homepage Forums Read Only Forums Read Only Forums WWII Fighters (Read Only) Target's v5.0 FMl Pack: You spin me right round

IMHO the compression sets in way too soon and hard on most of the aircraft. Take any of the planes past 450 indicated and they aren't going to respond almost at all. This is incorrect for the Jug and the 51 and probably the 38 too. Also the aircraft begin a slow roll to the right that cannot be stopped in high speed dives. I'm now of the opinion that the FM in WWII Fighters is just a hopeless cause. None of the aircraft can maintain any kind of speed in straight and level flight, and acceleration is unheard of. Note: Many Reno racers in the slower classes (Not the Gold) race unmodified airframes with extremely modified engines and they have complete control at 30' AGL at 430mph. So the compression problem should be fixed.

Spritle

Spritle:

Comparing the default FM with Targets is night and day. Remember when the makers put out a sim, they model the flight sim to keep the maximum # of buyers happy. The customers want realism, but not at the expense of crashing every ten minutes.

The only reason I am having trouble is:

A)I've spent too many years playing around with sims that have truly unrealistic FM's..
Especially some of the earlier jet stuff oiy.
B) I am not planing out my moves far enough in advance. which gets me into trouble.

I for one like Targets FM and am going to stick with it till I get it. It very much adds to the game IMO.

------------------
"You are what you do when it counts" - Masao

Spritle have you tried the FM pack we are reffering too? It is far superior to the default.

Oh I've tried EVERY flight model pack that has come out. As someone that has been playing Aces High sence it was open beta I can tell you the flight models as they stand in version 5 are still WAY off. If you want to see how these planes flew then download Aces High and play in the free arena. Talk about Night and Day. Short of the now available spins I would say the flight models have absolutely nothing in common.

Spritle

It's true that compressibility effects are a major area of realism compromise in the FM Pack. There are two major problems:

1. The only "compressibility" behaviour I can induce at high speed is a freezing of the controls. I can't specify buffeting, nose tuck, or structural failure--as far as I know, it's a limitation of the game engine, as is the right roll you're seeing.

2. The speeds at which the controls freeze up must be specified in IAS. This immediately poses a major problem since most high-speed control problems are Mach-based. To take a common example, the P-51D and P-38L both have Vne speeds posted at around 300 mph IAS at 30k versus 500 mph at SL.

In other words, I have no way to model compressibility accurately for both high and low altitudes. I have not found any way around this problem. In the end, I chose a "middle ground" compromise approach, which is almost certainly somewhat inaccurate for both high and low altitudes.

Another point to weigh up is that standard airspeed indicators give IAS readings which are inaccurately large at high speeds. I believe Aces High models this; Jane's WW2F doesn't, and so IAS readings at compressibility may look rather low by comparison.

It's no surprise that Aces High should be more realistic; Hitech, Pyro and the AH team have a great deal of experience behind them, they've built their own custom engine and can modify it at will, and it's their full-time day job. My goal was never to compete with AH on realism; given the limits of a one-person, spare-time project using an engine that's essentially a black box, it would have been an exercise in futility. What I did set out to do was to improve on the default flying experience, and I'm satisfied that I've accomplished that.

I appreciate your sticking around through every release of the FM Pack, Spritle. I'm willing to make changes if it'll improve historical accuracy, but I honestly don't think I can get an order-of-magnitude improvement on what I've got now. From that standpoint, you're certainly better off with Aces High; it does have a development path, one which looks long and fruitful.

Thanks for your feedback.

Well said, Target, and thank you so much for all your hard work!

------------------
Renner
http://ardennes44.20go.com/

I don't know about the Jug or the Lightning but as for the Mustang, at speeds showing 390 to 400 KIAS the stick is stiff. At 410+KIAS you are bracing yourself against he cockpit walls and really leaning on it. Much past 430 KIAS and you'll think the stick is set in concrete. Oh and P-38 had a known compressibility problem that was solved on the later birds (the J through M models) with what were called dive flaps. They were actually to pieces of metal that were mounted under the wings just inside of the booms that were extended into the slip stream to break up the compression wave that locked up the elevators when the P-38 exceeded 420 KIAS in a dive. So I don't think the compressibility is all that much off.


I would have to differ with you here also. The only thing the birds in Reno and the WWII warbirds they come from have in common are their general shape. Some might have a WWII style paint job too. Each of these has been stripped down to the frames and rebuilt. If it didn't make the bird fly it was outa there. And as for the compressibility problem, if the plane didn't come with a control boost system standard, i.e. the Mustang, it was added. For as you so aptly stated, loosing it at 30' and 430 KIAS would really ruin your day.


[This message has been edited by BrockyTaz (edited 07-16-2002).]

BrockyTaz,

If you look back at my Reno comment I said aircraft NOT in the Gold class. The Silver and Bronze classes contain aircraft that have either modified engines and unmodified airframes or completely stock. These aircraft do NOT handle like you describe. Period! If they did then there pilots would not be able to negotiate the course at the speeds and altitudes that they do. For more info on Reno checkout Pylon1.com

The compression sets on too early and hard and the aircraft accelerate too slow and generally are too slow in top speed in straight and level flight. I'm sorry if you feel differently but that is the truth. If you don't believe me take a P-51 up and fly at 20,000 feet. Fly for as long as you want at Max throttle. Let me know what your airspeed is. The P-51 should go 415mph True Airspeed at this altitude. And it should be able to go close to 425 with War Emergency Power (which isn't modeled in WWII Fighters or it is because your engine overheats at 100% throttle setting, depends on how you look at it). Let us know what your top speed is in straight and level flight.

