British FM killing the fun of the game for allied pilots.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

Ok, so what you guys want is an airplane that is as fast as the Spitfire, climbs as well as the Spitfire, turns as well as the Spitfire, but acts like the Hurricane?

Of course not. The two models currently in the game are vastly different to eachother in terms of flight characteristics. The Spitfire is already twitchier than the Hurricane, but more agile. It's already more difficult to keep guns on target with the Spit than with the Hurricane. The pre-stall buffet in tight turns so famous in the Spit is there already and is excellently reproduced in a force-feedback joystick.

With engine temperature effects off, the Spit is (to quote Bob Doe) 'like having wings on your back'. The Hurricane, with engine temperature effects off (again to quote Bob Doe), is 'like a brick shithouse'. Solid, steady, sluggish compared to the nimble Spit. The differences are already there. but of course pilot's anecdotes are inadmissable according to your own philosophy, whether mine or Bob Doe's.

The Engine power and therefore airspeed issues with a particular game setting are also there with all aircraft tested so far. Except for the Bf109 tested by one person, which demonstrated no power or airspeed loss with either of these game settings.

So please, unless you are prepared to test this specific issue for yourself, with whichever aircraft you'd like, stop quoting my responses in an attempt to argue issues which have been argued before.

My thanks.

[Crumpp]

The Spitfire is already twitchier than the Hurricane, but more agile

I don't see any difference between them when I play. Have you recorded the Hurricanes stability characteristics?

The Spitfire in game as tested is both static and dynamically stable, something the real aircraft was not.


The issue is will correcting one set of FM parameters make or a more realistic simulation or not? The aircraft represented in the game were on equal footing as dogfighters in the actual battle we are simulating.

I don't think making a frankenplane out of one side is going to accurately represent relative dogfighting capabililties.

[SlipBall]

So many of these problems could be related to pilot error. I damage the E3 engine many times when I am not paying attention to what I am doing.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

I don't see any difference between them when I play. Have you recorded the Hurricanes stability characteristics?

The Spitfire in game as tested is both static and dynamically stable, something the real aircraft was not.


The issue is will correcting one set of FM parameters make or a more realistic simulation or not? The aircraft represented in the game were on equal footing as dogfighters in the actual battle we are simulating.

I don't think making a frankenplane out of one side is going to accurately represent relative dogfighting capabililties.

Originally Posted by ATAG_Dutch

please, unless you are prepared to test this specific issue for yourself, with whichever aircraft you'd like, stop quoting my responses in an attempt to argue issues which have been argued before.

My thanks.

[Crumpp]

unless you are prepared to test this specific issue for yourself

MMMM, I thought it was clear, it was tested.

[Crumpp]

So many of these problems could be related to pilot error. I damage the E3 engine many times when I am not paying attention to what I am doing

Exactly.

1. Without a good set of operating instructions, we will never know if the engine is being damaged.

2. My personal feelings are it is not very realistic at all to have airplanes that speed, climb, and turn but don't fly like the real thing. It will really distort the relative dogfighting abilities adding frankenplanes.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Crumpp

I don't see any difference between them when I play. Have you recorded the Hurricanes stability characteristics?

<snip>

I don't think making a frankenplane out of one side is going to accurately represent relative dogfighting capabililties.

Really? No difference? This says a lot about your 'feel' because there's a world of difference.

The second part, he never suggested that, we want 2 models which are reasonably representative of each, + the 109 versions. By representative I mean reasonable accuracy on speed, ROC, roll and turn at respective heights and speeds. Followed by reasonably representative DM's for each type of weapon.

I suspect that you'll have an argument for that, ask for all that rot which degenerates the thread.

You misunderstand the term frankenplane btw. It was coined from the practice of producing a particular type by using model files from pieces of another type which are similar enough. The FM was never pieced together like that, they are new files.

[CaptainDoggles]

Originally Posted by Osprey

You misunderstand the term frankenplane btw. It was coined from the practice of producing a particular type by using model files from pieces of another type which are similar enough. The FM was never pieced together like that, they are new files.

That might be your particular definition but I think everyone knows what he meant by "frankenplane."

I'll be back; I have to go pick up more Pedantic from the grocery store

[5./JG27.Farber]

You would think the devs would have an entire library of stuff from the last title. However I suppose even if you did you would have to sit down and read an entire library

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

You would think the devs would have an entire library of stuff from the last title. However I suppose even if you did you would have to sit down and read an entire library

Where ? From SpitPerfsdotcom ? lol. Printed this makes only good sponges for the flood. Not much more

@CaptainDoggles : I've got plenty of second-hands to resale!