PDA

View Full Version : Oleg, Please address the P-47 Roll issue before patch release



XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 02:55 AM
Oleg, I haven't downloaded the beta. You didn't send it to me, so I'll wait for it like I'm supposed to. But many of those that have it say the P-47's poor roll rate has not been properly addressed.

I posted roll charts and a chart comparing the FB P-47s to actual roll performance and the FB P-47 roll rate was lacking at every speed. You have the correct roll figures for the P-47Ds.

I respectfully request that you make sure this glaring error in FB is addressed properly in the patch.


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://pages.prodigy.net/4parks/_uimages/SkyChimp.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 02:55 AM
Oleg, I haven't downloaded the beta. You didn't send it to me, so I'll wait for it like I'm supposed to. But many of those that have it say the P-47's poor roll rate has not been properly addressed.

I posted roll charts and a chart comparing the FB P-47s to actual roll performance and the FB P-47 roll rate was lacking at every speed. You have the correct roll figures for the P-47Ds.

I respectfully request that you make sure this glaring error in FB is addressed properly in the patch.


Regards,

SkyChimp

http://pages.prodigy.net/4parks/_uimages/SkyChimp.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 03:15 AM
Also, IMO the yaw needs speeding up just a tad as well. Not much but just a tad. and the stall rate need to be raised some. i know that the p-47 was a pig to fly but it was never as bad as it is portrayed in this sim. I only hope that the patch adresses the issues with the americain air craft.

<CENTER><CENTER><FONT COLOR="LIGHT BLUE">~My at last i'm in compliance, Umm well Sorta Sig~
<CENTER>http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/post-2-1053396877.jpg
<CENTER>Please visit the 310thVF/BS Online at our NEW web site @:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="orange"> http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron/
<CENTER>A proud member Squadron of IL-2 vUSAAF
<CENTER>310th VF/BS Public forum:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW"> http://invisionfree.com/forums/310th_VFBG/
<CENTER><CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW">
Proud Sponsor of IL-2 Hangar Forums
<CENTER> Visit the Hangar at:
http://srm.racesimcentral.com/il2.shtml
<CENTER> <FONT COLOR="RED">

<center> http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/post-2-1057134794.gif
<CENTER> <FONT COLOR="RED"> Gibbage you rock Man!
<center> http://usaaf8th.il2skins.com/leadfan.jpg
<CENTER> <FONT COLOR="RED"> Leadspitter: IL-2 Fb's next Skinner of the year!

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 05:55 AM
Just wondering, has the P-47 EVER been accurately portrayed in any sim? Every sim that I've flown the P-47 in it was a DOG.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 09:58 AM
EmbarkChief wrote:
- Just wondering, has the P-47 EVER been accurately
- portrayed in any sim? Every sim that I've flown the
- P-47 in it was a DOG.

It feels comparatively light in Janes WW2F. That
seems to be the exception, though. Apparently the
roll rate is pretty much on target in Janes WW2F.
However that sim uses a table-based flight model
and the model is quite limited, although it has
a better overall feel if you patch to the unofficial
version 5 flight models.

In WB3 it feels quite heavy. Aces High it closer
to Janes WW2F, but all planes feel a bit the same
in Aces High IMHO. (i.e. no big differences in
character and feel, just in performance). In EAW
is it lighter than in FB, but still quite chunky in
feel. WB2, CFS2 and FS;SDOE I can't remember the feel of
now.

The dog quotient will depend
on altitude, too. All planes are dogs at high
altitude, but the P47 should be less of a dog
than most, giving it an advantage at 30,000 feet.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 11:23 AM
I dunno what happened.Roll was fixed in 05 but in later versions wasn`t.


If it was in 05,you <u>can be sure</u> that it will be in 1.1 aswell.



"degustibus non disputandum"

<center>http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sig23d.jpg

<center>"Weder Tod noch Teufel!"</font>[/B]</center> (http://www.jzg23.de>[B]<font)

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 11:55 AM
I hope we can keep this to one thread, and not spawn a new one every 3 hours...

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 12:30 PM
Maybe 5 and 8 are forks from a common base.

I heard that there was a 9 (that hasn't been leaked).

That may well meld back together the 5 and 8 streams.

We don't know, but if it has been fixed once, it will
likely be fixed in FB 1.1.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 02:02 PM
roll rate is ok...dont't change it !!!

++ 88.IAP_Manuc ++

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 02:33 PM
The P-47 was not a good turner. It couldn't pull the same G's at speeds most other planes could.

However, it was not heavy on the controls, had a good roll rate, esp at high speeds, and the controls were harmonized especially well. It was, by all accounts, a joy to fly.

My Dad says you did not want to stall it. Stalls were announced well in advance by the plane through the stick. He says it was easy to hit stuff with the .50's because the plane was stable and the controls very honest.

Making the plane a slow roller does make it a pig. Now, not only are the stalls bad and the turning ability poor, but the roll rate sucks. Arrgh.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 02:55 PM
And how's about pitch during firing the guns as it's actually doing, esp. in turns - I'm in doubt that's accurate.

http://www.geocities.com/kimurakai/SIG/262_01011.jpg


"Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 04:19 PM
Why do some people download leaked BETAS? Wouldn't you rather wait for the final patch???

