Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-26-2009, 09:45 PM
ivagiglie ivagiglie is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 16
Default

Dear DT, some of you have stated that the way to get a bad/erroneous behavior fixed is to provide "actual data", sounds reasonable.

But what does constitute enough "actual data" to ask for a change?
For the Macchi 202/205 the FM seems underrated (turning performance above all).
Unfortunately tabular data or nice graphs so readily available for American planes simply aren't there.

What can be found though are reports (like the classic Feb'43 Guidonia one with comparison against the FW and 109) and interviews of actual pilots that flew those planes or against them in combat.
I'm willing to start to collect this data and make it available if this can trigger some modifications on your side.
What do you think?
  #2  
Old 09-27-2009, 10:18 AM
LesniHU LesniHU is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ivagiglie View Post
Dear DT, some of you have stated that the way to get a bad/erroneous behavior fixed is to provide "actual data", sounds reasonable.

But what does constitute enough "actual data" to ask for a change?
For the Macchi 202/205 the FM seems underrated (turning performance above all).
Unfortunately tabular data or nice graphs so readily available for American planes simply aren't there.

What can be found though are reports (like the classic Feb'43 Guidonia one with comparison against the FW and 109) and interviews of actual pilots that flew those planes or against them in combat.
I'm willing to start to collect this data and make it available if this can trigger some modifications on your side.
What do you think?
Its hard question what is enough and what not. Combat reports have no value when comparing turn performance, you never know enough about the adversary. Performance can be estimated from airframe geometry and engine power but that usually does not take details into account, so every report from test done under controlled conditions helps. We welcome your effort, but please be prepared that it can end in conclusion "not enough data to support such change" or "we think explanation is different" or other dead end. Please use DT email for further communication.
  #3  
Old 09-27-2009, 11:31 AM
ramstein ramstein is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 271
Default

Why not just put a thread for each aircraft type in a forum, instead of one big mess? Someone get creative and make it so the powers that be will be happy with the forum thread structure for these aircraft fix requests..


example:

Thread 1:
aircraft a) needs wings fixed. Supplied data.

Thread 2:
aircraft b) needs guns fixed, supplied data.

Thread 3:
etc..
__________________
ASUS P8Z68 V Pro Gen3
Intel i53570K 3.40 GHZ
G.Skill F3-17000CL9-8GBXM
EVGA Nvidia GTX 680 Video Graphics ard
WD Black WD1002FAAEX 1TB
Cooler Master HAF 922
Corsair Enthusiast Series TX650 V2 650W
46" Samsung LCD HDTV
Win8 x64
  #4  
Old 09-27-2009, 03:57 PM
Daiichidoku Daiichidoku is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ramstein View Post
Why not just put a thread for each aircraft type in a forum, instead of one big mess? Someone get creative and make it so the powers that be will be happy with the forum thread structure for these aircraft fix requests..


example:

Thread 1:
aircraft a) needs wings fixed. Supplied data.

Thread 2:
aircraft b) needs guns fixed, supplied data.

Thread 3:
etc..
+1!
  #5  
Old 09-27-2009, 04:08 PM
csThor csThor is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: somewhere in Germany
Posts: 1,213
Default

With roundabout 300 aircraft types that would be a huge amount of threads.
  #6  
Old 09-27-2009, 04:36 PM
Daiichidoku Daiichidoku is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 24
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by csThor View Post
With roundabout 300 aircraft types that would be a huge amount of threads.
true, but common sense cna make it manageable;

a separate forum for ac types by family, and then only for flyable types

yak

la/lagg

mig

po

spits

hawker

mossie

38s

bell

north american

grumman (can i say that? )

40s

47s

messerschmitt

folke wulfe

heinkel

junkers

macchi

G.50

nakajima

mitsubushi

tonys


just a list off the top of my head, but shows it could be quite manageable

would only be relatively few types per thread, except yaks (which i dont think has too many problems) or 109s perhaps....but still worth considering IMHO

Last edited by Daiichidoku; 09-27-2009 at 04:43 PM.
  #7  
Old 09-27-2009, 11:33 AM
ivagiglie ivagiglie is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 16
Default

Thanks LesniHU, it'll take a while to put together all the data... hopefully you (DT) are gonna be around for a long time so it's not a problem

Don't worry, I'm prepared and ok with a rejection if the data doesn't convince you, it's part of the game but I still believe it's worth a try.

I am really disappointed when reading comment from all sides (allies&axis) who flew the 202/205 describing them as "flying beautifully" and then go to IL2 basically finding myself on a truck with wings

Further communications will be by email, have a nice Sunday.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.