PDA

View Full Version : Best real nav settings



XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 04:22 AM
I think that the most realistic settings for the map would be to have the data on the cockpit map as the pilots would have entered in briefing.
That is
Track path.
Target position.

As soon as some see "full real" they want to turn all game help off.
This is NOT always more realistic.
Pilots dont go on a nav ex without working out tracks , headings drift etc. this they mark on their map and kneeboard.
The game gives you a electronic map, it should be marked with this data.

I enjoy the challenge of full nav. but without the time before launching to enter track headings and paths on the map (yes i print out maps)the hole thing becomes a bit silly-dare i say UNREALISTIC.

Leaving your own aircraft icon on (white plane) in my view just simulates the local knowledge a real life pilot would have built up over his operational area during area famil flights and un-eventful missions. I am not saying leave it on, just that without the option at the moment to turn off the path OR the White plane, then IMHO leaving them on for a mission without time to prepare is the better option.

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 04:22 AM
I think that the most realistic settings for the map would be to have the data on the cockpit map as the pilots would have entered in briefing.
That is
Track path.
Target position.

As soon as some see "full real" they want to turn all game help off.
This is NOT always more realistic.
Pilots dont go on a nav ex without working out tracks , headings drift etc. this they mark on their map and kneeboard.
The game gives you a electronic map, it should be marked with this data.

I enjoy the challenge of full nav. but without the time before launching to enter track headings and paths on the map (yes i print out maps)the hole thing becomes a bit silly-dare i say UNREALISTIC.

Leaving your own aircraft icon on (white plane) in my view just simulates the local knowledge a real life pilot would have built up over his operational area during area famil flights and un-eventful missions. I am not saying leave it on, just that without the option at the moment to turn off the path OR the White plane, then IMHO leaving them on for a mission without time to prepare is the better option.

XyZspineZyX
07-08-2003, 01:55 PM
RAAFIL2shark wrote:

- As soon as some see "full real" they want to turn
- all game help off.
- This is NOT always more realistic.
-
Yeah, you might be right on that, but as we all have the same maps available all of us are able to gain such a local knowledge of the area in question.

The defender of the area as well as the aggressor.

In wartime it rarely was question of beein custom to the area as the pilots mostly did not come from the geografical area where battles were fought.

On servers like the 'Virtualpilots' run on HL we all have equal chances of beein shot down as well as we have the opportunity to find the enemy and surprice him and take him down. On servers like that without Icons, plock or external views and no navigational help you rarely shoot anything down but when u do its because you got somekind of reallifelike advantage over your opponent.

So in my opinion the most realistic settings do´nt give you any support on navigational issues or on your capability to find enemies before they find you.

As a last remark I will add the facty that in these kind of realistic settings the advances and disadvaces of the ac of your choice relly shoves them selves.

Try to dogfight an enemy with a more agile ac and try to keep your sa on top...lol.

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 02:59 PM
We don't have any problems with all "realism" settings on max. No padlock, mini-map path no icons - nothing.

This is great in our Bf109's or FW190's....
We have an electric compass you see... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Some of you guys in your poor crappy low-tech Yaks can't even see your normal (and still crap!) compass, never mind know where you are with it!?!

Later Yaks like the 9U (I think?) have decent compass. Because of this, in our full real COOPS we have allowed speedbar (I can disable it so it doesn't bug me) so the Yak drivers actually have some idea of where they are going /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

We usually pick maps with strong gegraphical references like (for example) the Kursk Map with a North/South River. Or the Stalingrad area with it's city sprawl and airfields in good positions.

It is all a matter of taste IMHO. I would like a setting with no Aircraft Marker (so you can't be SURE of where you are) but a map with the route path overlayed so if you navigate well you can get bearings etc and know roughly where to turn.

Until such a time as Oleg changes the Yak cockpits so you can see the Compass (Think FW-190 !!) I think we will be stuck in a rut where players are understandably put-off by Full Real games as they can't hope to navigate without the speedbar, unless they are very familiar with the maps. Like I said, not an issue for us Luftwaffe guys - our compasses are over-modelled /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

JG5_UnKle

"Know and use all the capabilities of your airplane. If you don't sooner or later, somebody who does, will kick your ***"


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/victoria.stevens/jg5_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 04:56 PM
It will be better once they fix the problem with the home base not giving you a vector in multiplayer (currently it only works for the host).

<center>
http://members.verizon.net/~vze2cb22/KosSig.gif

America: #1 military...#15 in literacy...
Because right wingers run our military
and leftists run our schools!/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </center>

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 05:56 PM
Your sure about fighter pilots useing maps? In escape kits, sure, but having them out for flight, nope. They had heading, speeds, times, and if lucky, pre-flight recon photo peeks of the target areas. Bomber crews with navigators would have had them, no problem with the extra eyes and precision was required. But what good is a fighter pilot who's dependant on a map? He's totally useless on an overcast day, since he's no way to use the map, and to many of those days. Besides, it's an excellent way to get killed having your head burried in a map. Especially in the short distances of the eastern front.

