Wow you talk about kids on the forum, do you reread your posts before posting, do you honestly think the rest of the posters on the banana forums know that you and cheesehawk are having a lovers tiff, much less even care.

Apart from that the initial advice was quite good and really what difference does it make if someone has only recently joined we all have to join sometime, it would appear that your 133 posts havent taught you anything about how to behave politely

Heinz Knoke took off to fight in a 109G with a bent frame once...I remember from his book.

This thread has seriously gone sideways.

Yep, there's a reason this is SJ "II" :rolleyes:

Il-2 1946 4.10 presumably has bent airframes now (I've never tried to pull destructive G, though), so CoD better has them as well! ^-^

Man.. what a porked thread this is..

Taking a screenie before and after is the only way you can see i guess...apart from the obvious and comparing performance charts from a before flight and an after flight...

Good luck with that one :rolleyes:

I'm ashamed for even reading this far but thought that, you know, a thread about airframes bending might have contained something about airframes bending! Should just do the test when I'm next flying although I suspect it will be difficult to determine any effect since you would need to get precisely the same camera angle before and after the high-G maneuver.

You see, there are some intelligent people in this forum thank God.. it is not easy to see an airframe flex or bend, that's why I was wondering if anybody managed to observe some behaviour or effects that could testify this. Airframe flexibility is a very important aspect, since aeroelasticity affects aerodynamic behaviour.

Aggro, I'm very sorry you got your knickers in a twist about this man, I dunno where you live, but where I come from, when you get in a new place you don't just butt in conversations like you do and start giving judgements.. I hope it's not true you're 38 man..

As for my banning, it happened because OTHERS posted inflammatory posts in my thread apparently, and I received a ban which never got fully explained anyways, so sorry to disappoint you fellas, but it wasn't my fault.


Now, back to the topic if you don't mind, if you have other tantrums about me you can always feel free to PM me, all I care for here honestly is the development of the sim towards the right direction.

Ok Sternjaeger, you have been banned already.. Well Im not surprised about that. But its surprising that you are still posting freely. I thought that was the point of bans, keeping the order. But I dont care anymore, there will be no more posts from me, because if banning didnt help (since you were banned and still posting) then whats the point with the rules at all? The message here is that he can troll, come back with a II in his name, everyone seems to know its the same guy, he admits it himself, keep trolling and irritate the hell out of readers. So he wins. Why should I stay here then? I wont. Its not worth my energy. And it will spare you the trouble of putting me on the list of posters who might create "phoney accounts" and attack you. I promise I wont! I wish you Good Luck and a high post count!

I did some tests two-three patches ago, trying to find if wings bending was present and we have the "aileron reversal" effect modelled ingame. My conclussions were that no bending is modelled, from a FM point of view. Graphically I dont know because I dont care too much.
This test was in a 109.

Not directly related, but to give an idea of the things included in the DM: I made some tests trying to see if the airframe degrades when you go beyond the maximum G allowed during manouver, and I found that you can reach 13 G without doing any damage to the aircraft. Sure, you can break a wing, but no progressive damage as it was modelled in 4.10 in 1946.
The aircraft used in this tests was a spitfire and I recorded a video if someone is interested.

BTW, is interesting to recall that before 4.10, IL2 had this exact behaviour, i.e., all aircraft had hardcoded a limit of 13 G. If you were beyond that, you will broke your wings. It was in 4.10 that progessive damage to the airframe, and different limits for each aircraft, or even the same aircraft with different loads, was modelled, as you can test reading the readme of 4.10

Another thing you can test yourselves, that you can do virtually whatever you want with the flaps extended and you wont see a single failure.

So, although we have a incredibly well detailed DM in some aspects, in other aspects someone forgot to do their homework, and for a trained eye this is not difficult to see that, beyond the eye candy.

Hopefully, in future versions of the game, we will have all this stuff, but I think we are far from it yet.

If this have been corrected in the last official patch or its hotfix, that is something I didnt test, so maybe I am wrong and I apologize in advance if that were the case.

Basically, I setup carefully a test place in FMB, putting marks every 50 and 100 m, and preplanned the manouver before the final test, which I recorded. Then analyzing afterwards in slow motion and in several angles, i have a enough precise estimation of the turn radius.