PDA

View Full Version : il2compare 4.09?



na85
10-04-2009, 09:17 PM
Is there a way to import new flight data into il2c? I'd like to be able to look at data for the new 4.09 aircraft (maybe modded ones too) in il2c.

JG52Karaya-X
10-05-2009, 06:51 AM
I have compiled a new IL-2 Compare, on top of the stock 4.08 aircraft it holds performance information about:

- the Avia B.534
- the CW.21
- the Fokker S3Early and Late
- the Fiat G.55Early and Late
- the I-16 Type5 & 6
- the RE.2000
- the SM.79
- plus the updated flight models for the MC.200, Ta152 and P.11c

No info on the I-15bis and Letov S-328 yet, havent succeeded in making them flyable yet!

http://www.4shared.com/file/13...6f/IL-2_Compare.html (http://www.4shared.com/file/137694919/b38b296f/IL-2_Compare.html)

Pls dont ask me how I did it!

FatCat_99
10-05-2009, 07:04 AM
http://lesnihu.wz.cz/daidalos/il2cdata409.zip

AndyJWest
10-05-2009, 07:12 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
I have compiled a new IL-2 Compare, on top of the stock 4.08 aircraft it holds performance information about:

- the Avia B.534
- the CW.21
- the Fokker S3Early and Late
- the Fiat G.55Early and Late
- the I-16 Type5 & 6
- the RE.2000
- the SM.79
- plus the updated flight models for the MC.200, Ta152 and P.11c

No info on the I-15bis and Letov S-328 yet, havent succeeded in making them flyable yet!

http://www.4shared.com/file/13...6f/IL-2_Compare.html (http://www.4shared.com/file/137694919/b38b296f/IL-2_Compare.html)

Pls dont ask me how I did it!

Thanks JG52Karaya-X http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

I've always wondered how the data was arrived at. I don't suppose you could let us know (or PM me if it is something that shouldn't be discussed on the forum). I've got my own prototype autopilot which can do some of the testing needed to do this sort of thing, but to give comparable results, I'd need to ensure conditions were the same - I usually get results similar to IL-2 Compare, though I haven't done a great deal of direct comparison.

JtD
10-05-2009, 07:25 AM
Hm, your il-2 compares don't agree particularly well which each other, check for example the I-16 type 5. Who am I going to trust?

Thanks to both of you anyway!

JG52Karaya-X
10-05-2009, 07:29 AM
Was wondering about this too!

I've made all tests on the Smolensk map, 12:00, clear weather as this seems to be the same map the original IL-2Compare tests were done on. Why am I assuming this? Well I simply tested a few stock aircraft and compared my results to what is already included in IL-2Compare and the results were 100% identical.

Maybe FatCat can tell us under which condition his team tested!?

DKoor
10-05-2009, 07:29 AM
And someone please hack that il2c.exe to says v4.09 in upper left corner after initialization http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif .

DKoor
10-05-2009, 07:34 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
Was wondering about this too!

I've made all tests on the Smolensk map, 12:00, clear weather as this seems to be the same map the original IL-2Compare tests were done on. Why am I assuming this? Well I simply tested a few stock aircraft and compared my results to what is already included in IL-2Compare and the results were 100% identical.

Maybe FatCat can tell us under which condition his team tested!? Hey... can you tell just how did you perform those tests? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

JG52Karaya-X
10-05-2009, 07:38 AM
With my magic wand!

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

Now seriously, it's a mod that lets you dump flight model data via the console

FatCat_99
10-05-2009, 09:19 AM
Originally posted by JtD:
Hm, your il-2 compares don't agree particularly well which each other, check for example the I-16 type 5. Who am I going to trust?

Thanks to both of you anyway!
LesniHU did it and I don't know what exactly he did because we think that normal Il2Compare output is not correct so he made some changes.

TBH difference in speed for I16-5 are marginal but difference between climbs is huge, test the plane and see which version gives you closer results and than use that one for other planes too.

FC

JtD
10-05-2009, 09:32 AM
In my game the I-16 type 5 climbs at about 15m/s between 0-2000 meters.

I tested this on the CRIMEA map. Would be nice to see a 25m/s track for comparison, if you have one, Karaya.

DKoor
10-05-2009, 09:50 AM
Ummm.... TA-152C was sooo speed-porked according to new IL-2 Compare you both posted http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif .

Unbelievable... previous IL-2 Compare gives us speed value @ SL of 624kph, while in game highest obtainable was 612kph (+/- 1 or 2 kph depending on aircraft heading).

Now in JG52Karaya-X's & FatCat_99's data I'm reading 587kph & 591kph http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif . Was TA-152C speed messed up with again?
Or is it just another chain reaction?



Ta-152C wing area corrected from Fw 190D-9 values (~1.2mē) -> slightly improved turn performance


Ok turn but speed is mentioned nowhere? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

FatCat_99
10-05-2009, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by DKoor:
Ummm.... TA-152C was sooo speed-porked according to new IL-2 Compare you both posted http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif .

Unbelievable... previous IL-2 Compare gives us speed value @ SL of 624kph, while in game highest obtainable was 612kph (+/- 1 or 2 kph depending on aircraft heading).

Now in JG52Karaya-X's & FatCat_99's data I'm reading 587kph & 591kph http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif . Was TA-152C speed messed up with again?
Or is it just another chain reaction?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Ta-152C wing area corrected from Fw 190D-9 values (~1.2mē) -> slightly improved turn performance


Ok turn but speed is mentioned nowhere? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ta-152C is done by Oleg , we didn't test that one and TBH I didn't even check its data. Have you tried it in game?

DKoor
10-05-2009, 10:19 AM
No I haven't but considering your data I expect 596kph tops (in game, that's 16kph slower than in v4.09b1m)!
In which case TA-152C would be just as fast as the P-38L_LATE or FW-190A9 @ SL.

I have compared several of my results with data you posted and your Speed data seems to match my tests I did under 409 beta within ~ -5kph.
Another words I got slightly higher values when tested under "Realistic" settings, Crimea map, heading 270° etc.

DKoor
10-05-2009, 10:34 AM
Something definitely isn't right... I just tested it...

It achieves 588kph @ SL, that's much worse than I expected.

So to summarize... TA-152C in v4.09m is exactly 24kph slower than in v4.08/v4.09b1m (beta).

JG52Karaya-X
10-05-2009, 11:13 AM
Of course it is much slower, it has a larger wing area and in IL-2 that means considerably more drag!

Plus the engine has also been changed in terms of full throttle height from 9200 to 10200m, so thats where topspeed is being reached! Plus the supercharger seems to be less effectively so the aircraft drops in climbrate faster!

mortoma
10-05-2009, 01:08 PM
I'd say it's a good trade off because the TA-152C can now handle good enough to actually fight decently. Although it's still not great, it's better than it was. It was handling like a overloaded wheel barrow before. Now it handles like a half loaded one instead. Should be a lot more difference between 100% fuel and 50% but there isn't though. Almost seems like it screams better with full fuel load now??

JG52Karaya-X
10-06-2009, 08:24 AM
OK, I have updated my version of IL-2Compare for 4.09m final

http://www.4shared.com/file/13...6f/IL-2_Compare.html (http://www.4shared.com/file/137694919/b38b296f/IL-2_Compare.html)

This one includes all new aircraft from 4.09m plus the changed FM for the MC.200 and Ta152C

IMO this one is more accurate than the one provided by FatCat (no flame intended).