Spritle

Ok you can shoot me for that.



You had better check again. Most of them have had boost systems added to enhance their controllability at higher speeds and allow them to "negotiate the course".



No reason to feel sorry. I was not arguing about the speed or acceleration presented in the flight modeling. I too find it very upsetting to see my wingmen go screaming by me and steal my kill when I am blasting along with my throttle wide open. We are flying the same planes right? What I was pointing out is that the compressibility problem is somewhat understated if anything.



Actually wide open and on the second stage at 25 grand you get more like 425. With war emergency (a real no no these days) you can close in on 440.

Oh and one other thing. It is very difficult to state the exact performance of air craft especially on vintage aircraft. Most of the figures that we get are from the manufactures test data and it is almost always true that these figures will be higher than what the average Joe combat pilot sees. The manufacture is in the “business” of selling airplanes after all, so their figures are from light and clean aircraft. Things like paint, fuel, bullets, armored windscreens, armored seats, emergency survival equipment etc. do tend to degrade the actual everyday performance a little.

Brocky Taz

[This message has been edited by BrockyTaz (edited 07-17-2002).]

If you get within 20% of the claimed top speed of a 51D with this or any previous flight model I would be COMPLETELY suprised.

I don't think many if any of the aircraft use hydraulically boosted controls at Reno. This is more of a mod than just slapping some hydraulic actuators in the control linkage. It's a pretty huge engineering undertaking to make a system like that work well.

edit:

My own testing consisting of a gentle dive from 30k to 20k at 100% throttle with an easy level out at 20k resulted in an airspeed no greater than 350mph on the clock in level flight. That's just not right. The buffeting during the dive was pretty bad even though I NEVER got above 400mph. I think that the flight model needs some more tweaking.

In an attempt to negate the problems caused by the difference between indicated airspeed and true airspeed I would suggest that all future speed tests be performed on the DECK. The P-51 should still manage better than 350. I'm asking if anyone can maintain that speed with the flight models as they stand? And since NA's Data is being questioned by the IL-2 crowd (yes I saw that thread) I bet nobody can get withing 10% of that figure.

Spritle



[This message has been edited by Spritle (edited 07-17-2002).]

Spritle,

When you say "350 mph on the clock", do you mean 350 mph IAS (reading from the cockpit instruments), or 350 mph TAS (reading from the map screen)?

Target,

I didn't know that the map screen gave TAS. In that case the planes seem to be pretty close to published speed data. By the way in AH you get both readings on your airspeed dial.

Do you know why the AI aircraft are faster than your own? Do they have a different flight model as I've often suspected?

Spritle

I don't know. One of the development team was discussing the game on Usenet after it was released, and vehemently denied any FM cheating on the part of the AI.

Since the new stall / spin behaviour was introduced in FM Pack 5.0, I've noticed that the AI Fw 190 will sometimes stall and spin in on final approach, so evidently the AI's FM is at least based off the FM that players use.

I definitely agree that the AI has an edge in energy management. One possibility might be that the AI talks directly to the physics engine, so it knows when it's about to stall or spin, or how hard a turn to make for optimum energy efficiency. Without looking at the source code, however, I doubt we'll ever be sure.

A couple of other things to note when conducting speed tests are:

1) Is Auto Trim off or on?
2) The fuel state of the aircraft. (Some aircraft are more sensitive to this than others.)

All of my speed tests have been done out of the Quick Mission so I guess that means 100% fuel.

Actually I've only noticed 2 things that would make me think the AI have a different flight model.

The most obvious is their speed. No matter what they always seem able to overtake you. Even if they are in a slower aircraft. I'm pretty sure an A-8 could NOT run down a P-51 at altitude.

Second their ability to climb. I've seen the AI aircraft climb at speeds when they should be stalling hard. One way to see this is to put your aircraft into a climb and get to the point where you are almost stalled. Then switch auto pilot on and watch the plane climb away like it had an additional 2,000hp on tap!

Besides those two problems I'd say that the AI and you are pretty even.

Spritle

Sprittle go into the mission builder and create some planes and set the fuel. Both the 51 and 47 are bricks with full tanks. 1/4 tank will fly practically any mission. Also less fuel really helps the balance of the 51 and it is less prone to spins.

Using Auto-trim will rob your top speed.

As far as the AI they seem to use the same flight model. They however do seem to have perfect energy management. While they may lawndart from being overly agressive they will climb without robbing themselves of speed. Also since they have perfect energy managment they fly smooth and smooth equals fast.

Big Dog is right. This style of dog fighting (WW II) is as much a game of patience and perseverance as anything else. It took me a long time to figure that out. I used to yank and bank and would always pull way to much G in each turn. This was ok when I first bought the game and was flying on model level 1 and 2. But crank it up to five and then add Target's mod 5 or 4 even and you watch the Air speed indicator unwind and next thing you know stall city. Ever since I discovered the "lag" pursuit I have been able to close and kill more often and survive more too.

Brockytaz, your last post made me think of a question. Does Target's FM pack affect all the FM levels in the "Gameplay Options",or does it only come into play when you set the flight model level to the most difficult?
Thanks, TimeBandit

P.S. to Spritle, are you currently flying Aces High online? If so, if you ever run into TED, of the VMF-22 Redcocks Squadron, could you tell him "TimeBandit" says "Hello"? I used to fly with him on Air Warrior III MV before EA pulled the plug on it. Thanks.