----------------------------------------

Cheers, computer_67

If you can't make it good, make it LOOK good. - Bill Gates, computer authority /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_hawkeye.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 04:22 PM
I was curious. I don't know much of the jug, How was its low alt. performance? I wonder if oleg modeled it with its low alt performance in mind?


http://www.compsoc.man.ac.uk/~wingman/pics/g50bis_2.jpg


<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 05:53 PM
It was fast down low, but not that fast. it was sloppy in handling, compared to above 15,ooo feet. My Dad says you got used to the mushy feel down low.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 06:03 PM
Okay, what about the oft mentioned statement that FB flight models fail above 7km or something? This is originally supposed to be a IL~2 ground attack sim, or so I heard.

The_Blue_Devil
07-22-2003, 06:47 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- Oleg, I haven't downloaded the beta. You didn't
- send it to me, so I'll wait for it like I'm supposed
- to. But many of those that have it say the P-47's
- poor roll rate has not been properly addressed.
-
- I posted roll charts and a chart comparing the FB
- P-47s to actual roll performance and the FB P-47
- roll rate was lacking at every speed. You have the
- correct roll figures for the P-47Ds.
-
- I respectfully request that you make sure this
- glaring error in FB is addressed properly in the
- patch.
-
-
-
- Regards,
-
- SkyChimp
-
Low speed roll is greatly improved Chimp..however high speed roll leaves a bit to the imagination. Overall the Jug is faster and more manuverable. The fifties are more concentrated as well. A good half second to 2 second hosing will down just about anything depending on distance to target..pretty much like real life. At high alt she is a rocket. Prop pitch settings have been fixed so she can cruise at 600+ Kph at low throttle.

<center>----------------------------------------------------------------------------</center>
<center>[b]"Pilots who liked to dogifght could do it their own way. I avoided it. I always attacked at full speed and I evaded a bounce in the same manner. When you were hit from above and behind, and your attacker held his fire until he was really close, you knew you were in with someone who had a great deal of experience.-Erich Hartmann"[b]</center>


<center> <img src=http://www.angelfire.lycos.com/art2/devilart/MySig.gif> </center>



Message Edited on 07/22/0305:52PM by The_Blue_Devil

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 06:51 PM
Slickun wrote:
- It was fast down low, but not that fast. it was
- sloppy in handling, compared to above 15,ooo feet.
- My Dad says you got used to the mushy feel down low.

Your Dad flew them?

Do you ever get him to play the sim, or any sims with P-47's?


Neal

ZG77_Nagual
07-22-2003, 06:58 PM
Just and fyi to the jug being a dog in all simms - in janes ww2f - stock fms - it was a monster. In competition it was the plane you flew if you wanted to win. It climbed like a rocket and turned quite well - I was able to out-turn mustangs pretty consistently.
Not to say it was accurate - just a simm where it ruled.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/p47janes.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 08:10 PM
S! All


The reason the roll rate is so very important is that is how real 47 Fighter Pilots manuevered the aircraft to be able to turn with a 109 or 190.

The "Lead Roll" or "Vector Roll" as it was known was a barrel roll in the opposite direction of the turn of a 109/190 and allowed a 47 to turn with a 109. All of the top 47 Aces utilized the 47's roll rate to accomplish this manuever.

In EAW our Squadron dominated quite well above 25k with the P47 and P51 in all models. Once you got the altitude advantage the 47 was quite the boom n zoomer and the engine was quite strong up high. I thought the flight model of the Jug in EAW was pretty dang accurate. I was able to utilize the "Vector Roll" in EAW.



Cheers, BigKahuna

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 08:27 PM
Sounds good blue devil /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 09:58 PM
computer_67 wrote:
- Why do some people download leaked BETAS? Wouldn't
- you rather wait for the final patch???
-


Yes I would, but look here http://oldsite.simhq.com/simhq3/sims/boards/bbs/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=98;t=002104 and notice the author, and title of the thread. Also read a few of the postings to find out what is being done with this info. Something good is coming from all this. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan/XP-39best.JPG


Death is just nature's way of telling you to watch your airspeed.

http://www.theinformationminister.com/press.php?ID=612345111

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 09:59 PM
I feel the p-47 is improved in the betas without question. However I think she could be faster. All the models in the game have a top speed at sea level of 430mph. This doesnt seem to hold true in the betas. And yes I do feel also that the roll rate should be a little better. And why does the 1943 model seem so much more agile then the 1944?

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 10:32 PM
I agree with you AaronGT.

I'm thinking that they were basically testing different things in each beta -- maybe beta-5 was for testing the P-47 FM changes, whereas 8 is mainly for testing the 190 FM along with the weapons and sound improvements. Almost certainly, the patch itself will be the end result of all that testing.

Keep in mind that one beta does not a patch make. I think a lot of people are making the mistake of confusing the betas with the complete official patch. It ain't so; remember that betas are very *unofficial*, and *incomplete*, with big flashing neon letters screaming "Use at your own risk." Just because the P-47 FM tweaks weren't in a particular beta, does not mean that they won't be in the finished patch.

I think that's the main reason why 1C didn't want the betas to be public; because they didn't want everyone to jump to the conclusion that something that was being testing in a particular beta was going to be in the patch, or that something that was left out of a particular beta would also be left out of the patch.

Eight more days and we find out for sure (eight... long... days...*shudder*)


AaronGT wrote:
- Maybe 5 and 8 are forks from a common base.
-
- I heard that there was a 9 (that hasn't been
- leaked).
-
- That may well meld back together the 5 and 8
- streams.
-
- We don't know, but if it has been fixed once, it
- will
- likely be fixed in FB 1.1.
-
-



"Soon-to-be-Ex-Wurgerwhiner: I had enough whine, now I'm ready for the cheese."

