PDA

View Full Version : Compressability



Daiichidoku
07-05-2007, 08:18 AM
seems to ONLY be applied to the B1 series rockets, and the P 38

this effect, for the P38, has clearly been shown to be incorrect, as far as onset speed and altitude isses are concerned

no other types in game, despite also being subject to comp. effects IRL, do not have this "feature"


my request to 1C is as follows;

REMOVE all "compressability" effects from P 38 and B1 series

OR

ADD compressability effects to ALL other types in game (and wait for the hue and cry http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif)



just because the P38 was one of the first to exp. this effect, does not mean it was the ONLY one...why were P 47s fitted with DRF from block 30 on? this "stigma" attached to the P38 sucks, is inaccurate, and unfair

i appreciate any consideration given this by devs, thank you

Daiichidoku
07-05-2007, 08:18 AM
seems to ONLY be applied to the B1 series rockets, and the P 38

this effect, for the P38, has clearly been shown to be incorrect, as far as onset speed and altitude isses are concerned

no other types in game, despite also being subject to comp. effects IRL, do not have this "feature"


my request to 1C is as follows;

REMOVE all "compressability" effects from P 38 and B1 series

OR

ADD compressability effects to ALL other types in game (and wait for the hue and cry http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif)



just because the P38 was one of the first to exp. this effect, does not mean it was the ONLY one...why were P 47s fitted with DRF from block 30 on? this "stigma" attached to the P38 sucks, is inaccurate, and unfair

i appreciate any consideration given this by devs, thank you

FritzGryphon
07-05-2007, 08:50 AM
Other planes have mach tuck. It's just not nearly as severe.

Try it on a P-47 at 650-750km/h and you can notice a nose-down change of trim like a P-38, but not as much.

Besides, I don't think the Bi-1 noses down from compressibility. It's something else, like blanking the horizontal stabilizers.

GH_Klingstroem
07-05-2007, 11:38 AM
the P51 has it too!!

DKoor
07-05-2007, 01:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
i appreciate any consideration given this by devs, thank you </div></BLOCKQUOTE>+1

Daiichidoku
07-05-2007, 02:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
Other planes have mach tuck. It's just not nearly as severe.

Try it on a P-47 at 650-750km/h and you can notice a nose-down change of trim like a P-38, but not as much.

Besides, I don't think the Bi-1 noses down from compressibility. It's something else, like blanking the horizontal stabilizers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the "mach tuck" effect is negligble for all other types

i have MANY hours in the P 47...i have NP diving a Jug, untrimmed, to below 1000m, with 1000kph+ on the clock, and pull out with little to no difference on elevator authority (and without snapping a wing in the process)

continuing with the P 47 example, given the way it flies in game, in regards compressability/mach tuck, i see NO reason why DRF were ever installed on RL Jugs, completely irrelevant

however you slice it, the 38 (and B1, to be fair, unless its behavior is completely accurate, of course) are saddled with a distinct disadvantage, that no other type must put up with

it wouldnt even be so bad, if it was only on the b1/P38, but CORRECT effects, at least

triggerhappyfin
07-09-2007, 08:28 AM
Isnt the term 'compressability' describing the phenomena of airpressure increasing inside fabric skinned controls(due to airspeed), making them brake apart? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Fork-N-spoon
07-10-2007, 06:08 AM
Daiichidoku,

I've been wondering where you are. I've stopped playing this game, visiting this forum to read and debate, and I do not even have this game or the hyper lobby installed on my computer.

I no longer enjoy this subject and I'm looking to dump my extensive collection of books.

You need to contact me at bolillo_loco@comcast.net

Daiichidoku
07-10-2007, 08:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fork-N-spoon:
Daiichidoku,

I've been wondering where you are. I've stopped playing this game, visiting this forum to read and debate, and I do not even have this game or the hyper lobby installed on my computer.

I no longer enjoy this subject and I'm looking to dump my extensive collection of books.

You need to contact me at bolillo_loco@comcast.net </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

rgrt, wildo

i gave your mom my phone number...you should have it...guess she wanted to keep me all to herself http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

i know ur area code and last number...first 3 are "785" or 765"?

Jaws2002
07-11-2007, 08:52 AM
Oleg please add compressability to Gotha 229 only. Thank you. http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Daiichidoku
07-25-2007, 12:48 PM
bump for FM "accuracy", please

Daiichidoku
08-03-2007, 09:05 AM
D-30 block P47s were fitted with DRF

why?...could it be the P 47 would experience compress.?

in game one can dive well over 900...even go into the 1000 range..and it still has PLENTY of elevator authority

this compress. stigmata attached the 38 is ludicrous

bump to remove from 38, or add to all other applicible types in game, PLEASE http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Scen
08-03-2007, 10:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by triggerhappyfin:
Isnt the term 'compressability' describing the phenomena of airpressure increasing inside fabric skinned controls(due to airspeed), making them brake apart? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In short no

Scen
08-03-2007, 10:42 AM
+1

I couldn't agree more. Either Remove compressibility "Feature" or make all the other planes suffer as well.

