Patch 4.10 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team

[Splitter]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

I've flown a very well done Catalina add-on on a friend's FSX installation for many hours. In fact, we once played pilot and co-pilot on a 10 hour flight spread across three evenings, taking turns on the controls over the course of it. It's also among the top three aircraft i choose to fly whenever i visit him and we happen to fire up FSX.

I have flown a couple models in X-Plane and would relate a similar experience. For a single person fying it, it's a big work load.

Handling was just terrible lol. It "wallowed" around whenever you turned unlike just about any other aircraft I tried.

I think the old joke about the Catlinas was that they cruised at 100mph, climbed at 100mph, and dove at 100 mph . That was my sim experience too.

It's one of those planes that is probably much more suited to a true flight sim as opposed to a combat sim. The work load is just too high for one person in a combat situation.

Splitter

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by Splitter

I have flown a couple models in X-Plane and would relate a similar experience. For a single person fying it, it's a big work load.

Handling was just terrible lol. It "wallowed" around whenever you turned unlike just about any other aircraft I tried.

I think the old joke about the Catlinas was that they cruised at 100mph, climbed at 100mph, and dove at 100 mph . That was my sim experience too.

It's one of those planes that is probably much more suited to a true flight sim as opposed to a combat sim. The work load is just too high for one person in a combat situation.

Splitter

yeah definitely slow here is clip I took over the weekend of a takeoff ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eqn7XoLlTw8

I would agree its not a suitable ride for online air-Halo fighter jock types but no seaplanes or big bombers are. That lot just want a big engine and lots of guns.

However I think a lot of people, especially offline players and campaign builders, would love a flyable PBY.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Regarding realism in flying, people want it as long as it suits their needs. Historical accuracy is totally another matter. None of us has the faintest idea how much work flying and managing a plane was, good example that Catalina. Hopefully SoW will give a real kick on the nuts to everyone and make them THINK and RTFM to LEARN. The whiney flight sim crowd needs a wake-up from the lullaby we are living in..and I hope SoW does it.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

Hopefully SoW will give a real kick on the nuts to everyone and make them THINK and RTFM to LEARN. The whiney flight sim crowd needs a wake-up from the lullaby we are living in..and I hope SoW does it.

What would the sales of that be? Almost nothing, that's just not a plausible situation, there aren't that many masochists.

[Azimech]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

What would the sales of that be? Almost nothing, that's just not a plausible situation, there aren't that many masochists.

We already have multiple options in the IL2 series for decreasing workload like simple engine management and starting all engines at once.

So online, just set the params accordingly to your desired crowd. The more serious, thoughtful simmers, or the airquakers. Just like it is today.

I agree having to read and learn a manual like that of Black Shark is totally beyond the scope of the series.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Igo Kuy, at full real I would expect FULL real, no shortcuts or similar. Do the things by the book, then call it a sim. For those not wanting that there are sure options to make it IL-2ish easy IL-2 even at full difficulty is a lot simplified in many regards, like said above you can firewall the throttle straight from start etc. without ANY consequences. Workload for the pilot is minuscule.

Germans had 1 lever that did it all on Fw190 and Bf109 reducing workload, in IL2 allied planes that have no fuel injection or kommandogerät enjoy precisely the same which is not totally realistic. So the bottom line holds, people like realism that suits their preference

I am gonna fly SoW at full real from the start(regarding engine management, flight model, gunnery or whatever parameters can be adjusted), by the book and reading the frigging manuals

[Blackdog_kt]

The good thing about WWII aircraft is that they are much simpler. In a civilian/modern sim you can have all sorts of different engines, from regular pistons to turboprops to jets and they all have different principles of operation.

In IL2 and SoW all there is is the good old piston engine. It's not a mountain of knowledge, if you learn how piston engines work on one aircraft you've learned it for all aircraft. From that point on the only thing that changes is the operating limits. And if you don't want to remember them either, don't worry, they are clearly marked on the instruments with colored arcs: green=good, yellow=caution, red=bad

I seriously doubt that a bunch of seasoned flight simmers will find it hard to keep a needle within a colored arc after reading the manual once

It's a bit of extra stuff to do on those boring transit legs of the route, it adds an extra dimension to combat because you need to think wether your attack profile will push your engine outside its operating limits and most of all, it's not that difficult to be considered the realm of masochists, it's just as complicated as it needs to be to present a welcome and satisfying challenge when you learn how it works.

