View Single Post
  #47  
Old 11-28-2011, 05:03 PM
6S.Manu 6S.Manu is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Venice - Italy
Posts: 585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KeBrAnTo View Post
I agree. But the problem here is HOW are they gonna be changed.
Are they gonna be changed towards the fake 1946 FM?. We'll find out soon. To be honest I don't think it should be so difficult to set the parameters of each plane in game according with the official performance tests of them, which were really extensive in WW2 and there is plenty documentation about them also, that's the way it should be and remain either if we like it or not, IMHO.
I agree.

The problem with the 109's elevator is also about the flimsy data: simply there aren't real numbers about the strengh needed to manouvre. Only pilots' accounts...

We all know that the 109 pilot could control the plane using both his arms since it was not a lack of efficiency of the elevators at high speed (as the simulated in 1946).

Developers need to be find a way to manage this, otherwise we'll have again a porked 109. And here we go with the pilot's fatigue simulation...
__________________

A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria.
Reply With Quote