The problem with the 38s in the game have been proven incorrect. Either Correct it or apply it to all the aircraft.

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-03-2007, 11:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
seems to ONLY be applied to the B1 series rockets, and the P 38

this effect, for the P38, has clearly been shown to be incorrect, as far as onset speed and altitude isses are concerned

no other types in game, despite also being subject to comp. effects IRL, do not have this "feature"


my request to 1C is as follows;

REMOVE all "compressability" effects from P 38 and B1 series

OR

ADD compressability effects to ALL other types in game (and wait for the hue and cry http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif)



just because the P38 was one of the first to exp. this effect, does not mean it was the ONLY one...why were P 47s fitted with DRF from block 30 on? this "stigma" attached to the P38 sucks, is inaccurate, and unfair

i appreciate any consideration given this by devs, thank you </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Flown a 109 lately? There is actually quite a few aircraft which suffer from this. And the P-38 has been improved dramatically. I can dive the P-38J to over 400mph easily now and still be able to pull out. You must remember that you do have elevator trim.

S!

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-03-2007, 11:15 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
the P51 has it too!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What sim you flying?

faustnik
08-03-2007, 12:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Fork-N-spoon:
Daiichidoku,

I've been wondering where you are. I've stopped playing this game, visiting this forum to read and debate, and I do not even have this game or the hyper lobby installed on my computer.

I no longer enjoy this subject and I'm looking to dump my extensive collection of books.

You need to contact me at bolillo_loco@comcast.net </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What?????????????

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Scen
08-03-2007, 04:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
seems to ONLY be applied to the B1 series rockets, and the P 38

this effect, for the P38, has clearly been shown to be incorrect, as far as onset speed and altitude isses are concerned

no other types in game, despite also being subject to comp. effects IRL, do not have this "feature"


my request to 1C is as follows;

REMOVE all "compressability" effects from P 38 and B1 series

OR

ADD compressability effects to ALL other types in game (and wait for the hue and cry http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif)



just because the P38 was one of the first to exp. this effect, does not mean it was the ONLY one...why were P 47s fitted with DRF from block 30 on? this "stigma" attached to the P38 sucks, is inaccurate, and unfair

i appreciate any consideration given this by devs, thank you </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Flown a 109 lately? There is actually quite a few aircraft which suffer from this. And the P-38 has been improved dramatically. I can dive the P-38J to over 400mph easily now and still be able to pull out. You must remember that you do have elevator trim.

S! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah I'm well aware of the 109 problem but the 38 is way off even though it's been improved.

M_Gunz
08-04-2007, 06:48 AM
I am so honored to be in the presence of such experienced experts.

J_A_M_F_
08-04-2007, 10:54 AM
+1 on either making the 38's compressibility more like reality (disappearing below "n" alt)...., or reducing it so it's at the same (nearly non-existant) level with the compressibility of the other aircraft.

Daiichidoku
08-04-2007, 11:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
I am so honored to be in the presence of such experienced experts. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

stow it, Gunz, no expertise needed, it has been shown clearly that compress. is incorrect as to onset speed, critical mach, altitude, etc for the 38

ElAurens
08-05-2007, 10:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:

What?????????????

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My thoughts exactly.

"Dump books"? The mind boggles.

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-05-2007, 12:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yeah I'm well aware of the 109 problem but the 38 is way off even though it's been improved. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What are you basing you observation on? Have you conducted the proper test to prove its wrong? Do you have some form of comparable evidence to show or you just going off of a feeling like so many do? Im just asking.

S!

Scen
08-05-2007, 01:52 PM
No need to test my friend... The NACA test data supports it along with the Pilots Operating Handbook. The 38 we have in the game suffers from compressibility way to early and the funny thing is it's not really a "compressibility" Problem to begin with. Its a high speed wing stall. I sent a document to Tagart.

Every P-38 was equipped with a dive limit compression chart right in the cockpit for all conditions of speed and altitude. Pretty much in the manual as well.

From Page 30 in the Pilot Operating Handbook for the P-38H Series , P-38J Series, P-38L-1 L-5 and F-5B Airplanes.

I would normally post a cut from the page but I have it in PDF format.

The Dive Chart Limits

Outside of above limits buffing and dive tendency may be expected. If experience reduce acceleration or speed

1 Above 10,000 ft 429 mph Indicated

2. Above 20,000 ft 360 mph Indicated

3. Above 30,000 ft 290 mph Indicated

d. When the above conditions are noticed, the following action should be taken immediately.