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 10:51 PM
Slickun wrote:
- It was fast down low, but not that fast. it was
- sloppy in handling, compared to above 15,ooo feet.
- My Dad says you got used to the mushy feel down low.

Mushy is how it feels in FB and WB3. I'll have to
do some playing around at altitude and see how it
feels compared to others at altitude. Online everything
seems to be at medium to low alts, so I am most used
to the response of aircraft in FB at lower alts.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 10:53 PM
The_Blue_Devil wrote:
- Overall the Jug is faster and more manuverable. The
- fifties are more concentrated as well. A good half
- second to 2 second hosing will down just about
- anything depending on distance to target..pretty
- much like real life.

I would hope that 4 20mm cannon are about 1.5 times
as effective, else we need a tweak in the 20mm cannon
damage model!

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 10:55 PM
BigKahuna_GS wrote:
- In EAW our Squadron dominated quite well above 25k
- with the P47 and P51 in all models. Once you got the
- altitude advantage the 47 was quite the boom n
- zoomer and the engine was quite strong up high. I
- thought the flight model of the Jug in EAW was
- pretty dang accurate. I was able to utilize the
- "Vector Roll" in EAW.

EAW isn't a bad sim at all. The large battles are fun.
I still fire it up from time to time.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 10:57 PM
VMF-214_HaVoK wrote:
- I feel the p-47 is improved in the betas without
- question. However I think she could be faster. All
- the models in the game have a top speed at sea level
- of 430mph. T

Since the top speeds at sea level were about 350mph, it
certainly doesn't need to be faster!

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 11:07 PM
rj-newbee wrote:
- I agree with you AaronGT.
-
- I'm thinking that they were basically testing
- different things in each beta

If you have several developers it makes development
faster (if the code is sufficiently modular to
support this way of working, and still be able to
merge the results at the end!) to hand specific
areas of responsibility to various subunits of the
development team. You can then develop and test
each beta patch in parallel, and make best use
of the development team. It makes even more sense
if the members of the development team have particular
expertise - so you could, say, get the developers
with graphics and audio skills to create a patch
addressing those areas whilst the ones with aeronautical
skills work on the FMs, etc. Otherwise each part of
the team would be falling over each other trying to
get a patch issued, and it would slow patch development.

In other words a leaked beta patch may not be much
use without the list of things changed in that patch
that the beta testers are supposed to be looking at.
Beta 8 might be beta 2 plus sound changes, whilst beta
5 is beta 2, plus some iterations of FM changes not
in 8, but made their way to some later beta that hasn't
been leaked.

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 11:11 PM
Yep, they probably use and improve several builds parellel to each other, to make work faster. When I was a betatester, I rememeber Oleg told they program several versions at the same time.

http://www.x-plane.org/users/isegrim/FB-desktopweb.jpg
'Only a dead Indianer is a good Indianer!'

Vezérünk a Bátorság, K*sérµnk a Szerencse!
(Courage leads, Luck escorts us! - Historical motto of the 101st Puma Fighter Regiment)

Flight tests and other aviation performance data: http://www.pbase.com/isegrim

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 11:15 PM
Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
-
- Yep, they probably use and improve several builds
- parellel to each other, to make work faster. When I
- was a betatester, I rememeber Oleg told they program
- several versions at the same time.


And if that is the case, that's fine. But it seems that the first beta should have included fixes for all problems then known, and each successive beta should be a tweak of the last.

I don't know if it works that way or not, but it would make sense if it did.

It's just disturbing that in beta 8 the roll rate is so far off after so much attention has been paid to it on these boards.





Regards,

SkyChimp

http://pages.prodigy.net/4parks/_uimages/SkyChimp.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-22-2003, 11:37 PM
And that's probably why they didn't want the betas leaked -- the average person isn't "in the loop" like the actual beta testers are, and wouldn't know which areas to pay attention to, and which ones to outright ignore. So a beta tester would know "We gutted the other flight models to keep filesize down, so only worry about the 190's in this beta." Where as we'd think, "Shmoly Hit! All the planes are dogs except for the 190. They've made the 190 Uber and everything else lame! It was the Wurgerwhiners! They blew it up! You maniacs! D*mn you! G*d D*mn you all to H*ll!!!" (Pretty cool Charleton Heston impersonation, huh?)


SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
--
-- Yep, they probably use and improve several builds
-- parellel to each other, to make work faster. When I
-- was a betatester, I rememeber Oleg told they program
-- several versions at the same time.
-
-
-
- And if that is the case, that's fine. But it seems
- that the first beta should have included fixes for
- all problems then known, and each successive beta
- should be a tweak of the last.
-
- I don't know if it works that way or not, but it
- would make sense if it did.
-
- It's just disturbing that in beta 8 the roll rate is
- so far off after so much attention has been paid to
- it on these boards.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Regards,
-
- SkyChimp
-
- <img
- src="http://pages.prodigy.net/4parks/_uimages/SkyC
- himp.jpg">
-
-



"Soon-to-be-Ex-Wurgerwhiner: I had enough whine, now I'm ready for the cheese."

ZG77_Nagual
07-23-2003, 12:46 AM
You forgot "D*&n stinking apes!!"

