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 > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #30  
Old 09-18-2012, 01:48 PM
ATAG_Snapper's Avatar
ATAG_Snapper ATAG_Snapper is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kitchener, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,286
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camber View Post
Thank you MusseMus, that is very interesting!

In previous speed tests I put in the phrase that these comparisons were only valid if a 109 and Spit flying side by side showed the same speeds on their gauges. From your tests it looks like the answer is no! From flying in ATAG it is clear that 109s show a large speed advantage at all alts but perhaps not as much as the gayges suggest

camber

Definitely worth looking at -- good work. I see this question of airspeed gauge accuracy has been posed in the Questions thread, as it should be. Anything like this should be examined, IMHO, and I hope Ilya does. RAF aircraft need accurate instruments for navigation as well -- especially if cloud cover is someday introduced. Hopefully you will post a Bugtracker Report using your data as its basis.

Having said that, I must admit I'm not convinced that perceived major FM inequities lie just with simple instrument error. As the old saying goes, "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you.". The hundreds of hours (literally) most of us have virtually flown on type (for both sides) to believe this notwithstanding, the RAF models alone are hobbled with huge radiator drag, with radiator surface area assigned three times the surface area of the 109's TWO radiators combined, with the double whammy of the RAF rads being assigned a drag coefficient 40% greater than their 109 counterparts. This alone has the Spits and Hurries flying with a huge drogue chute behind them when the pilot tries to cool his glycol and oil even under normal operating conditions, let alone in a fast interception climb or actual combat.

Only when Engine Temperature Management is deactivated in the Realism Options do the Spits and 109's actually achieve parity in engine performance. By default, with ETM off, all radiators are closed (huge benefit for Spits, Hurries, small benefit for 109's), and all temps are now AI - regulated (again, huge benefit for RAF, smaller benefit for LW). This is wrong and must be corrected, instrument error or no instrument error.

The devs are aware of this, and they should be made aware of all instrument error -- including the dodgy Rate of Climb indicator in the RAF aircraft as well.

None of this is rocket science, it just remains if Ilya sees fit to order the corrections or not.

Plus, I want to emphasize how much I respect and support your hands on initiative and the work you've done, and sincerely wish for any and all instrument inaccuracies be fixed -- at least to authentic specs. I tend to agree with my colleague, Dutch, that if the radiator drag issue is remedied in the RAF aircraft that the FM's for both RAF and LW will be closer aligned in relative performance. And I certainly want accurate gauges!
__________________
Reply With Quote
 


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 04:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.