1 In accelerated maneuvers (dive pullouts or steep turns) buffeting may be stopped by reducing the acceleration.
2. In steady dives at high speed, the buffeting may be stopped by reducing the airplane speed and pulling out using minimum acceleration. Use the elevator tab if necessary to assist in recovery.

e. A new placard will be installed in late airplanes and may be retroactive to airplanes already in service. This new placard indicates the safe speed range at any altitude for one G flight. As the airplane approaches this critical one G condition, its ability to pull out is gradually reduced and at the critical speed, buffeting and nose heaviness will occur.

f. Dive Recovery Flaps P-38L and Later P-38 J airplanes are provided with dive recovery flaps to improve the dive recovery characteristics of the airplane. As described above, the airplane without these flaps becomes very nose heavy and starts to buffet above the placard dive speeds. This condition is caused by a high speed stall and a consequent decrease in lift in the wing producing the nose heavy condition. The dive recovery flaps which are install under the wings between the booms and the ailerons, restore the lift to this portion of the wing and thus cause the uncontrollable nose heaviness to occur at higher speed. The flaps also add some drag to the airplane, which in conjunction with the higher allowable dive speed, permits safe dives at a much steeper dive angle. The dive recovery flaps should be extended before starting the dive or immediately after the dive started before a buffeting speed has been reached. If the airplane is buffeting before the dive recovery flaps are extended, the buffeting will momentarily increase then diminish. With these flaps extended, the nose heaviness is definitely reduced but the dive speed should never be allowed to exceed the placard by more than 15 - 20 mph. With the dive recovery flaps extended before entering the dive, angles of dive up to 45 degrees may be safely accomplished. Without dive recovery flaps extended, the maximum angle for extended dives is 15 degrees. Diving characteristics are better with power off than with power on.

Warning

Although the dive recovery flaps greatly improve the diving characteristics of the airplane dangerous buffeting and nose heaviness will still be encountered diving at angels above 45 degrees if the diving speed is allowed to exceed the placard limits by more than 15 to 20 mph


The problem is this has been presented to Oleg and Company with several other supporting documents and it was blown off as propaganda over a year ago.

I don't think we will see any changes any time soon if any.

Daiichidoku
08-05-2007, 05:16 PM
of course, one merely has to read fine print in all NACA and Lockheed reports..its hard to see though:

"published by US dept. of propaganda"


besides, how could big time 38 operators like USSR not have all pertinent "correct" data themselves? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


while sadly, vital corections for such outta whack flight characteristics as in the 38 may likely never be fixed in FB, at least enough notice of this issue may spur any future 38 made by 1C will not suffer "stigmata"

avimimus
08-06-2007, 10:00 AM
All that I recall is that the Bi-1 nosed down uncontrollably at around 700kmph in real life and that upon reading this I flew it and discovered that it did so as well in Il-2.

The P-38's controls would freeze at high speed, maybe Oleg got this one right too?

Scen
08-06-2007, 10:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by avimimus:
All that I recall is that the Bi-1 nosed down uncontrollably at around 700kmph in real life and that upon reading this I flew it and discovered that it did so as well in Il-2.

The P-38's controls would freeze at high speed, maybe Oleg got this one right too? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhh are you reading the thread? Yes there is a problem with the 38 in a high speed dive however in the game it kicks in way too early in the flight envelope.

We would like to see it fixed or removed if it's not done properly. Why is it that a 47 can dive 1000 kmh and the 38 is terminal at that point. In other words its incorrect.

Read my post above that's straight out of the Pilots Operating Handbook that clearly says what airspeed and altitude the problem begins.

Daiichidoku
08-06-2007, 12:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Scen:
Uhh are you reading the thread? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

not even the first 4 lines of the thread it seems
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Daii:
[compressability] seems to ONLY be applied to the B1 series rockets, and the P 38

this effect, for the P38, has clearly been shown to be incorrect, as far as onset speed and altitude isses are concerned

no other types in game, despite also being subject to comp. effects IRL, do not have this "feature" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Daiichidoku
08-06-2007, 12:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faustnik:

What?????????????

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

My thoughts exactly.

"Dump books"? The mind boggles. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

step back MF!

i saw him first!

when he finally snaps and goes "mad sniper/john rambo (hmm john rambolillo)", i will have the sacred spoils of the unholy tritiny of NACA, Lockheed and u.s.a.f./a.f./a.c PROPAGANDA that is bolillos book collection

even a lot of not-38 stuff too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


but he not losing the books...i think he said that cuz he knew it would get my attention, hehe

Scen
08-07-2007, 11:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
I am so honored to be in the presence of such experienced experts. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Care to comment now Turbo?

I would love to see your argument for keeping the 38 the way it is...

M_Gunz
08-07-2007, 03:27 PM
I'd love to see how YOU expect to change it cause the way you go about getting it changed
hasn't worked in HOW LONG?

Scen
08-07-2007, 03:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
I'd love to see how YOU expect to change it cause the way you go about getting it changed
hasn't worked in HOW LONG? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Regardless it still should be brought up because it's wrong and it should be fixed.

Whether or not someone is paying attention is a different story.

Scen
08-07-2007, 03:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
of course, one merely has to read fine print in all NACA and Lockheed reports..its hard to see though:

"published by US dept. of propaganda"


besides, how could big time 38 operators like USSR not have all pertinent "correct" data themselves? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


while sadly, vital corections for such outta whack flight characteristics as in the 38 may likely never be fixed in FB, at least enough notice of this issue may spur any future 38 made by 1C will not suffer "stigmata" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well it's hard to believe they got it wrong so far the information has been made public for many years.

