Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

[ramstein]

it's not a question of what we want, it's a question of being modelled correctly, to match the real world fm/dm, as historic as it is and was in real life..

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

I may be wrong about this, but I don't think that IL-2 models CoG changes with decreasing fuel load. Perhaps TD can enlighten us on this?

In any case, do you want the CoG further forward to increase stability, or further back to increase manoeuvrability? People seem to complain about both.

As for whether the P-51 is really 'totally porked', there seem to be differing opinions. I'd say in it's proper context, as a long-range escort fighter, working at high altitudes, it is fine.

[AndyJWest]

Originally Posted by ramstein

it's not a question of what we want, it's a question of being modelled correctly, to match the real world fm/dm, as historic as it is and was in real life..

I agree, but I don't think that saying the P-51 is 'porked' without saying how is particularly constructive. You seemed to be suggesting that the aircraft was modelled with the CoG too far back. Moving it forward will increase stability, but reduce manoeuvrability Is that what you want?

As for matching the 'real world', I think IL-2 did a reasonable job when it was written, though there have been disagreements about particular aircraft. It is unlikely that TD are going to do anything fundamental to the basic flight model engine, though they have said that they may look at adjusting particular aircraft provided sufficient documentation is given. Simply saying 'it's porked, fix it' isn't likely to achieve a great deal.

What is it you think is wrong? If you can at least indicate where you think the faults are, perhaps others can chip in with their comments.

[Tempest123]

Effects of different fuel loads are modelled, just take a few planes for a spin at 50% fuel, like the p-47, its much livelier without all the extra weight. I don't know about CoG changes, but it does affect the performance of the aircraft.
I have a request for TD, I would like to see some more information on the mission breifing maps, such as waypoint altitudes, rendevouz points, flight plans of other squadrons/aircraft involved in the mission, options to see recon photos etc. As it is now the map is pretty useless, as is the in-flight map, there is no information about targets, bearings to targets, altitudes, go/no decision points etc.

[RPS69]

Something that bothered me on this sim from time zero, is it possible to made the gunners to give you a message like: "Bandits! 8 o'clock" or else... instead of just seeing a phatom moved gun trying to aim on an enemy plane that you haven't seen before? specially on planes like il-2, or the Ju-87 where you don't even see the phantom moved gun...

It gives much more immersion offline, and it really helps a lot when flying online on dogfight servers. On coops you could allways use a human gunner, but that is not so often either.

Actually only the gunner of the il2 at least insults you a beat, but no usefull data on incoming enemies.

[ramstein]

why should I re-write everything that has been written for all these years... maybe you were nothere al these years.. in this community, I have no clue.. but it has all been said and done.. and everyone that has been here knows it,,

I am not going to write anymore.. no reason to.. I was only reminding the gentleman who asked for the fuel loadouts to be fixed and made changleable from tank to tank that this has already been brought up and asked for for many years..

I used this long ongoing discussion as an example..

now you want me to bring it all up again, 5 years of al the data put together again,
no way Jose..
it's a been said, done, and overwhelming proven as histroical fact on how a particular plane used it's fuel out of which tanks, first to last, and how the handling changes..

If you guys want to go through all the documents,, many of which were professionally packaged by engineers and pilots, were submitted for changes in code.. go do it.. you must have not been here while it was all happening.. either that or you were not paying attention..

The End..

Originally Posted by AndyJWest

I agree, but I don't think that saying the P-51 is 'porked' without saying how is particularly constructive. You seemed to be suggesting that the aircraft was modelled with the CoG too far back. Moving it forward will increase stability, but reduce manoeuvrability Is that what you want?

As for matching the 'real world', I think IL-2 did a reasonable job when it was written, though there have been disagreements about particular aircraft. It is unlikely that TD are going to do anything fundamental to the basic flight model engine, though they have said that they may look at adjusting particular aircraft provided sufficient documentation is given. Simply saying 'it's porked, fix it' isn't likely to achieve a great deal.

What is it you think is wrong? If you can at least indicate where you think the faults are, perhaps others can chip in with their comments.

[AndyJWest]

Originally Posted by ramstein

why should I re-write everything that has been written for all these years... maybe you were nothere al these years.. in this community, I have no clue.. but it has all been said and done.. and everyone that has been here knows it,,

I am not going to write anymore.. no reason to.. I was only reminding the gentleman who asked for the fuel loadouts to be fixed and made changleable from tank to tank that this has already been brought up and asked for for many years..

I used this long ongoing discussion as an example..

now you want me to bring it all up again, 5 years of al the data put together again,
no way Jose..
it's a been said, done, and overwhelming proven as histroical fact on how a particular plane used it's fuel out of which tanks, first to last, and how the handling changes..

If you guys want to go through all the documents,, many of which were professionally packaged by engineers and pilots, were submitted for changes in code.. go do it.. you must have not been here while it was all happening.. either that or you were not paying attention..

The End..

Sorry, Ramstein, I don't think TD work that way. I certainly wouldn't. If somebody requests a change to an aircraft FM, it is down to them to provide the data to explain why. Do you expect TD to be experts on 5 years of postings on half-a-dozen different forums?

As for the specific question of the P-51 handling changing due to fuel balance, I've seen no evidence that IL-2 models this. Certainly manoeuvrability increases with reducing inertia (and maximum speed increases too, though only noticeably at high altitudes, as should be expected). I can't detect any obvious stability changes with fuel load in the P-51, and if this is correct any change to the FM CoG is either going to reduce stability or manoeuvrability under all fuel loads. Which is it you want?

[SPITACE]

can they put in the r/o seat in the bf110g BEFORE the radar update and how about having the bf110c flyable

[ECV56_Guevara]

HI DT grat Work!
Just asking...it´s possible to include the Oboe ? it´s a bit similar to the navigation guide systems that are planned for 4.01

[Bearcat]

I don't know if this has been mentioned or not... if it has please bear with me.. but can the FFB issue be finally fixed? The FFB issue that results in loosing total FFB (stick forces, gunshake EVERYTHING.. you wind up with a completely loose stick) if you ALT+TAB or WIN key out of the sim.. and often I have to do that.. in order to get my mouse to move. I think pre 3.0 that didn't happen.. I just turned off my FFB.. I primarily use the stick forces.. but it would be nice to be able to use it without that happening...

[P-38L]

Hello and thank you for upgrading the best flight simulator of all times.

I have some requests that should be taken as ideas:

1. Moving head when you use your POV or TracKIR in replay or from outside from another player that can see your head movement.

2. The possibility to have HOTAS the mixture.

3. As I know you are going to implement R/R/R what about an option to Heal, everything is red when you are wounded.

4. The real use of selectable tanks.

5. Variable weather while you fly (random).

6. Lights that iluminate the objects near to them. As an example if I place a light near to a house, that light doesn't iluminate the house or the road or any object near to it.

7. Animals that move ramdomly in an area you select when you program a mission in FMB. Like a circle or square. Animals like cows, horses, bulls or any other.

8. Bigger trees. Taller trees.

9. When you use pedals the option to activate the left or right break, the game has only one pedal for break.

10. Get rid of stationary aircraft and put instead AI Aircraft that can fly at certain moment or when you ask for help. If the AI Aircraft can land and park, they can do start engine, taxi and fly. That way too you can select any skin or livery in those airplanes. If you don't need them, they will stay there.

11. Instead to use the "I" to start an engine, to have to do all the necessary steps to start a real engine. Battery, magnetos, primer, starter, avionics, wait for warm engine, etc.

I hope some of these ideas will help.

Thank you