Updated RAF FMs in 1.07.18301

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Ernst

There is so much misunderstanding here. I remember seeing a SPITFIRE Ia manual stating that 12 lbs time limits were 3 minutes.

Now you come here and says its 5 minutes for the IA. There is another manual stating 5 minutes but that was for the IIa i guess. There is so many that use general desinformation and try to using data from other aircraft (IIA) to provide performance of others (IA). Or comparing the best data from one ac with worst of others, or using extra arguments and aproximation much beyond the data to prove their points. The data should talk by themselves with minimal interference of the interpreters.

I do not known but my opinion is that guys complaining about sptifires are noobies because yesterday i found =AN=Felipe's spitfire at 6.5 K and we need 3 109s to shot down him.

The fight lasted almost 10 minutes. The spitfire IIA totally overperformed the 109 high there making loops and barrels rolls while the 109 barely can climb or fly level. If in RL was that way the 109s would have no chance since the BoB fight occured mostly at high altitude, and we known that they were very well matched if we compared the kill/ratios against each other. Someone can say? The Germans have more acs? Ok if you consider the bombers. But fighter vs. fighter they were matched and the british were flying over its territory, the germans had teh fuel problem etc... The truth is, the SPIT accutually in sim is very capable aircraft and certainly well matched with the 109s....

If you have the spits like you want, overperfoming the 109s in every aspect the blue players would give up. Maybe the reds ll feel better historical accuracy shoting 109s at will, killing the 109s in 10 by 1 kill ratio, and flying only against IAs and germans drones. This happened in some IL2 servers after last mods. The servers are killed. If you are blue you have to be extremely sadomasoquist to fly that ultrapack servers. The multiple fms, each one with its own biased fms for one side or other completely destroyed the game...

What do you want in a simplistic way is an all win spitfire model who can zip zap, hang on the prop, barrels rolls like humming bird, rocket climbing, outstanding climbing and energy retention etc... I think you should think yourselves, you are really good pilots? My believe is that you believe spit is that mess because you do not accept defeat and have no humildity to recognize your own fault in your failure.You think you can only be defeated if fighting 3 or 4 109s. If you got defeated by 1 then the game is cheating.

Once i shot down a guy by surprise and he complained: "You shot me down because you got me by surprise. I would expect a chance to fight" And i answered: "Then you suppose i would give you a chance. You are in a spit."

The guys here complain about the spit. I go online and see a complete different situation: Man the spits are very agile, once the pilot sees you and are not a complete noobie is very difficult to put your guns in it, mainly if you are alone. Sometimes they start to whirlwind down there, the only thing they need do to is to pull the elevator as they. They have not to think in a strategy to escape, think about energy, force the adversary to lose their initial energy to after escape in a dive, etc they have just to turn in and endless whirlwinding... So simplistic and ridiculous... However i just accept the performance that i have in the 109 and fly with my brains... Man, is this guys playing the same sim than me?

just my point...

my be the devs would develop two versions of the sim. One for the british commowealth and another for the rest of the world.

People should note that Ernst was one of those in the tiny minority who voted against 100 octane fuelling in bug 174. As a result I take what he says with a pinch of salt.

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Osprey

People should note that Ernst was one of those in the tiny minority who voted against 100 octane fuelling in bug 174. As a result I take what he says with a pinch of salt.

Lol tht's all your theory of 100oct available in fighter during BoB that has to be taken "with a pinch of salt".

Your way of re-writting the big and the small history is remarkable ! Wew

[Osprey]

.....riiiiight.........

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

Lol tht's all your theory of 100oct available in fighter during BoB that has to be taken "with a pinch of salt".

Your way of re-writting the big and the small history is remarkable ! Wew

Enough has been said to this topic, the evidence is overhwelming, but you can't please everyone, feel free to believe what suits you best.

Having the 100 octane fighters at least is both historically correct and good for the game.

As for the actual FMs - shall we report the current issues or is it OK to rely that the devs will get it absolutely right in the final release?

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by Robo.

Enough has been said to this topic, the evidence is overhwelming, but you can't please everyone, feel free to believe what suits you best.

Having the 100 octane fighters at least is both historically correct and good for the game.

You hve a strange way of understanding the logic behind what is historically correct.

Assumptions does not makes proof of fact. No matter how numerous they are thrown in the basket.