There's nothing secret about it.

Yeah I noticed that very fine print... It's pretty small but there http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-11-2007, 01:28 PM
The P-38 was horrible in earlier patches but now I really do not see what the problem is. How much is it off? I understand you guys are posting official data and whatnot but how does it relate to the game? How are you conducting your test? I feel the P-38 is just fine now and I have been able to dive to about 500mph IAS and pull out. Are you keeping your plane trimmed?

S!

VMF-214_HaVoK
08-11-2007, 01:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">1 Above 10,000 ft 429 mph Indicated

2. Above 20,000 ft 360 mph Indicated

3. Above 30,000 ft 290 mph Indicated

d. When the above conditions are noticed, the following action should be taken immediately.

1 In accelerated maneuvers (dive pullouts or steep turns) buffeting may be stopped by reducing the acceleration.
2. In steady dives at high speed, the buffeting may be stopped by reducing the airplane speed and pulling out using minimum acceleration. Use the elevator tab if necessary to assist in recovery. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I do believe my P-38 performs exactly as described.

S!

Daiichidoku
08-11-2007, 02:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
The P-38 was horrible in earlier patches but now I really do not see what the problem is. How much is it off? I understand you guys are posting official data and whatnot but how does it relate to the game? How are you conducting your test? I feel the P-38 is just fine now and I have been able to dive to about 500mph IAS and pull out. Are you keeping your plane trimmed?

S! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=F...le=viewtopic&t=10029 (http://www.acompletewasteofspace.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=10029)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">GOYA:
"Something that has always bothered me about compressibility discussion is the common saying that under ~20,000 feet there was no problem. The problem wasn't altitude per se, or even speed per se. The problem was mach number. The wing had a critical mach number and it shouldn't matter what altitude the P-38 was, if it reached that critical mach it started having compression problems.

The above bar chart shows the operational dive speed to about .7 mach.[ AFAIK, the "official" mach limiting number is .68, so GOYA is very close~Daii] .7 mach is 533 MPH at sea level and 515 MPH at 10,000 feet. Does it make sense that the P-38 couldn't reach critical mach starting a dive from below ~20,000 feet?

More importantly, the operational limits were past the critical mach stage. So what mach number must be reached for elevator lock and tuck under to begin? The chart might indicate around .83 or so, but it is not clearly stated. Pilot accounts would seem to support this number as well.

BTW, at 5000 feet, mach .83 is 622 MPH. Try a dive from 15,000 and see if you can reach that. It's 1000 kph. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

M_Gunz
08-11-2007, 04:39 PM
Below 20,000 ft the heavier air is supposed to provide enough drag for a P-38 with already
throttles pulled back and trying not to exceed VNE to slow down enough to pull out.

Unlike gamers, the real pilots did not want to crash and die. Terribly soft of them to not
check the calculated critical speeds down to 5,000 ft wasn't it?

Scen
08-13-2007, 10:21 AM
True.... Though they aren't really hitting VNE when the plane experiences this phenomenon. It's a high speed wing stall. The wing actually loses lift on the inner portions and she tucks under. In addition the disturbed air is going over the elevator and actually increased its effectiveness which caused even more tuck under.

It's sad that it's modeled incorrectly.

Scen
08-13-2007, 10:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">1 Above 10,000 ft 429 mph Indicated

2. Above 20,000 ft 360 mph Indicated

3. Above 30,000 ft 290 mph Indicated

d. When the above conditions are noticed, the following action should be taken immediately.

1 In accelerated maneuvers (dive pullouts or steep turns) buffeting may be stopped by reducing the acceleration.
2. In steady dives at high speed, the buffeting may be stopped by reducing the airplane speed and pulling out using minimum acceleration. Use the elevator tab if necessary to assist in recovery. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I do believe my P-38 performs exactly as described.

S! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So you can Dive to 429 mph Indicated 10k and Below?

M_Gunz
08-13-2007, 03:13 PM
Can you do it if you start with an overspeed dive from higher up?

bob669
08-13-2007, 09:17 PM
I just tried this in the P38J. Entered a quick mission from 5000 meters. Pointed myself down in a 75% power dive when I hit 400 indicated MPH around 10000 feet I started to pull out while cutting the throttle to 0 and popping flaps. Pulled out of dive at around 500mph indicated and 1500 or so meters off the ground. I could barely keep her from nosing over while going level at 500mph indicated. It IS possible to PULL OUT, you just have to remember to pull out ahead of time because you accelerate past the limit too quickly once you hit it its too late. Try not diving at a 90 degree angle. You gotta anticipate it. Yes this effect is a halmark of 38 handling realistic or not, but the 38 also can accelerate in a dive to this speed much faster than most planes.

VW-IceFire
08-13-2007, 09:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by avimimus:
All that I recall is that the Bi-1 nosed down uncontrollably at around 700kmph in real life and that upon reading this I flew it and discovered that it did so as well in Il-2.