In fact, it's dead simple and you don't even have to wait for SoW to see what it's all about. Have a look here if you're interested and you'll see exactly what is not only simplified, but in many cases completely opposite to how things operate betweem IL2 and the real world: http://www.a2asimulations.com/wingso...sim_Manual.pdf

[Ernst]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

The good thing about WWII aircraft is that they are much simpler. In a civilian/modern sim you can have all sorts of different engines, from regular pistons to turboprops to jets and they all have different principles of operation.

In IL2 and SoW all there is is the good old piston engine. It's not a mountain of knowledge, if you learn how piston engines work on one aircraft you've learned it for all aircraft. From that point on the only thing that changes is the operating limits. And if you don't want to remember them either, don't worry, they are clearly marked on the instruments with colored arcs: green=good, yellow=caution, red=bad

I seriously doubt that a bunch of seasoned flight simmers will find it hard to keep a needle within a colored arc after reading the manual once

It's a bit of extra stuff to do on those boring transit legs of the route, it adds an extra dimension to combat because you need to think wether your attack profile will push your engine outside its operating limits and most of all, it's not that difficult to be considered the realm of masochists, it's just as complicated as it needs to be to present a welcome and satisfying challenge when you learn how it works.

In fact, it's dead simple and you don't even have to wait for SoW to see what it's all about. Have a look here if you're interested and you'll see exactly what is not only simplified, but in many cases completely opposite to how things operate betweem IL2 and the real world: http://www.a2asimulations.com/wingso...sim_Manual.pdf

Very nice. I guess if BoB will simulate all this features. I think more workload over the pilot (like the real thing), more the sim will favour the better pilots most of times than better aircraft. But i am not 100% certain SoW will include this features since until i have seemed more preocupation about graphics.

Il2 does not give to the aircraft historically easy to manage and more features for pilot help any advantage.

[Auger73]

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

The good thing about WWII aircraft is that they are much simpler. In a civilian/modern sim you can have all sorts of different engines, from regular pistons to turboprops to jets and they all have different principles of operation.

In IL2 and SoW all there is is the good old piston engine. It's not a mountain of knowledge, if you learn how piston engines work on one aircraft you've learned it for all aircraft. From that point on the only thing that changes is the operating limits. And if you don't want to remember them either, don't worry, they are clearly marked on the instruments with colored arcs: green=good, yellow=caution, red=bad

I seriously doubt that a bunch of seasoned flight simmers will find it hard to keep a needle within a colored arc after reading the manual once

The principles in operation of a pistone is a more complex than a turbine, whether a turbofan or turboprop. In a turbine the only thing a pilot controls is how much fuel to dump in the flame cans. In a piston engine, you have throttle, mixture, carb heat, and radiator to control.

Over the years, flying has become safer. There are more instruments on a modern aircraft, but they allow you to do things that were impossible in earlier eras (such as 0/0 landings). You may have to learn more instruments, but in the end, it becomes easier to accomplish the same tasks in a modern aircraft. Compare navigating with a hand-cranked hoop ADF vs. GPS.

[Azimech]

I agree that starting the engine with one button without switching battery, starting fuel pump, priming, setting mags, pre-lube, boosting coil, setting mixture and after starting giving time to warm up, is a bit too easy. And slamming the throttle to max complete with WEP is just weird. As if we do it with our cars, cold starting and afterwards directly ramming the accelerator pedal to the floor and let it stay there. Most (non computerized) cars will lose a head gasket within minutes.

I'd like some more workload. Especially during long boring flights, it's nice to really have to depend on your instruments and to have some random element of engine trouble like icing or spark plug fouling. As with most simmers here, I feel we've got the brains.