The way the 100oct debate have been pounded and the voices of other opinions (because there was different opinions) repeatedly hammered by constantly repeated arguments and personal insults (I still have a vivid remembrance of being insulted by some myself) shld hve not played in your favor this way.

Even the way of some 100Octaner are flying the sim is subject to doubt.

And know you are arguing the SPit does not have strange FM regarding turn rate, E retention, is not Free of stall etc.. etc...

You know, the more I read you and your affiliates, I make my mind believing that the right simulation for you is something related to Duck shooting in a narrow corridor. And still you might request some change in the bird FM !

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

You hve a strange way of understanding the logic behind what is historically correct. Assumptions does not makes proof of fact. No matter how numerous they are thrown in the basket.

Please do tell me what is historically correct then, regarding the 100 octane spirit.

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

Even the way of some 100Octaner are flying the sim is subject to doubt.

I know I know, everybody is cheating - especially whoever shoots you down.

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

And know you are arguing the SPit does not have strange FM regarding turn rate, E retention, is not Free of stall etc.. etc...

No I am not arguing about that at all. In fact I have raised many issues regardless on the side preference (I fly pretty much everything) and I am aware of the issues you mention. I never said what you said I said though.

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

You know, the more I read you and your affiliates, I make my mind believing that the right simulation for you is something related to Duck shooting in a narrow corridor. And still you might request some change in the bird FM !

You are very wrong in your assumptions, but it does not matter all that much. I have nothing else to say to you.

[phoenix1963]

Kwaitek's post reminded me that with this patch the Spit 2a versus 100 octane Spit 1a performance is now completely out of kilter. They really should not be massively different.
The 100 1a now feels strangely unstable, much slower to accelerate, struggles to turn.

Spitfires were always "nice" to fly, this one is not. Yes, this is a rather subjective view! I'd be grateful if someone could produce some comparative performance graphs, particularly sustained turn rates, it's difficult I know.

56RAF_phoenix

[CaptainDoggles]

Do not turn this into another moronic 100-octane thread. Please and thank you.

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by phoenix1963

Kwaitek's post reminded me that with this patch the Spit 2a versus 100 octane Spit 1a performance is now completely out of kilter. They really should not be massively different.
The 100 1a now feels strangely unstable, much slower to accelerate, struggles to turn.

Spitfires were always "nice" to fly, this one is not. Yes, this is a rather subjective view! I'd be grateful if someone could produce some comparative performance graphs, particularly sustained turn rates, it's difficult I know.

56RAF_phoenix

I don't think that would make any sense now as the devs might come with a new patch soon, putting all testing and graphs to the square one again.

From technical point of view, main Spitfire FM issues are:

1. Mixture still wrong way around (although unlike the Hurricane, this one works correctly as 2 pos. lever)

2. +9lbs. bnominal boost on Merlin III

3. inability to use BCC-O at Auto Rich mixture at 3000rpm (and +12lbs.), just makes no sense, but your engine will shake above 2600rpm

4. temperature limits too strict (time wise) for both all out and BCC-O, engines too fragile

As for the 'feeling' I don't think they have changed anything, neg. G is still dodgy, now you can't stall the thing, you can apparently pull like a plunger and it won't stall while turning. It's still a spitfire with some nice extra kick at lower alts, just as it should be. Above 10-12k it's the same like good old Mk.Ia. I haven't noticed any changes in acceleration or stability - non of these are strong points of this plane anyway.

We'll see how and if these issues will be addressed, but I'd say that with this patch it's a bit more of a Battle of Britain, which is good.

/edit/

If you feel like voting for the mixture bugs, please do so here:

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/18

http://www.il2bugtracker.com/issues/102

It seems that some of the most obvious bugs have been addressed already based on the bugtracker system.

[Talisman]

Originally Posted by phoenix1963

Kwaitek's post reminded me that with this patch the Spit 2a versus 100 octane Spit 1a performance is now completely out of kilter. They really should not be massively different.
The 100 1a now feels strangely unstable, much slower to accelerate, struggles to turn.

Spitfires were always "nice" to fly, this one is not. Yes, this is a rather subjective view! I'd be grateful if someone could produce some comparative performance graphs, particularly sustained turn rates, it's difficult I know.

56RAF_phoenix

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-II.html

I found the gen via the above link (esp para 4) rather interesting Phoenix.

Happy landings