On the turn issue - I think the p47 feels like it doesn't turn well - but is actually not so very bad at all.

http://pws.chartermi.net/~cmorey/pics/p47janes.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 02:07 AM
Can't speak for any of the other versions, but in Beta 8 the Jug's roll has been improved somewhat but not nearly enough. It's still a big fat wallowing pig, with the crudest cockpit graphics of any plane in FB.

(Also it's got a new bug: when you fire the guns, the engine sound cuts out. Same with the MG-armed Hurricanes; apparently eight guns and up does something to the engine sound. But then the sound is buggy as hell anyway; I think that's the main thing they're trying to fix right now.)

If the P-47 in the official patch is anything like it is in Beta 8, Chimp, you're not going to be happy. Doesn't affect me, I don't fly the plane, but I know you're a big Jug fan.

(As distinguished from a big-jugs fan, which I admit myself to be.)

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 02:16 AM
- Why do some people download leaked BETAS? Wouldn't
- you rather wait for the final patch???
-


Of course not. That's like saying, "Wouldn't you rather wait till you're married to have sex?"

I'll tell you the main reason I downloaded it, though: I wanted to see if it fixed enough things that I could just go ahead and use it, and not bother with the final patch when it comes out.

(And it almost does. If it weren't for the buggy sound that cuts in and out, I'd be fine with it right now. Not that it's perfect, but the remaining flaws either are things they're obviously not going to change - the comic-book muzzle flashes, the porked trim, etc. - or that don't affect me as I use the sim. Or that I don't really mind all that much.)

I was hoping I could do that, because the final patch is almost certain to be packaged with a couple of airplanes that I don't want and that will take up a lot of room and make the download ridiculously fat.

But also I downloaded the leaked Beta 8 for the same reason I screwed around before I got married: to find out what it was like. Didn't you?

(Also for the same reason I screwed around AFTER I got married: because I enjoy getting away with things I'm not supposed to. Don't you?)

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 02:25 AM
- Just wondering, has the P-47 EVER been accurately
- portrayed in any sim? Every sim that I've flown the
- P-47 in it was a DOG.

Stock aircraft, I don't know. There is, however, a freeware add-on P-47 series for CFS-2 and FS2K2, made by a guy named Kristof Malinowsky (sp.?), which is superb; and the razorback model is considerably superior in just about every way to that abortion in FB. And its flight model is made according to the 1% system, which is supposed to be extremely accurate.

Of course in CFS-2 you're up against the limitations of the sim, which are pretty bad in some respects. It flies better in FS2K2 but only if you just want to fly around, and I never have understood why anybody would want to do that with a fighter plane. (I spend a lot of time flying FS2K2 with everything from Airbuses to Stearmans to the Goodyear blimp, but when I want to fly fighters I do it in a combat sim.)

But the Malinowsky Jug is easily the best I've tried in any of the flight sims I've used - in visual appearance, in cockpit views (it's one of the very few CFS-2 planes with a really good virtual cockpit) and in flight characteristics - and if I were Maddox I would be ashamed that a freeware developer could do a better job than my professional team.

There's a P-47 in CFS-3 but I haven't got that yet so I don't know anything about it. I was gonna buy it but then they announced FS2K4....

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 02:43 AM
As bad as CFS3 was, they got the FM for the Jug a lot closer then in FB. Sorry.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://pages.prodigy.net/4parks/_uimages/SkyChimp.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 03:18 AM
Chimpster did you D/L my track of the beta 08 P-47 rolling at max stick deflection yet?
Chris


http://members.cox.net/miataman1/wurger.bmp

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 03:22 AM
chris455 wrote:
- Chimpster did you D/L my track of the beta 08 P-47
- rolling at max stick deflection yet?
- Chris
-
-
http://members.cox.net/miataman1/wurger.bmp
-
-
-

No, I must have missed it. What's the link?

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://pages.prodigy.net/4parks/_uimages/SkyChimp.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 03:38 AM
chris455 wrote:
- Chimpster did you D/L my track of the beta 08 P-47
- rolling at max stick deflection yet?
- Chris
-

At what speed where you rolling? I haven't been able to download and view the track yet, myself, so I don't know.

The thing is, the P-47's max roll rate is already very close to the real aircraft's max roll rate of about 360 every five seconds at 250mph IAS/400kph IAS. The problem is that the aircraft's roll rate drops off to quickly with speed. Once one is up to 400 mph IAS/600kph IAS the aircraft takes around 11-12 seconds to complete a roll. To my understanding of the charts posted, it could still manage around a six second complete roll at that speed.

So, a 4 second roll at 250 mph IAS is nothing new, what we want to know is the roll time at 400 mph IAS.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 03:48 AM
You're right Harry, the low speed roll rate was pretty close. It just dropped off too fast.

At 375mph, it rolled (in real life) at 72 degrees per second, or a 5 second roll. In FB, it rolls in 10 seconds at 375 mph. At 400 mph, it is -more than- 2x too slow.

It drops off that dramatically.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://pages.prodigy.net/4parks/_uimages/SkyChimp.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 04:22 AM
Blind_Joe_Death wrote:
- Of course not. That's like saying, "Wouldn't you
- rather wait till you're married to have sex?"

ROTFL!




TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 04:27 AM
Blind_Joe_Death wrote:
- Can't speak for any of the other versions, but in
- Beta 8 the Jug's roll has been improved somewhat but
- not nearly enough. It's still a big fat wallowing pig,

Agreed!

