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

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-16-2011, 10:05 AM
F19_Deathlok F19_Deathlok is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7
Default

+1 Agree!

1. Realism should always be first priority. Each step away from realism should be an option where we can choose whether or not we want it in game.

War was NOT fair, choose other means than dumbing down realism in case of gameplay balance.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-16-2011, 10:45 AM
IvanK IvanK is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 886
Default

"What we have now is a Spitfire that can match the 109 in a dive."

BS.... go on line and prove it. See if you can hold the same distance from a 109 with both of you performing the same manoeuvre. You have the 109 Maintaining its ATA and RPM with the Hurris and Spitfire both having RPM rapidly drop to <1600RPM and Boost dropping to zero. The 109 pulling combat power and the Hurri and spit pulling stuff all !

If you don't want to go On line then replicate the manoeuvre individually as best as you can starting from the same IAS hold the push for say 15 seconds and then note the IAS ... both the same ?

In the brief tests I have done here are the results. Using the Quick Flight Over Dover as the start point.

BF109E3 Wait for prop pitch to get to the 12 O,Clock setting.
Start from 200Kmh select Max Max ATA
At 300KMH Push progressively forward until 90 degree nose down is achieved over a period of 8 secs
Increase in IAS achieved 100KMH
Av acceleration 12.5KMH per second

Spitfire IIA Prop Full Increase
Start from 100MPH
Select Max Boost
at 140MPH Push progressively forward until 90 degree nose down over a period of 8 secs
Increase in IAS 20MPH
Av acceleration 2.5MPH per Sec

So the Spit gets around 2.5MPH per second and the 109 around 15.5MPH per sec.
Or the BF109 gets a round a 50MPH gain over the Spit in the manoeuver ... hardly "staying with the 109"

Last edited by IvanK; 04-16-2011 at 11:05 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-16-2011, 11:15 AM
LcSummers LcSummers is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 585
Default

Yes agree, realism must be saved.

If its hard work onit:::
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-16-2011, 11:49 AM
flyingblind flyingblind is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 255
Default

If this thread wasn't here I would have started it myself. Please, please keep as realistic as possible. I was sad when I read the dancing instrument needles were being removed. I was truly gobsmacked when they first appeared in the video clip released some months ago. Battle of Britain planes that didn't have electronic tachometers shouldn't have them in game purely because of a few peoples dislikes. I do not have any problems reading instruments in CoD and my eyesight is far from brilliant.
The same goes for Spitfire engines under negative G. If they cut out in real life they should do so in game. It is well documented that 109s were generally better aircraft than Spitfires. They were faster, dived better and had cannons and twice the amount of ammunition. It was superior tactics, radar and logistics used by the allies and crass blunders by Goering that won the battle not that Spitfires performed as well or better that 109s. I love flying the Spitfire and to have it as something it wasn't just spoils it.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-16-2011, 11:49 AM
robtek's Avatar
robtek robtek is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,819
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IvanK View Post
"What we have now is a Spitfire that can match the 109 in a dive."

BS.... go on line and prove it. See if you can hold the same distance from a 109 with both of you performing the same manoeuvre. You have the 109 Maintaining its ATA and RPM with the Hurris and Spitfire both having RPM rapidly drop to <1600RPM and Boost dropping to zero. The 109 pulling combat power and the Hurri and spit pulling stuff all !

If you don't want to go On line then replicate the manoeuvre individually as best as you can starting from the same IAS hold the push for say 15 seconds and then note the IAS ... both the same ?

In the brief tests I have done here are the results. Using the Quick Flight Over Dover as the start point.

BF109E3 Wait for prop pitch to get to the 12 O,Clock setting.
Start from 200Kmh select Max Max ATA
At 300KMH Push progressively forward until 90 degree nose down is achieved over a period of 8 secs
Increase in IAS achieved 100KMH
Av acceleration 12.5KMH per second

Spitfire IIA Prop Full Increase
Start from 100MPH
Select Max Boost
at 140MPH Push progressively forward until 90 degree nose down over a period of 8 secs
Increase in IAS 20MPH
Av acceleration 2.5MPH per Sec

So the Spit gets around 2.5MPH per second and the 109 around 15.5MPH per sec.
Or the BF109 gets a round a 50MPH gain over the Spit in the manoeuver ... hardly "staying with the 109"
You should have used 124 mph for start and initiated the dive at 186 mph with the spit to compare.
Would this give the same result???
Also i believe the prop-pitch of the 109 would never be in the 12:0clock position when diving, overspeed comes much too fast.
Further a 45° to 60° dive would be much more realistic, tough not so easy to compare.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects

Last edited by robtek; 04-16-2011 at 11:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-16-2011, 12:05 PM
41Sqn_Stormcrow
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think to compare cut out by diving behind a 109 is not a good base for comparison as both types will have different dive behaviour, cut out or not.

I think: The g values used for cut out evaluation before patch are correct (all historic scources agree on this). They should be kept

I think the behaviour just needed a bit thweaking - the build-up of the effect should by SLIGHTLY made more inert. A small delay between time of g-factor for cut out and the realisation of cut out and a smooth transition between 0% cut out to Cough condition and between cough condition to 100% cut out would have done the trick to have a good representation of push over cut outs while still being insensitive to turbulences.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 05:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.