What is "aircraft stability" - IN VIDEO

[macro]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

Of course it's relative, all warplane performance is relative to other concurrent warplanes.

The German for "fighter" in WW2 was "Jager", but if you translate that back, it comes out "hunter". For the Germans at the time, hunting was stalking big game with a rifle, not the British style of hunting which involved chasing foxes with hounds.

It's a different attitude, and a different style, and the bf 109 fitted the style.

with a completly different objective at the time. if i was defending against a bomber attack i would rather fly the hurri, but attacking (or hunting as they did) i would definitly choose a 109.

[Christop55her]

It takes more controlling on the part of the pilot.

[Crumpp]

Yes I am going to ignore it because you are highlighting stick-free behaviour in game

Wow,

Nobody has compared anything in the game regarding the NACA measurements yet.

The test for the game is stick free, just like the RAE measurements!!!!!

They do not match. The RAE found the Spitfire to be longitudinal neutral or unstable Stick Free.

Take a second and digest the data in both test's before frothing at the mouth I am wrong.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Wow,

Nobody has compared anything in the game regarding the NACA measurements yet..

Then what the hell are you even contributing here?

Originally Posted by Crumpp

The test for the game is stick free, just like the RAE measurements!!!!!

it is for both, fixed values are on the left column and free on the right, and in both cases some stability was recorded, you said it yourself, long period oscillations are irrelevant, if you can't sort out a bit of divergence after 4 minutes then youre either dead or paralysed.

Originally Posted by Crumpp

They do not match. The RAE found the Spitfire to be longitudinal neutral or unstable Stick Free..

not in all conditions tested, you took the time to put it in red yourself, both columns show some element of stability, engine off with flap and gear up is stable in bot fixed and free.

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Take a second and digest the data in both test's before frothing at the mouth I am wrong.

Look pal, take a second yourself and read from post 68, you are the one that mentioned long period oscillations were not measured, all I did was say 'exactly' and pointed out that NACA concluded short period longitudinal oscillations were satisfactorily heavily damped. you are the one 'frothing' at the mouth in a desparate attempt to give no quarter, you really should just give in because you 'are' wrong.

[macro]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Sure they can get it right. They already have the relative performance correct and it is the best simulation of WWII combat piloting to date.

What makes you think they can't get this right too?

In fact, I think they have been looking like most of us, for the characteristics that made these aircraft equal dogfighters.

You won't find it just looking at raw performance numbers.

sorry mate relative performance is not correct, there are other threads that explain this.

[Crumpp]

sorry mate relative performance is not correct

The fighters can all dogfight on equal terms.

How is that not correct relative performance????

Some people are pushing for a unrealistic rendition of their favorite gameshape that has the speed, climb, and turn ability but with a stability that did not exist in reality.

In my book that is an overmodeled fantasy that will alter the correct relative performance found in the game now.

[macro]

Im not pushing for performance on any plane. I want realism same as you. I like flying the 109. I dont want "fantasy" fms on any plane. Just because i disagree with you doesnt mean i want this

If you think they are equal then you are either a really good spit pilot or a poor 109 one, check out threads on main page theres a few. If you take away porked temp effects then they are about equal. At present i only blow up a 109 engine if i want to. I can fly full throttle on auto prop pitch until fuel runs out.

Do you play online maybe under a different name? As i wonder how you come to this conclusion

[Crumpp]

If you take away porked temp effects then they are about equal

That is the issue and the NOT the FM performance numbers at this point.
It has been shown there is a problem with the temperature effects. Flying the Spitfire IAW the Operating Notes should reward the pilot with the same performance as found with temperature effects disabled.

It is a much more realistic combat simulator if the FM numbers are off slightly if they cannot reproduce the stability characteristics.

If they can model the stability characteristics of these aircraft then the dogfights will be on equal terms regardless of raw performance numbers. Game players really put an inordinate amount of emphasis on raw performance numbers anyway.

The differences in performance have to be surprisingly large for most parameters for it to be even noticeable in the air.

It is the ability to put the gunsite on a target and kill it in World War II aerial combat that determined the dogfight ability of the airplane.

For example, here we have a much more maneuverable opponent but it is the ability to land the punch that wins the day.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLRvUhyh2ok