- with the crudest cockpit graphics of any plane
- in FB.

You think? God, I thought it was pretty good? Granded the razor back version with that solid bar down the middle is a little too much.. but other than that I thought it was pretty good... what part dont you like?

- (Also it's got a new bug: when you fire the guns,
- the engine sound cuts out. Same with the MG-armed
- Hurricanes; apparently eight guns and up does
- something to the engine sound. But then the sound
- is buggy as hell anyway; I think that's the main
- thing they're trying to fix right now.)

Sad but true.. The new sounds are still very messed up, I hope they fix that before the realise.. but in light of the sounds being messed up from day one of IL2 I dont hold out much hope! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

- If the P-47 in the official patch is anything like
- it is in Beta 8, Chimp, you're not going to be
- happy. Doesn't affect me, I don't fly the plane,
- but I know you're a big Jug fan.

Good thing is.. even with the roll rate being F up at high speed.. it still rolls better than a 109 at that speed, but not the Fw190.. Which I thought I read somewhere it was as good if not better than at high speeds

- (As distinguished from a big-jugs fan, which I admit
- myself to be.)

LOL!


TAGERT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 06:39 AM
Here is the track, speedbar shows speed and altitude.
Also (Harry are you here?) the "one hit I quit" P-47 engine bug is still in Beta 8.

http://members.cox.net/miataman1/p47roll.trk



http://members.cox.net/miataman1/wurger.bmp

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 09:18 AM
SkyChimp wrote:
-
- Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
--
-- Yep, they probably use and improve several builds
-- parellel to each other, to make work faster. When I
-- was a betatester, I rememeber Oleg told they program
-- several versions at the same time.
-
-
-
- And if that is the case, that's fine. But it seems
- that the first beta should have included fixes for
- all problems then known, and each successive beta
- should be a tweak of the last.

If you can address some problems quickly, and get
a beta out to testers quickly, then it makes sense
to do that, as you can then beta test some things
in parallel with the development of others. Without
a detailed roadmap of how the betas have been created,
we can only speculate. It seems that the roll rates
are incorrect in beta 8, but correct, some say, in
beta 5, so I suspect we are going to have to wait until
the official release next week to know if all the
code streams have been successfully merged. At least
Oleg is well aware of the issue, and if beta 5 is as
reported, it should be fixed.

- It's just disturbing that in beta 8 the roll rate is
- so far off after so much attention has been paid to
- it on these boards.

Like I said - I suspect that at some point before
beta 5, code was forked off to produce betas addressing
other issues, forming the basis of beta 8, and in beta
8 we probably have a pre-P47 fix flight model. Given
that it is apparently correct in beta 5 seems to suggest
it has been addressed, and hopefully should be in the
final release.

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 09:23 AM
Blind_Joe_Death wrote:
- (Also it's got a new bug: when you fire the guns,
- the engine sound cuts out.

That suggests you don't have enough channels set
up for sound (or the guns are using up too many
channels). I get better frame rates if I set
the number of sound channels to 8, for example,
but any firing of any gun on any plane then
cuts off the engine sound.

- Same with the MG-armed
- Hurricanes; apparently eight guns and up does
- something to the engine sound.

The default is 16 channels of sound, I think.
8 channels of gun sounds would eat that up (there
are also probably channels dedicated to other sounds).
I think the maximum number of channels is 32 - try
setting the number of sound channels to 32 and see
if that makes a difference?

The issue with sound I have (FB 1.0) is that it tends
to get distorted easily, but this is mostly through
the left channel, so it makes me wonder if my sound
card is working properly. (Eventually I'll get round
to testing with my USB audio - it's just a pain that
I have to set it up to use the USB Audio in windows,
not in FB). Other games don't suffer the distortion,
though. It seems to be ameloriated somewhat by lowering
the in game volume settings, but not totally eliminated.
Mind you, in SDOE, when I fire the guns for the first
time the game locks up for a couple of seconds!

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 09:25 AM
ZG77_Nagual wrote:
- On the turn issue - I think the p47 feels like it
- doesn't turn well - but is actually not so very bad
- at all.

I've said before that it seems to be ok if you
let it 'turn itself' rather than trying to force
it round. It comes round fairly smoothly and not
_that_ slowly then. Certainly it's not a Hurricane,
but it is not totally embarassing either. It seems
that forcing it round tends to (In FB 1.0 at least)
bleed a lot of E, risk stalls, and not actually
make the turn much tighter. I haven't tried flaps,
come to think of it, though.

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 10:45 AM
The Jug is big and heavy, and nobody can change that, so I don't know why some are always complaining about the fact it behaves as a big and heavy aircraft.

If this continues, we'll finally get a P-47 flying like a Yak-3.

The P-47 is fast, though, and well armed, and it has the defects of its qualities, that's all.

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 12:08 PM
exactly, it wasnt what uld call a nimble plane a 109 should have no problem outturning it, a 190 can stil roll and turn and climb faster and hold greater firepower, etc. The p47 in FB tho might be a bit undermoddled in sum spots a increase in roll isnt going to make a terribly big difference.

http://lamppost.mine.nu/ahclan/files/sigs/spitwhiners1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 07:08 PM
What SOME people MAY be missing is the fact that in the vertical, an aircraft "turns" by rolling i.e., placing it's lift vector on the enemy and pulling. Hard.
Rollrate to E fighters is just as important as turnrate to an angles fighter.
I have ALWAYS said (and many have disagreed) that the P-47 was very good pre-patch. (Beta08)
I am saying now that, in my opinion, it is SLIGHTY worse, but still pretty good.
I was looking forward to a better damage model (no 1 round 7,9mm engine knockout) and a slightly better rollrate. Beta08 has neither. Maybe final release will.
We'll see.

