzles me is, do the devs actually FLY their own sim? I'm dead serious on this, and not being facetious whatsoever. My reasoning?

1) First thing I did after installing the new beta patch was to run some quick (VERY quick) tests on the Spitfire 2a and 1a 100 octane. Went into Quick Mission, selected Cross Country Flight.....and took off and climbed. Easy peasy. In this case I noted it took 20% throttle to start both aircraft. Take off roll at 9 lbs/6.25 lbs (full throttle resp), 3000 rpms, 100% rad (full open). On wheels up I held to level flight, coarsening pitch to 2850 rpms and closing rad to 50%. Watching oil & glycol temps, increased climb to maintain 185 mph IAS. All fine temps-wise, maintaining this combat climbout. At 18K feet (2a)/22K feet (1a 100 octane) the engine began sputtering, losing power, with rpms jumping wildly between 2400 and 3000. No damage reported in Damage Window; temps OK (ie oil < 95, glycol < 110 for both aircraft). The only way to smooth the engine vibrations and get partial climbing power back was to go Fine Pitch -- 300O rpms, but temps climbed with rad fully opened. Aborted climb, engine resumed normal operation below 16K feet with no apparent damage.

Each test here took about 10 minutes, but clearly no dev has done this, otherwise why wasn't it fixed OR reported in the readme? Sloppy.

2) I didn't do any tests on the Hurricanes. But how long would it take a dev to jump in the cockpit and discover the wretched thing wouldn't start? (Especially when the same problem had occurred in beta 1.07 and fixed in beta 1.08 ). Again, sloppy.

I'm baffled by the testing protocols, or rather, the lack thereof. If such ridiculously simple performance issues such as these are missed, how on earth are more complex issues dealt with?

Originally Posted by ATAG_Snapper (Post 465019)

At 18K feet (2a)/22K feet (1a 100 octane) the engine began sputtering, losing power, with rpms jumping wildly between 2400 and 3000. No damage reported in Damage Window; temps OK (ie oil < 95, glycol < 110 for both aircraft). The only way to smooth the engine vibrations and get partial climbing power back was to go Fine Pitch -- 300O rpms, but temps climbed with rad fully opened. Aborted climb, engine resumed normal operation below 16K feet with no apparent damage.

Originally Posted by bw_wolverine (Post 465092)

+1 from me too, Snap.

The only explanation I can come up with is that they're just not bothering to test *everything* because they're so busy with the other stuff for the sequel. They're coding what they think'll fix it and throwing *other partially untested fixes* into the beta patches. Then we get the patches and test them and see what sticks and what breaks.

There's no reason a patch that prevents half of one side's aircraft from starting engines for 9-15 minutes should have ever reached beta status let alone Release Candidate status.

Originally Posted by Kupsised (Post 465085)

I was thinking the same thing when you said that. I'll go an give it a try in a different AC (Blenheim makes most sense) then report back in a few minutes.

EDIT: Weird, I just went up in a Blenheim against Hurricanes (to make sure it was machinegun fire I was hearing and not cannon) and still got the very loud banging hit sounds. This was all offline though, so maybe it could be the difference between online and offline? Again, I'll try and do a test and trawl around on ATAG begging people to come and shoot me down :P

Originally Posted by Chivas (Post 465088)

I'm not on COD's staff to see how and what priorities they gave their testing staff. Contrary to some schools of thought, I don't think its possible they aren't doing alot of testing. Thankfully the devs are intelligent enough to use the expertise in the forums to find issues, especially with the engine management changes they appear to have made. They would have to be clairvoyant to list the issues found by the community in the read me. ;)

Originally Posted by klem (Post 465049)

How does that compare with this:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-II.html

Boost figures??