XyZspineZyX
07-15-2003, 12:32 AM
Sure on short flights you could get by with local knowledge of the area you are flying in because you have probably flown many hours in the area amd know the landmarks.
IN IL2 this would be simulated by having the "white plane" on as especialy in VOW as each mission can be on a different map entirely.

On long flights EG bomber escort especialy USAF missions to germany you must have a map.In a dogfight it is easy to lose your position and contact with other friendlies you need a map to fix your position.
In real life pilots would have to deal with drift from incorrect forecast wind direction.If you dont have a map you have no hope of calculating this and applying correction to planned headings. The weather guessers these days still get it wrong. in war you dont have met stations in enemy territory.

As far as having your head buried thats why u nave a wingman. The best navigater pilot (or the one who got the duty) would be doing the work and giving his buddies regular fixes and track corrections as required.

Dont forget they didnt have TACAN in then and you need to know wind drift to use an NDB.

XyZspineZyX
07-15-2003, 02:07 AM
BfHeFwMe wrote:
- Your sure about fighter pilots useing maps?



Apart from flying local cap over airfields you will probably find nearly all fighters pilots relied on a map, a clock, and a compass or DG to find their way around. One advantage of the LW planes for navigation is better clocks which are essential for distance estimations.

If you ever fly VFR real time you will know how quickly you become lost in the air and just what a sinking feeling it is to not know where you are. You learn to position yourself on your maps continually.

The bombers in fact often used sextants and an aviation ephemeris, some bombers even had a sextant built into the roof of the nav position

XyZspineZyX
07-16-2003, 05:14 AM
Map still isn't going to help on an obscured deck day. Heading and distance is all they needed. The bombers still needed escorting, no visability problems aloft. So if they were able to do it on days like that, why bother with maps. Besides, how do you unfold a half europe sized map in a fighter cockpit?

XyZspineZyX
07-16-2003, 08:39 AM
What about fighter sweeps and jabo missions. Low levil nav impossible without map,
maps were also marked with aa threat areas.

XyZspineZyX
07-17-2003, 03:17 PM
RAAFIL2shark wrote:
- Sure on short flights you could get by with local
- knowledge of the area you are flying in because you
- have probably flown many hours in the area amd know
- the landmarks.
- IN IL2 this would be simulated by having the "white
- plane" on
Completely agree. Also learning a map on a sim is in someway's more difficult than it is in real life, maybe it's the lack of detail.

http://www.ciudadfutura.com/aviones/yak-1.jpg

"Anytime you have an opportunity to make things better and you don't, then you are wasting your time on this earth." -Roberto Clemente

XyZspineZyX
07-21-2003, 10:33 PM
To fly VFR on top they'd have to rely on deductive reckoning - clock, compass (with or without a directional gyro, I do not know when the slaved gyros appeared) and map. Yes, map. For finding the track to fly from wherever you are to wherever you want to be (you can't plan ahead for every possibility), to check drift against landmarks, to figure out where the *bleep* you ended up when going back down through the overcast...

As for physically handling them... Map folding in a tight cockpit is an artform. Divide the maps into sections for long flights. But for everything but a local spin, a map should be brought along. The question is not IF you will end up in a place where you never intended to be. It is WHEN...

Cheers,
Fred

No sig as of now, as people apparently can't handle reality without creating too much trouble for the poor mods.

adlabs6
07-22-2003, 12:23 AM
This is an interesting problem. I don't know who feasable adding marks to the in game map is, in terms of patching.

My best fix is marking landmarks and targets on a printed map, just as I would in real life. A laminated map would be nice for the sake of being reusable.

<html>
<body>
<table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="600" align="center">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><font color="000000">adlabs<font color="#ff9900">6</font></font>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" bgcolor="#42524e">
<div align="center"><font color="#999999">
http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/bin/sigtemp.JPG (http://mudmovers.com/Sims/FB/fb_skins_historical_adlabs6.htm)
<small><font color="#ff6600">NEW</font> at mudmovers! Click the pic to download my skins from mudmovers.com!</small>
</font>
Skinner's Guide at mudmovers (http://mudmovers.com/Sims/FB/fb_skinnersguide.htm) | Skinner's heaven (http://www.1java.org/sh) | IL2skins (http://www.il2skins.com)
<font color="#999999">
My Forgotten Battles Webpage (http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/index.html) Current Wallpaper: <font color="#999999">P-51D Flyover</font></font>

<A HREF="http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=zhiwg" TARGET=_blank>"Whirlwind Whiner"
The first of the few</A>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 02:34 AM
JG5_UnKle wrote:

- This is great in our Bf109's or FW190's....
- We have an electric compass you see...



Slightly off topic ...........


.... the DG's in Forgotten Battles are far too good .. there is no precession and thus no need (or capability) to regularly reset the DG to match the compass.

In fact this gives an unfair advantage to planes with DG's as they get all the advantages of a stable DG without the downside of it precessing all the time and needing to be resest.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 03:09 AM
sorry, you're wrong. I have several of my father's maps from Korea (He flew F-3D's for the Marines). They did indeed use them in-cockpit, along with the information you mentioned above.


Regards,
HerrBaron