S!
Chris

PS- I'm sensing that some folks, having flown the pre-patch jug rarely or never because of the bad things some had to say about it, are trying the beta P-47 for the first (or second, or third) time, and saying "Gee, this thing's pretty good! What all the fuss about?"
They have no basis for comparison.Beta 08 jug is somewhat the worse than the FB release version. Not alot. Somewhat.


http://members.cox.net/miataman1/wurger.bmp

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 07:23 PM
No, Aaron, it doesn't have anything to do with number of channels or any of that. All sorts of people have tested this with any possible sound setup you could name - trust me, I ran my own through all the available configurations, searching for a fix - and it does the same thing no matter what. It's just a bug.

It's probably related to the larger issue of sound cutting out under various circumstances - sometimes just the engine sound, sometimes the whole sound level drops by more than half. It seems to be a compression problem: too much sudden input overloads the sound system. (Flak bursts for example will cause major sound fading for a minute or so until the system catches up.)

This is a design problem and shouldn't be all that difficult to fix. Although you never know with these guys; from the day Il-2 was released, every time they've tried to fix the sound it's gotten worse...but I think this particular bug should be fixable. Word is they're working on it, anyway.

Actually it's not as noticeable with the Jug, since those eight fifties make so much racket they nearly drown out the engine anyway. It's the Hurricane that's really unnerving: sudden silence except for the gentle crackle of eight little old .303s.

On the other hand the Hurricane doesn't roll like a fat old lady turning over in bed.

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 07:30 PM
What's wrong with the graphics? Christ, man, just LOOK at that gunsight! (You can't really help looking at it, can you? It's right in your face.) All corners, not even rounded. Not even textured, either. I've seen better workmanship in WarBurdz for God's sake.

I thought at first they'd accidentally put in an image from an unfinished model - that's how it looks, unfinished - and I figured they'd correct this in the patch, but (in the immortal words of a great Albanian-American) NOOOOOO....

The bar down the middle, however, is historically correct. The razorback really DID have wretched visibility. It just wasn't as big a problem for real pilots because (unlike us in FB*) they could move their heads to look past the big canopy frame members.

-----------------------------------------------------
*Though not unlike pilots in FS2K2, Aces High, and, I understand, Jane's....

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 07:36 PM
Vo101_Isegrim wrote:
-
- Yep, they probably use and improve several builds
- parellel to each other, to make work faster. When I
- was a betatester, I rememeber Oleg told they program
- several versions at the same time.


I`ve figured that out by myself.Am I the only genius here?


"degustibus non disputandum"

<center>http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sig23d.jpg

<center>"Weder Tod noch Teufel!"</font>[/B]</center> (http://www.jzg23.de>[B]<font)

Message Edited on 07/23/0308:38PM by carguy_

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 08:21 PM
Hey, Aaron, THANKS, man!

I said I'd tried all the possible combinations of settings, but something you said made me think of something - I better not go into the details, they don't like us to talk too much about the leaked patches in here, but let's just say you gave me an idea and I tried it and it worked.

The engine sound still drops when you fire the guns, but it doesn't cut out entirely as it did before; the effect really isn't very noticeable unless you're listening for it. Nothing that would detract from the enjoyment of flying the Hurricane or the P-47 unless somebody's really fussy.

That still leaves the main problem - the sound dropping drastically under certain circumstances - but that usually comes back up after a minute or less, and then stays up for the rest of the mission. It's still a major issue that needs to be addressed, but it's not the end of the world.

So I owe you on this one, Aaron. Thanks to your remarks, I'm OK with the Beta 8 patched version of FB - there's nothing left that I can't live with, and the overall improvements are so great that I don't really mind. And what the hell, the sound has been wonky ever since the first Il-2 patch, I'm used to it.

And as for the P-47, I don't have any interest in flying it in FB anyway; I just got curious because Chimp and the others have been talking about it so much.

(In fact I may not even bother with the final patch, if they hang on a couple of doofus airplanes that I don't want. I'm going to have to think about it anyway.)

Thanks again!

XyZspineZyX
07-24-2003, 10:28 AM
Blind_Joe_Death wrote:
- Hey, Aaron, THANKS, man!

Your welcome. It just occured to me that it might
be a sound channel issue as I'd tried to trim down
the number of channels to improve sound card performance,
and had to decide if I could cope with the engine sounds
cutting out when firing for the few extra FPS. (In the
end it proved too distracting).

- I said I'd tried all the possible combinations of
- settings, but something you said made me think of
- something - I better not go into the details, they
- don't like us to talk too much about the leaked
- patches in here, but let's just say you gave me an
- idea and I tried it and it worked.

PM me - I'd be curious to know what you tried in
terms of the tweaks.

What I suspect FB does is assign each gun to a channel,
and has several channels of sound for the engine. If
means that if you lose a gun through a jam it is easy
to modify the sounds. Equally you can create complex,
beating engine sounds by overlapping several sound
channels with different repeat rates (based on RPM etc).
It must make writing the sound systems a LOT easier. But
maybe there are just too many channels to handle all
the guns, engine sounds, etc., all at the same time?