The P-38's controls would freeze at high speed, maybe Oleg got this one right too? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Missing a detail...said controls would only freeze during a high speed and high altitude dive. The P-38 never had a control lock issue at low altitudes. The problem in game is that the lock occurs at high and low altitude and it happens sooner than its supposed to. The Bi-2 for all we know is wrong as well...it works but isn't subtle enough in its implementation.

Daiichidoku
08-28-2007, 02:33 PM
bump

M_Gunz
08-28-2007, 04:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by avimimus:
All that I recall is that the Bi-1 nosed down uncontrollably at around 700kmph in real life and that upon reading this I flew it and discovered that it did so as well in Il-2.

The P-38's controls would freeze at high speed, maybe Oleg got this one right too? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Missing a detail...said controls would only freeze during a high speed and high altitude dive. The P-38 never had a control lock issue at low altitudes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How do you know?

Control lock at high alt, the pilot had time to back off on the engine and take measures and
still getting out wasn't a right-then thing was it?
Well I guess if any got the lock down low they'd have taken time from trying to pull out to
radio a report in.

I have a friend who spent many hours flying since 1942 when he joined the Navy. We'd fly sims
some of the time and I was talking about the Beechcrafts with the split tails. He told me he
saw one once coming down to land and how the plane just arrowed right in and crashed. He said
those planes are so slick they gain speed faster than anyone would think and next you know you
are beyond VNE and can't pull out.

That was a split tail Beech on landing approach, not some power-dive out limit-pushing.

How about someone with P-38 POH please quote VNE as given? IIRC the P-38's were the first
where they discovered such problems but I can't quote how many were lost before they had the
answers, what was happening and why and what to do about it.

VW-IceFire
08-28-2007, 06:21 PM
Its been explained to me that the reason for the control lock has to do with the differences in mach speed at differing altitudes. At low altitudes the plane never encounters the compressibility and thus the air is still on the control surfaces making them effective.

The problem isn't with the control surfaces locking at high speed like a Spits aileron do...the problem is with them loosing their effectiveness because the plane is entering compressibility and the air is not flowing across them properly.

Or at least this is what I've read from a variety of differing sources. Its true, however, about the plane simply being so slick that it gains speed faster than you'd expect it to. Nonetheless...in the sim it does seem to lock before most other types and it behaves the same way at low and high altitude. Evidently this isn't as accurate as it could be. Its probably a limitation to the flight modeling where compressibility is modeled all the way or not.

M_Gunz
08-28-2007, 10:34 PM
I look at where the tailplane is and in a dive, does that or doesn't that enter into the
slipstream from the wings and fuselage? Just guessing that wind-tunnel software beyond
what the game itself is might show such behaviour.

DustyBarrels77
09-09-2007, 12:22 AM
I rather see all aircraft have it to be honest done like the b1, which is the way compressibility works on all aircraft no matter what model, only being able to recover from an overspeed dive with forward stick use.

I doubt it will get a response or happen, trims are all different for all ac just like the mixture killing have the planes engine at 700m when others can use it to 5000m + with 10% power increase.

half the planes will fly like garbage trucks full of concrete that even at 700kmph the tiniest touch of rudder will send them flopping and those that fly like friggin rc planes will continue to like the spitfire, la series, bf109, 190s, yaks, zekes, n1k2s, ki84s its all about being able to use full rudder deflection low and high speed against those that cant even use a quarter of it any airspeed without a rubberband like flop, same as the fms on the il2 with one cannon shot out you hold down the trigger and can fly forward with the prop pointing the opposite way then stop shooting and rubber ban flop back to correct direction.

This oleg fellow claims to be all about realism when theres not one aircraft in game even close, closest is the p51 in flightmodel, while all others are over done or under done then half are over performing under 6000m then these same ac are getting over performed by ac that should be worst above 6000m for example the anton series vs lagg3 and mig3. Games all off has been each and every patch new patch fixes 4 planes fms then that arcades 8, makes no sense. Looks at pf right out of the box 4.0 the corsair and hellcat flew the same as the ki84 did.

Then the biggest ufo 109g2 f2 f4 pilots only cry about the lagg3 and p39 back in the day. They get shytcanned now and can barely fight an emil but g2 remains the same, makes no sense at all. But it was fun to fly either side back then russian or german and do equally well now its like zekes vs usn, total simplton can win with ease against overwhelming odds.

Im all for adding compressibility on all aircraft much much earlier before breakup speeds, but this would bring dive accelaration into the mix which is so wrong despite the work put into fixing it a bit.

