109 advice needed (climb)

My fear with the new patch is that luthier said they are looking into the fm of the spit but made no mention of the other planes. So probably we will get a spit 1 faster than the hurricane to make this right but the rest will stay where it is ...

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

My fear with the new patch is that luthier said they are looking into the fm of the spit but made no mention of the other planes. So probably we will get a spit 1 faster than the hurricane to make this right but the rest will stay where it is ...

I'm not bothered since to me this game is still incomplete: but having a well modelled Spit is a great thing... one of the many steps they have to take.

Originally Posted by 6S.Manu

I'm not bothered since to me this game is still incomplete: but having a well modelled Spit is a great thing... one of the many steps they have to take.

Agreed that they should fix the Spit. My concern is that we will wait a long time or even an eternity for the other planes to be fixed.

@Ace:

I agree that to some extend we will have to rely on some hypothesises wrt plane performance. However we should use any data that we can get imho - and be it just to calibrate the calculated data.

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

Agreed that they should fix the Spit. My concern is that we will wait a long time or even an eternity for the other planes to be fixed.

Of course. That I meant is that they have to start with a plane: it's better to have one well modelled plane and 3 bad modelled ones for 6 months than 4 bad modelled planes for 6 months.

I know that the dogfights will suffer from it... but since I've not CloD on my HD for me it's ok (as for majority of the pilots in my squad).

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

I agree that to some extend we will have to rely on some hypothesises wrt plane performance.

Not to some extent..

Actually in most cases we will have to rely on a calculated (what you call hypothesizes) value.

Because truth be told, they did NOT test every variant of every plane in WWII.. Add to that the fact that most tests in WWII were limited to '2' (ROC, TOP SPEED per Altitude) sometimes '3' (ROC, TOP SPEED per Altitude, Time to Climb) performance tests. And a lot of those were lost during or since the war.

As noted here, out of the hundreds upon thousands of plane types used during WWII we only have about '6' turn rate tests, and only at one altitude.

Now consider 'other' factors people love to whine about.. say roll rates.. There was very little testing done on that during WWII..

So with that said MOST of the data used in WWII flight sims is of the 'calculated' type (what you call hypothesizes)

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

However we should use any data that we can get imho

Yes all six or so turn rate test should be used along with the half dozen or so roll rate tests

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Stormcrow

- and be it just to calibrate the calculated data.

I would call it more of a sanity check than a calibration

All in all the turn rate and roll rate data is very limited, because they just didn't bother or think those values were worth testing. Where 'they' did find ROC and Top Speed per Altitude worth testing.. So that data is much easier to find, but, they didn't always re-test a plane when a variant of said plane came out.

So, there is almost always going to be a calculation done, if not from scratch or to tweak existing data for a variant of the plane