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

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik > Daidalos Team discussions

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #571  
Old 11-27-2012, 06:31 AM
CWMV's Avatar
CWMV CWMV is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 758
Default

Im not a 190 fan, but maybe you could post them up?
Was there something 190 specific in the landing procedures?
EDIT: for the record I havent had an issue landing the 190-just make the approach a bit longer.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by banned View Post
Just fix the friggin thing you boof heads. It's getting boring now. Only 11 people on the whole thing. Yawn.
  #572  
Old 11-27-2012, 08:05 AM
SPAD-1949 SPAD-1949 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 124
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CWMV View Post
Im not a 190 fan, but maybe you could post them up?
Was there something 190 specific in the landing procedures?
EDIT: for the record I havent had an issue landing the 190-just make the approach a bit longer.
with 4.11 the 190 changed its aproach beahviour. It wont bleed of speed. Slips, narrow spiral turns, you need to behave like an idiot to come down towards flap speed and even then with full flaps its rather hard to come down to 200 or less kph. With 200kp/h it bolters or shows excessive ground effect, with lower than 180 lets say 170 it drops like a ******* stone. You need to plan your approach like with an airliner.
  #573  
Old 11-27-2012, 04:19 PM
Snake Snake is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 90
Default

Just follow the normal pattern procedure for landing and you'll be fine!
  #574  
Old 11-27-2012, 08:23 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

CWMV, no nothing specific to the 190. The usual force-it-down! approaches just don't work anymore. I had to change my style quite a bit, too. But as Snake points out, if you follow the usual landing pattern or normal historical / realistic landing pattern, landings are very smooth. These patterns will require a large diameter go around the airfield at lower altitudes, during which you'll lose more than enough speed.
  #575  
Old 11-27-2012, 11:18 PM
Bouma004 Bouma004 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 13
Default

Thaks for answer.

But you have to know that this perameter has nothing to do with RPM ! I am still conviced that there is somthing wrong whith FW190 FM in 4.11.1m but this is only my point of view and some other pilotes from historical Squads.

That kind of problems are genraly never matched by dogfight pilots who generaly never use the planes from the parking to the parking wich is my case.

I just hope to initate a debat about this question.
  #576  
Old 11-28-2012, 10:59 AM
Nicholaiovitch Nicholaiovitch is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouma004 View Post
Thaks for answer.

But you have to know that this perameter has nothing to do with RPM ! I am still conviced that there is somthing wrong whith FW190 FM in 4.11.1m but this is only my point of view and some other pilotes from historical Squads.

That kind of problems are genraly never matched by dogfight pilots who generaly never use the planes from the parking to the parking wich is my case.

I just hope to initate a debat about this question.
This issue was discussed at some length in this thread:-

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...W190+FM&page=2

Starts at the bottom of page 2 and continues.

Although I think I understand why it is happening (prop pitch), i also feel that the drag in the approach config. is still an issue....it is just not representative of a high wing loading a/c with gear and flaps down at 1.3VS.

I can only guess that like the excessive down trim necessary in the Spitfires it is a parameter necessarily incorporated to achieve a desired overall result bearing in mind the limitations imposed by the IL-2 "engine".

TD seem to go to great lengths to get things right....it would be nice to get it from the "horses mouth" sometimes as to why things are the way they are.

I think that nearly all here are full of admiration for the work done by TD....it is just that most of us are not able to understand how these things are applied and the reason why is sometimes baffling!

Nicholaiovitch
  #577  
Old 11-29-2012, 09:36 AM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouma004 View Post
But you have to know that this perameter has nothing to do with RPM!
It defines minimum rpm with a constant speed prop, or in case of the Fw 190, for the Kommandogerät at 0% throttle.
Quote:
I can only guess that like the excessive down trim necessary in the Spitfires it is a parameter necessarily incorporated to achieve a desired overall result bearing in mind the limitations imposed by the IL-2 "engine".
The excessive down trim is in game because the real aircraft has that quality. The problem with it being that it is not possible to redefine the "neutral" level, neutral is always 0° control deflection, while in real life the trim set by the tabs on the ground would be considered neutral.
  #578  
Old 11-29-2012, 11:03 AM
Nicholaiovitch Nicholaiovitch is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
It defines minimum rpm with a constant speed prop, or in case of the Fw 190, for the Kommandogerät at 0% throttle.

The excessive down trim is in game because the real aircraft has that quality. The problem with it being that it is not possible to redefine the "neutral" level, neutral is always 0° control deflection, while in real life the trim set by the tabs on the ground would be considered neutral.
Many thanks JtD...

Still don't understand why the drag curve in the approach config. cannot be altered to a more realistic level even with the prop pitch/RPM changes that have been made. Was the 190 really like that?

Re. the Spitfire trim. Don't really want to open this once again as so much has been written about it....but.....the trim was not like that before the changes....so presumably the changes were made to improve realism or to make changes to manoeuvrability in the FM (moving CG aft.....centre of lift forward....increasing wing area?)

Just really trying to understand what TD has to go through in order to make changes to FM with the limited tools they have bearing in mind the age of the prog.

Hope I have not hijacked this thread!

Nicholaiovitch

Hearing from the chaps that have to do all this will I'm sure help in all of us understanding why things are the way they are.
  #579  
Old 11-29-2012, 12:51 PM
IceFire IceFire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPAD-1949 View Post
with 4.11 the 190 changed its aproach beahviour. It wont bleed of speed. Slips, narrow spiral turns, you need to behave like an idiot to come down towards flap speed and even then with full flaps its rather hard to come down to 200 or less kph. With 200kp/h it bolters or shows excessive ground effect, with lower than 180 lets say 170 it drops like a ******* stone. You need to plan your approach like with an airliner.
Do you cut throttle on landing or run at a higher value? Sounds counter intuitive but I've been running at 30% until just a moment before touchdown and that seems to help. I was having great difficulty getting the FW190 to slow down as well.

A wider turn helps with the throttle thing did too.

EDIT: Edited to correct auto correct which auto corrects stupidly
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com

Last edited by IceFire; 11-29-2012 at 09:03 PM.
  #580  
Old 11-29-2012, 01:17 PM
Bearcat Bearcat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Northern Va. by way of Da Bronx
Posts: 992
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FC99 View Post
Change is global but it affects each plane in unique way so we actually have to change/add high speed FM parameters for each plane.
So does that mean that the P-47 will now be capable of it's historic dive speeds with reference to other AC or more historic
Closed Thread


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 05:44 PM.


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