Lightwieght turn and burners winning in all categories still. Especially just doing the stupid porpoise move. Just climb dive climb dive makes a slower ac faster then a straight faster ac, 109 or spit for example doing this manuever online to catch the faster p51 47 or 190a. Hope someone steps into a can of realism and getting rid of some of the arcadeness.

has to be a good level of both for playability, work on a faster moving ac in a dive not being able to out manuever a slower ac which should hold the turn advantage no matter what it is just because of airspeed...

take of flight model making even brand new players first time playing being excellent just because of the easy of everything and a 1 shot burst kill everytime. Put some basics of flight into the game at least

msalama
09-09-2007, 01:57 AM
...and yet another desktop ace shares his divine aviational wisdom with us mere mortals, and all this without burdening us with any cumbersome evidence to back up his opinions too!

Yah, gotta love the average sim smacktard http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

M_Gunz
09-09-2007, 02:45 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DustyBarrels77:
Lightwieght turn and burners winning in all categories still. Especially just doing the stupid porpoise move. Just climb dive climb dive makes a slower ac faster then a straight faster ac, 109 or spit for example doing this manuever online to catch the faster p51 47 or 190a. Hope someone steps into a can of realism and getting rid of some of the arcadeness. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Try reading this, argue with Leon (http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_015a.html)

DustyBarrels77
09-10-2007, 08:12 PM
Thanks for the civil comment gunz, I dislike discussing these issues especially here with some of these spend their life on a forum people like msalama which just looking at his last 200 posts hasnt said one thing helpful or knowledgable about anything just bashes people.

While in the diagram i agree if ac are at similiar speeds with a heavier ac being at a same or slower speed in a slow gradual climb vs the ac that will dive for some more e, but with diving for the e in rl of course it will gain speed and e but be lost at the climb so its not really gaining an advantage except for a one shot chance at firing position, simhq is fantastic and same for the people there. But those simpleton charts are nice for explaining the concept on how things should work but theres alot more to it, distances glide slopes the paths etc, always has to be very close for it to work in rl for example.

Thing here is for example even say a spit and 190 head to head, the spit can turn which would bleed off its E making the 190 gain in distance much quicker then it does in game and over time can catch the faster 190 with constant porpoising, works for zekes vs usn ac, 109 vs 51 la7 vs 190a etc for some examples. this move is well know in game by many of the best pilots online. Over on simhq this diagram is ment for a one time deal meant to be done once not constantly over and over for an advantage.

You dont have to be newton to have a basic concept of energy and matter, the straight path is always the quicker route and should be an advantage gaining a gap between you and the pursuer

Its little exploits of the game people will always find and use. I doubt salama even has an inkling of whats going on just one of those whos has google as a so called brain look at his last 150 posts just insulting everyone.

I refuse to post charts on this place which does not mean I have countless aeronautical committee data from multiple nations.

Its just a waste of time really and always have the true armchair experts or people here just to cause problems. Its always nice to vent here every now and then because some of the good people here reply and nice to speak to them without wanting or hoping anything will be changed in the game.

All im looking for is if you agree with me gunz and nothing more, and even if you dont it does not matter with me its good to see people who actually fly the games opinions.

DKoor
09-10-2007, 11:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DustyBarrels77:
... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>You have a pm

Wildnoob
09-11-2007, 12:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:

"published by US dept. of propaganda"


besides, how could big time 38 operators like USSR not have all pertinent "correct" data themselves? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif " </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hmmmmm

I've heard many things about that.

I still want my P-51 that could match a BF-109 in a turning figth.

DKoor
09-11-2007, 01:47 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wildnoob:
I still want my P-51 that could match a BF-109 in a turning figth. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Why?

joeap
09-11-2007, 02:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wildnoob:
I still want my P-51 that could match a BF-109 in a turning figth. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Why? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

+1

Brain32
09-11-2007, 06:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wildnoob:
I still want my P-51 that could match a BF-109 in a turning figth. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Why? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Atleast he said it, just look at all those guys that usually post in "Something is wrong with P51" threads, most of them preform something like: "....urrmmmh..speed...grgljh...rear tank...ummmh...e-retention...urmh...(insert usual BS)".
I have 10 times more respect for guys like Wildnoob because they clearly and precisely say what is on their mind even if I heavily disagree with them.

As for P51 and 109, MustangMkIII already handily outturns all late German fighters, if you take "only" 50% of fuel(which is standard in most scenarious) it turns almost like a Spitfire.
P51D is not as good but also with 50% fuel the difference is marginal, just don't drop to some obscenely low speed like 200-250kmh...

Wildnoob
09-11-2007, 11:56 AM
Thank you very much Brain.

it's very comm to hear things like "America's propaganda"

you don't hear nothing about the P-47 or the P-38 be greast dogfigthers witch in fact they not are, but about the P-51 everybody knows.

but I really don't know if they are making sensasionalism or that's the truth.

why I say that ?

the Mustang is claimed as US greatest dogfigher(and all over the world by most sources).

ok everyone have to agreed with that ?

NO, NEVER !!!

but I don't think a plane that have this merity could not be even half of wat he really was.

about maneuverability just google 2 magic words :

http://www.google.com.br/search?hl=pt-BR&sa=X&oi=spell&...euverability&spell=1 (http://www.google.com.br/search?hl=pt-BR&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=P-51+maneuverability&spell=1)

I are just a aviation entusiastic who don't know nothing about aviation, but despite the fact IL2 is a masterpice, doens't mean everything is perfect (like the turn time of the BF-109 G-6 witch as 2 seconds delayed by wat I've read).