The only solution I can think of would be to have
a single channel for pairs of guns that are close
together, with one sound for both being active, and
another when just one is firing. It would halve the
number of channels required for the guns on some
aircraft, but at the expense of rather more complexity
in the coding (and more chance of bugs that goes with
increased complexity).

Or maybe we all need to upgrade our sound cards so that
they work quickly with 32 or 64 channels of sound! :-)

The problem I have is with distortion - but I need to
go through the options to work out if it is FB, my
sound card (sound blaster live value), or my speakers
(Edirol MA10) or a combination thereof.

- So I owe you on this one, Aaron.

I do what I can to help when I am not on some rudeness
kick, which is fairly rare I hope. I am too much of a
smartass for my own good at times, though :-(

XyZspineZyX
07-24-2003, 08:36 PM
S!

FlightVector gave a good description of the "Vector Roll" :

fjuff79 wrote:
- yes please show us what u mean with the Vector roll

>>>>If the enemy breaks left, you start a barrel roll to the right, and as you complete a half roll and turn left as you come out the bottom of the barrel, you exit the barrel roll maintaining this left turn, thus placing you behind the enemy with a much smaller deflection angle.<<<<<<<

A track now wouldnt do the "Vector Roll" justice with such a slow roll rate the 47 has currently.

_____________________________


I thought you might want to read this excerpt from Military History Magazine interview of Robert S. Johnson (P47 driver) on aircraft types vs aircraft ruggedness :


MH: Pilots generally swear by their aircraft. Günther Rall and Erich Hartmann praised the Messerschmitt Bf-109, Erich Rudorffer and Johannes Steinhoff the Me-262, and Buddy Haydon the P-51 Mustang. I have to say after seeing all of the old photos of the various Thunderbolts and others that were shot up, I can't imagine any other plane absorbing that much damage and still flying. What is your opinion of your aircraft?

Johnson: This is very similar to the German debate. As far as the 109, all of the German pilots loved that plane, but the FW-190 was harder to shoot down. Just like the controversy over the P-51 and P-47. The P-47 was faster; it just did not have the climb and range the Mustang did. But it had speed, roll, dive and the necessary ruggedness that allowed it to do such a great job in the Ninth Air Force. As far as aerial kills go, we met and beat the best the Luftwaffe had when we first got there. It was the P-47 groups that pushed them back, as I said before. The P-51s had the advantage of longer range, and they were able to hit even the training schools, hitting boys just learning to fly. As the war dragged on, many of the old German veterans had been killed--so much of the experience was gone. As far as the 109 versus 190 argument, the 109 had the liquid-cooled engine whereas the 190 had an air-cooled radial engine, much like ours. One hit in the cooling system of a Messerschmitt and he was going down. Also, none of the German fighters were as rugged as a P-47. When I was badly shot up on June 26, 1943, I had twenty-one 20mm cannon shells in that airplane, and more than 200 7.92mm machine-gun bullets. One nicked my nose and another entered my right leg, where the bullet split in half. I still have those two little pieces, by the way; they went in just under the skin. I had been hurt worse playing football and boxing. However, I had never been that scared, I'll tell you that. I was always scared--that was what made me move quick. "Hub" Zemke liked the P-51 because it had great range, but he put one in a dive and when he pulled out he ripped the wings off that airplane--that was how he became a POW. Adolf Galland, who was a very good friend of mine and who I had known since 1949, flew the Me-262 and loved it, but he still swore by the 109, although it was still easier to shoot down.

When his combat tours were finished, Johnson returned Stateside, to a hero's welcome.

XyZspineZyX
07-24-2003, 11:09 PM
chris455 wrote:
- What SOME people MAY be missing is the fact that in
- the vertical, an aircraft "turns" by rolling i.e.,
- placing it's lift vector on the enemy and pulling.
- Hard.
- Rollrate to E fighters is just as important as
- turnrate to an angles fighter.

Dead on, Chris! I was just about to jump in and say the same thing. Amazing how many people underestimate rollrate, must be because the majority are turn&burn dweebs http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. But even then they should be able to note that a high rollrate comes in handy during a scissor maneuver.



- PS- I'm sensing that some folks, having flown the
- pre-patch jug rarely or never because of the bad
- things some had to say about it, are trying the beta
- P-47 for the first (or second, or third) time, and
- saying "Gee, this thing's pretty good! What all the
- fuss about?"
- They have no basis for comparison.Beta 08 jug is
- somewhat the worse than the FB release version. Not
- alot. Somewhat.
-

That's correct, too, imho. I flew the P-47 approx 50% of the time after FB was out (the other 50% went into the P40), and all I can say is I see no improvement whatsoever in the Jug.

Regards
heartc




Message Edited on 07/24/0310:11PM by Heart_C

The_Blue_Devil
07-25-2003, 12:33 AM
Blind_Joe_Death wrote:
- Can't speak for any of the other versions, but in
- Beta 8 the Jug's roll has been improved somewhat but
- not nearly enough. It's still a big fat wallowing
- pig, with the crudest cockpit graphics of any plane
- in FB.
-
- (Also it's got a new bug: when you fire the guns,
- the engine sound cuts out. Same with the MG-armed
- Hurricanes; apparently eight guns and up does
- something to the engine sound. But then the sound
- is buggy as hell anyway; I think that's the main
- thing they're trying to fix right now.)
-
- If the P-47 in the official patch is anything like
- it is in Beta 8, Chimp, you're not going to be
- happy. Doesn't affect me, I don't fly the plane,
- but I know you're a big Jug fan.
-
- (As distinguished from a big-jugs fan, which I admit
- myself to be.)

