|
|
|||||||
| FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#3
09-22-2012, 04:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Here are the test results using Spit IIA. Again feel free to pick this apart both Maths wise,method wise and the conclusion.
Firstly I checked the file properties and ensured that all "Flow" and "wind" values are deleted. However they always return when you next enter the mission. METHOD Same as before however 261MPH (420Kmh) was a bit too fast to achieve with the current CEM/FM so elected to use 240MPH on the ASI this also gave a simple reference to fly using Wonder woman display mode. Again East bound times were shorter than West bound times. Implying that some latent wind is still present on the map. 2 runs each way were flown. IAS maintained to within +-1mph each run. I then averaged as per JTD's suggestion by average Eastbound values then average westbound values then a combined average. RESULTS: East Bound Run 1: 6min 14secs East Bound Run 2 : 6min 12secs Avg of both East bound run times : 6min 13secs West Bound Run 1: 6min 36secs West Bound Run 2: 6min 33secs Avg of both West Bound time: 6min 34secs Overall Avg time for 42.59Km: 6min 23 Secs. Converting MPH to KMH 240MPH = 386.3KMH Time to fly 42.59Km at 386.3KMH IRL 6min 36secs I flew 42.59Km in an average time of 6min 23secs 42.59Km in 6min 23secs works out at speed of 400.53Kmh So speed error is 13.23Kmh (8.2MPH)or about 3.6% CONCLUSION: Again considering the potential errors in the test method same as BF109 case I think its close enough. Spitfire ASI is accurate. Its worth noting that even IRL you will get some Instrument errors. All Flight test reports will have some correction table. Notes: No matter if you delete all "Flow" or "Wind" some latent wind is always present on the map. Maybe significant for the level bombers and explain some of the strange IAS/TAS sight setting issues and workarounds that are being employed to get bombs on target. Last edited by IvanK; 09-22-2012 at 05:48 AM. 
|
|
#4
09-22-2012, 07:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi Ivank
is it possible to determine the direction of the inherent wind in CoD or are you finding it varies depending on location? If only 1C would tell us what they've given us! Incidentally, rather than delete Flows I set all 'Flow' values to 0 in FMB and saved it. When I re-opened it and looked at them again everything was still 0 except gust angle and effect. I did not change anything and closed the mission at which point it asked if I wanted to save changes and I said no. So, I wonder if all the zero values were all still held in the mission and the gusts/effects are defaults in the Flow panel which, when you go into Flows, edits them into the mission but they don't really get applied unless you do save them. Fortunately I don't think this will affect IAS/TAS tests, only navigation/bombing.
__________________
klem 56 Squadron RAF "Firebirds" http://firebirds.2ndtaf.org.uk/  ASUS Sabertooth X58 /i7 950 @ 4GHz / 6Gb DDR3 1600 CAS8 / EVGA GTX570 GPU 1.28Gb superclocked / Crucial 128Gb SSD SATA III 6Gb/s, 355Mb-215Mb Read-Write / 850W PSU Windows 7 64 bit Home Premium / Samsung 22" 226BW @ 1680 x 1050 / TrackIR4 with TrackIR5 software / Saitek X52 Pro & Rudders
|
|
#5
09-22-2012, 09:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes you should be able to calculate the wind Direction from the Trk and groundspeed. Though shudder at the possibility that wind input will use the Russian penchant to use were the wind is blowing to rather than the aviation standard of where it is coming from
 .... just leads to more forum discussion ambiguities. This directional thing has been discussed directly with Ilya a long time ago so hopefully its not an issue, though wind directional input is still some weird Angle expression rather than a straight Bearing !In general terms we know its a "Northerly" I will get my "prayer wheel' out and start doing some vectors. Good idea on setting it to zero rather than just deleting it. Last edited by IvanK; 09-22-2012 at 09:30 AM.
|
|
#6
09-22-2012, 10:36 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 Thanks
|
|
#7
09-23-2012, 11:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Which is just another good reason to not rely solely on the gauges! Best to use some of the C# scripts aval (FST has one and klem has one based on FST's with some added features) that collect data in real time. And not only the gauge values (I_*), but the internal game 3D world values (Z_*). In the testing I have done so far, I have found the gauge values (I_*) to not only be off, but laggy and with offsets. Where as most (not all) of the internal game 3D world values (Z_*), thus far, seem to match the real world data better. On that note All the game calculations are done using the internal game 3D world values (Z_*), the gauge values are derived from these. When I say derived, I mean they may add code to them to make them mimic real world gauges (laggy, offsets, etc) Hope that helps!
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
|
|
#8
09-23-2012, 11:56 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
But to be honest.. Doing the test is not a big deal.. Anyone can test an in game plane.. But I will say this, very few take the time to do the research on how the tests were actually performed during WWII to ensure the test method and plane configuration used in game is as close as it can be to the actual WWII test data.. That and I am the only one I know of, thus far, that has not only gone as far as to make the effort to actually test the plane performance, but also gone as far as to provided the tools to compare/graph the game results along side the real world results.. Which can be seen at my website, i.e. www.flightsimtesting.com
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on. Last edited by ACE-OF-ACES; 09-23-2012 at 11:58 PM.
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