Wildnoob
09-11-2007, 12:03 PM
before anyone could say anything, no, I'm not a fanatic !

some aircrafts like the KI-84 among others where actually superior in many aspects to the P-51, but I think everybody will understand the point I are talking about.

Daiichidoku
09-11-2007, 04:59 PM
i know the mustang is often reffered to as the great US fighter, wildnoob...NEVER seen it described as a "dogfighter" anywhere but history channel, or other ill-informed sources

it is known as a great fighter for several aspects, not its fighting ability alone

ease of manufacture, low unit cost, RANGE, and ADEQUATE fighting ability make it "US best fighter of WWII" (although that in itself is VERY debatable, id pick the 38 or corsair over mustang anyday, baby)

as someone else here said, engage an enemy at 400kph+, and stay fast, u will see ur beloved pony is QUITE manuverable


yes, i agree with u, in that there a lot of completely F***d thing in FB....109G2s that turn better than F series 109s, despite RL, the Fs turned way better

Brain32
09-11-2007, 06:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> i know the mustang is often reffered to as the great US fighter, wildnoob...NEVER seen it described as a "dogfighter" anywhere but history channel, or other ill-informed sources </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
"Dogfight" is NOT only a "turnfight". In game P51 really is a great dogfighter, however it's sustained turn ability is average. You can still tun while fighting in P51, I turn A LOT in it, but I'm not making circles 5cm of the deck at 20kmh http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Also that plane is really not n00b friendly, it's a handfull, proper trimming is a must for example. Of all US planes I like P51 best, I even stopped flying the FatLady and now fly the "Stang" exclusively http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> yes, i agree with u, in that there a lot of completely F***d thing in FB....109G2s that turn better than F series 109s, despite RL, the Fs turned way better </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well last tests I saw on this, shoed F4 to indeed turn better than G2. Interesting that you say F4 turned way better as RL testing showed:
109F4: 19,6-20,5sec
109G2: 20,0-21,5sec
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

DKoor
09-13-2007, 08:06 AM
G2 turning better than F4 in game is news to me.
LoL. And I claim that 109s are one of my favs.
RoFL. I'm teh noob http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .

Anyway I'll check it out.

I take we are speaking of sustained turn here?

IL-2 Compare gives very little difference, F4 being better on higher speeds, while G2 better on up to 310km/h.

M_Gunz
09-13-2007, 12:42 PM
So now energy transfer is simpleton charts. Nice characterization from someone so expert.

Maybe check Leon's credentials and consider how many sims made either by pros or with pros on
the development teams that you can do exactly as Leon states. He also felt it was wrong and
he says why he does not feel so but f-all if anyone thinks it may be right then put them down
quick! Don't bother with any points they make, just throw funny dweebish names at them.

I've shallow dived to catch up to faster planes and zoomed up in many sims. It doesn't always
work and the why may be "got the wrong speed or angle" seeing as how sometimes it does.

Unloading does away with induced drag, it's a great way to get speed up from slow. A short
zoom at the right speed just may use an efficiency of the wing to get more than an intuitive
marbles rolling on ramps level analysis will. It works great with jets but Leon made his
points how it should work to some extent with the fast props as well. Simpleton? Oh geez.

Whatever. I just noted that there is a possible real explanation, not just for IL2 but for
almost 20 years of the best prop sims on the market. Are they ALL made by simpletons?
Must be! Common sense says so!

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

SNACKY-353rd
09-13-2007, 05:03 PM
Funny, Monroe has always said the P51 was a good "Dogfighter" but that was in RL and not in Oleg's world. Shame he never flys it in this game. His reason is "The P51 didn't spin and flip like that in RL".

Some planes have seen improvements, but this game has run it's course and I don't think you will see a whole lot of support for it.

DKoor
09-14-2007, 02:59 AM
I can easily believe in that.

joeap
09-14-2007, 03:58 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SNACKY-353rd:
Funny, Monroe has always said the P51 was a good "Dogfighter" but that was in RL and not in Oleg's world. Shame he never flys it in this game. His reason is "The P51 didn't spin and flip like that in RL".

Some planes have seen improvements, but this game has run it's course and I don't think you will see a whole lot of support for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dogfighting is not turnfighting.

Daiichidoku
09-14-2007, 09:22 AM
@ 108 F/G

yes, i could be http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif Gs outturning Fs in game, by long time 109s flyers....this was last yr, so subsequent patches may have addresed this....my bad for posting loosely http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

@ p 51....i have heard MQs comments before...and on the P 47 in game.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif...i cant even talk about it, its too ridiculous...maybe its cuz MQ wore the "wrong" wiings, for his recollections to be taken seriously http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

however, to get my compress thread back on trtack, here an excerpt i ffound iunteresting, from the GD thread linking a vintage P 51 training film
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5991086985/p/2

"Pilot: In the dive the pilot doesnt have to maintain excessive forward pressure on the stick. Catch the slight tendency to veer to the right with a trim tab if in a prolonged dive, otherwise the ship is posiotively stabkle in a dive. Hello Arthur, I'm going up high altitude and put her into a maximum speed dive to show you how fast she'll go before reaching compressability.

