4.12 development update discussion and feedback

[Bouma004]

Thaks for answer.

But you have to know that this perameter has nothing to do with RPM ! I am still conviced that there is somthing wrong whith FW190 FM in 4.11.1m but this is only my point of view and some other pilotes from historical Squads.

That kind of problems are genraly never matched by dogfight pilots who generaly never use the planes from the parking to the parking wich is my case.

I just hope to initate a debat about this question.

[Nicholaiovitch]

Originally Posted by Bouma004

Thaks for answer.

But you have to know that this perameter has nothing to do with RPM ! I am still conviced that there is somthing wrong whith FW190 FM in 4.11.1m but this is only my point of view and some other pilotes from historical Squads.

That kind of problems are genraly never matched by dogfight pilots who generaly never use the planes from the parking to the parking wich is my case.

I just hope to initate a debat about this question.

This issue was discussed at some length in this thread:-

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...W190+FM&page=2

Starts at the bottom of page 2 and continues.

Although I think I understand why it is happening (prop pitch), i also feel that the drag in the approach config. is still an issue....it is just not representative of a high wing loading a/c with gear and flaps down at 1.3VS.

I can only guess that like the excessive down trim necessary in the Spitfires it is a parameter necessarily incorporated to achieve a desired overall result bearing in mind the limitations imposed by the IL-2 "engine".

TD seem to go to great lengths to get things right....it would be nice to get it from the "horses mouth" sometimes as to why things are the way they are.

I think that nearly all here are full of admiration for the work done by TD....it is just that most of us are not able to understand how these things are applied and the reason why is sometimes baffling!

Nicholaiovitch

[JtD]

Originally Posted by Bouma004

But you have to know that this perameter has nothing to do with RPM!

It defines minimum rpm with a constant speed prop, or in case of the Fw 190, for the Kommandogerät at 0% throttle.

I can only guess that like the excessive down trim necessary in the Spitfires it is a parameter necessarily incorporated to achieve a desired overall result bearing in mind the limitations imposed by the IL-2 "engine".

The excessive down trim is in game because the real aircraft has that quality. The problem with it being that it is not possible to redefine the "neutral" level, neutral is always 0° control deflection, while in real life the trim set by the tabs on the ground would be considered neutral.

[Nicholaiovitch]

Originally Posted by JtD

It defines minimum rpm with a constant speed prop, or in case of the Fw 190, for the Kommandogerät at 0% throttle.

The excessive down trim is in game because the real aircraft has that quality. The problem with it being that it is not possible to redefine the "neutral" level, neutral is always 0° control deflection, while in real life the trim set by the tabs on the ground would be considered neutral.

Many thanks JtD...

Still don't understand why the drag curve in the approach config. cannot be altered to a more realistic level even with the prop pitch/RPM changes that have been made. Was the 190 really like that?

Re. the Spitfire trim. Don't really want to open this once again as so much has been written about it....but.....the trim was not like that before the changes....so presumably the changes were made to improve realism or to make changes to manoeuvrability in the FM (moving CG aft.....centre of lift forward....increasing wing area?)

Just really trying to understand what TD has to go through in order to make changes to FM with the limited tools they have bearing in mind the age of the prog.

Hope I have not hijacked this thread!

Nicholaiovitch

Hearing from the chaps that have to do all this will I'm sure help in all of us understanding why things are the way they are.