I hate the wrong data in Il2 strmovik 1946

[K_Freddie]

What I think you're missing with regard to the modelling, are the aircraft relative performances. This has been modelled pretty well.

I might ask you at what difficulty settings and which map are you testing your planes. Crimea is the official test map, and I would think 100% setting would be the test reality.

Another point about 'reality' is that there is only data on paper to go by, plus a few relic aircraft. And then old veteran's comments, which invariably are biased.
So all-in-all, You now have the best combat prop-sim in your hands - period ( Most probably the the worlds best sim).

And of course you can always throw the disks in the bin - just make sure you don't empty the bin, coz you will be digging into the bin after a few weeks (of MSFSim, LockOn, other inferior products ).

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by K_Freddie

And of course you can always throw the disks in the bin - just make sure you don't empty the bin, coz you will be digging into the bin after a few weeks (of MSFSim, LockOn, other inferior products ).

Life way too short to hate and in this stage of the IL2 life cycle there is very little chance (Bucklies to none!) of any official updates of the flight models.

As Freddie says there's plenty of other sims out there to try.

Cheers!


Elwood: We certainly hope you all enjoy the show and remember people that no matter who you are and what you do to live, thrive and survive, there's still some things that make us all the same. You, me, them everybody, everybody.

[steppie]

i have been reading what has been said and if you are going to say that the 109 g2 is fast than the Fw 190 or the TC152 that great but it would help to know thing like the fuel loads as this play a big part on how fast the aircraft flys. And like some of the post that i have read it how you are flying the aircraft and part of this is how the aircraft is setup.

109 G2 range 545 km
190 D9 range 837 km
TA 152 range 1200 km

[ZaltysZ]

Originally Posted by steppie

...it would help to know thing like the fuel loads as this play a big part on how fast the aircraft flys.

Not directly. Mass effects acceleration, but not top speed. Top speed is effected by drag and available power to overcome it. However, in case of low speed maneuvering, aircraft with larger power to weight ratio may look faster, because of its greater acceleration. As speed increases, effects of power to weight ratio melt in front of increased drag. In fact, larger mass is desirable in high speed applications as it increases diving performance and helps to conserve kinetic energy.

This is not a question which is faster: D9 or G2. D9 is surely faster (regarding top speed) at all altitudes in level flight. The question is: what mistakes has SturmKreator done?

[Furio]

More weight equals more angle of attack to stay level, and more alpha means more drag. In fighters this is less evident than in bombers (think of B17 speed with load...), unless there is a significant fuel load, as is for long-range planes.
I don’t know how much this is modeled in game. Surely, trim, mixture, prop pitch, supercharger speed and radiator shutters position all have a BIG effect.

[ZaltysZ]

Induced drag tends to be greater at lower speeds because a high angle of attack is required to maintain lift, creating more drag. However, as speed increases the induced drag becomes much less, but parasitic drag increases because the air is flowing faster around protruding objects increasing friction.

Most bombers are victims of large induced drag, because they are designed to be "heavy" and often fly at relatively low speed which makes requirement for greater angle of attack to get enough lift. Fast fighters have more problems with parasite drag than with induced one as at high speeds induced drag makes only small part of total drag. The other thing is climbing: larger mass isn't good for it.

[BadAim]

I've been watching these discussions for years now, they are for the most part pointless, especially considering the aged nature of IL2. As for IL2 not being worth $20, that's just plain foolishness. I know IL2 is not perfect, but the amount of bitching people do is just insane. And as for even bothering to convince people who obviously know EVERYTHING, that they just need to accept that they don't: that is a waste of time too. Drafting this post was a waste of time too, but as I've already lost that few minutes of my life I might as well hit send.