........................
Pilot:38000.. you all set down there? .......
300..... 350.... 400.... 440..... compressability.. stick movinf fore and aft, slight elevator over balance, heavy buffeting on tail section, oscilation occurs rapidly, however control forces on elevator reman unchanged plane hunts sklightly along horizontal axis.... pulling out now. No difficulty, excpet buffetting continues until a lower speed has been reached.

Major: 440 indicated at that height!!! That's really moving!!!

Colonel: Enemy fighters will have a h@ll of a time trying to keep up with this ship in a dive"


so where THE FRACK is this wonderful compress "feature" to be found on the P 51 in game? or P 47s?

M_Gunz
09-14-2007, 01:53 PM
He hit the start of compression and we don't know what he did to the throttle or how fast he
nudged into that speed. He noted the signs very well of the START of compression in P-51B.

WE don't have much feel in the sim planes, nothing like the REAL pilots did. Stick a REAL WWII
pilot onto the sim and it won't be the same for them without the feel or full stick throw or
trim that works as real as far as holding the stick and feeling the forces lessen as you turn
the wheel.
Just look at the slider settings that suited the REAL British Ace flying IL2 and try to get it
about woods vs trees vs furniture perhaps.

Daiichidoku
09-14-2007, 02:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
He hit the start of compression and we don't know what he did to the throttle or how fast he
nudged into that speed. He noted the signs very well of the START of compression in P-51B.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes, agreed

its clear that pilot knows and keeps his ship out of the "deep" compress, as "control forces on elevator reman unchanged plane hunts sklightly along horizontal axis"

compress in the 38 also gives buffet before the "deep" effects take hold

but i found it interesting, that compress. is mentioned at all, as one doesnt generally find any reference to it unless its about 38, which never fails to mention it

Wildnoob
09-15-2007, 01:24 AM
turning around and going around...

I don't think the P-51 is exactly the plane you should use in arcade game (hate that)and you'll not gonna achive the maximum performance their with it.

In my personal experience with the P-51, I've achive the best results with this figther playing in full real servers (Warbirds of Prey) and not in arcade ones. arcade is not game for me.

And for the pilots who play in this mode and are not liking the Mustang, I strongly recommend switch to full real.

it's amazing how a plane behavior's completly different without icons, external views, capability of see where your enemy are etc...

I've got an exemple of this today, me and a buddy whe're flying with BF-109 E's on the Finnish front and a MIG-3 zoom at us, fatality wounded my plane, zoom again and before my buddy could do anything, he zoom again and shoot us both down.

in a arcade server this MIG probably would be easy prey (despite it's obsolence for 1945) in the normally held low altitude turning dogfigts for the KI-84 IC's, LA7's and Spitfires 25 lbs. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

ok, but that's just a personal opinion and facts.

DKoor
09-15-2007, 09:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
so where THE FRACK is this wonderful compress "feature" to be found on the P 51 in game? or P 47s? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>+1

..........and all others too.

Kwiatos
09-15-2007, 10:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DKoor:
G2 turning better than F4 in game is news to me.
LoL. And I claim that 109s are one of my favs.
RoFL. I'm teh noob http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .

Anyway I'll check it out.

I take we are speaking of sustained turn here?

IL-2 Compare gives very little difference, F4 being better on higher speeds, while G2 better on up to 310km/h. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dont count on Il-2 Compare in turn and climb rate. Il2 Copmare is only accuare in maximum speed section with these what we have in game.

And Bf 109 G-2 in game clearly turns better then F model which is wrong and should be opposite.

Brain32
09-15-2007, 12:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> And Bf 109 G-2 in game clearly turns better then F model which is wrong and should be opposite. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Disagree 100%

Daiichidoku
09-15-2007, 02:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> And Bf 109 G-2 in game clearly turns better then F model which is wrong and should be opposite. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Disagree 100% </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

keep it clean, fellas, no hittin below the belt, and remember, its not a title fight as turning 109s are OT http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/Daiichidoku/151a.jpg

Kwiatos
09-15-2007, 03:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brain32:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> And Bf 109 G-2 in game clearly turns better then F model which is wrong and should be opposite. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Disagree 100% </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We could try Brain no problem. You in F and i'm in G-2. I think you have no chance

DKoor
09-15-2007, 04:42 PM
Don't know.......nowadays I have been flying the G2 sporadically.
Truth to be told I don't fly that frequently anymore, but I'm under impression that F4 is overall more responsive, more maneuverable plane overall.

Of course that I may be wrong, after all I haven't conduct any tests about this.

Daiichidoku
10-02-2007, 08:25 AM
bump

(G2s are teh ghey!)