You've been flying your Jug on the Deck? I have had no problems with her above 15,000ft. She out turns LW planes..much like it did in real life and I often have to slow down to engage folks..It keeps energy almost too well. Any Jug fanatic will know that the Jugs roll rate is almost accurate..I agree that it needs a bit more..but hell you make it seem like the Jug is a slow lumbering beast and not the Eight Ton Ballerina that she is.


<center>----------------------------------------------------------------------------</center>
<center>[b]"Pilots who liked to dogifght could do it their own way. I avoided it. I always attacked at full speed and I evaded a bounce in the same manner. When you were hit from above and behind, and your attacker held his fire until he was really close, you knew you were in with someone who had a great deal of experience.-Erich Hartmann"[b]</center>


<center> <img src=http://www.angelfire.lycos.com/art2/devilart/MySig.gif> </center>

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 01:34 AM
You may be right, but it's pretty moot since there's no way to keep the action up around 15K, because the damn AIs always take it down to the deck. Unless you want to circle around high above the fight and admire it at a distance.

This is the one and only respect in which CFS-2's AIs - who otherwise are abominable - are an improvement over those in Il-2/FB. You can set up an engagement at a given altitude and they'll stay up there and fight you there without compulsively heading for the deck. I wish the ones in FB would do it too but that's one thing that hasn't changed.

Of course historically they've got a point, because most of the action on the Ostfront did take place at low altitudes - mainly because of the VVS's orientation toward ground support - and that's one reason the VVS wasn't impressed by the P-47. The same thing crippled the MiG-3, another excellent high-altitude plane that never got used as intended.

But whatever arguments could be made over the AIs' behavior, the fact remains that while you may be right about the Jug performing better at higher altitude, there's no way to use it in that manner in FB that I've ever found.

(Unless you're talking about that online business? I don't do that. Most people don't, you know.)

The_Blue_Devil
07-25-2003, 02:11 AM
Blind_Joe_Death wrote:
- You may be right, but it's pretty moot since there's
- no way to keep the action up around 15K, because the
- damn AIs always take it down to the deck. Unless
- you want to circle around high above the fight and
- admire it at a distance.
-
- This is the one and only respect in which CFS-2's
- AIs - who otherwise are abominable - are an
- improvement over those in Il-2/FB. You can set up
- an engagement at a given altitude and they'll stay
- up there and fight you there without compulsively
- heading for the deck. I wish the ones in FB would
- do it too but that's one thing that hasn't changed.
-
- Of course historically they've got a point, because
- most of the action on the Ostfront did take place at
- low altitudes - mainly because of the VVS's
- orientation toward ground support - and that's one
- reason the VVS wasn't impressed by the P-47. The
- same thing crippled the MiG-3, another excellent
- high-altitude plane that never got used as intended.
-
-
-
- But whatever arguments could be made over the AIs'
- behavior, the fact remains that while you may be
- right about the Jug performing better at higher
- altitude, there's no way to use it in that manner in
- FB that I've ever found.
-
- (Unless you're talking about that online business?
- I don't do that. Most people don't, you know.)
-
-
You have no valid point here. My squad uses the Jug in Dogfight servers all the time. Circle your enemy and bounce him as he climbs up. It is not exactly hard to do. The problem is most folks try to TnB with the Jug on the deck..It is a HIGH ALTITUDE Pursuit Plane.. not a low to medium altitude Dogfighter. When used in it's element it kicks intense butt.




<center>----------------------------------------------------------------------------</center>
<center>[b]"Pilots who liked to dogifght could do it their own way. I avoided it. I always attacked at full speed and I evaded a bounce in the same manner. When you were hit from above and behind, and your attacker held his fire until he was really close, you knew you were in with someone who had a great deal of experience.-Erich Hartmann"[b]</center>


<center> <img src=http://www.angelfire.lycos.com/art2/devilart/MySig.gif> </center>

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 02:51 AM
chris455 wrote:
-
- Here is the track, speedbar shows speed and
- altitude.
- Also (Harry are you here?) the "one hit I quit" P-47
- engine bug is still in Beta 8.
-
- http://members.cox.net/miataman1/p47roll.trk
-
-

You saved it as a .trk Without the correct beta patch, I can't view that .trk

Could you resave that as a .ntrk?

I was kind of expecting the 1 hit quit, and other damage model problems to remain with the P-47 after the patch. I strongly belive that most of them are caused by limitations of the Il-2 damage engine itself, rather than developer oversights, and that they cannot be corrected, unless the developers are willing to do a signifigant overhaul of the code.

I doubt they are willing to make that sort of effort just for one plane, though.

I've posted the laundry list elseware, but if people are interested I can post it again. It's probably time for me to make up a file of them. Maybe one of these days I'll get them to the attention of a dev. When pigs fly and people stop fighting over 1.5 degrees of visibility of another aircraft.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 05:24 AM
Do I need to make another track or can I rename my existing one?


http://members.cox.net/miataman1/wurger.bmp

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 06:24 AM
Sorry Harry that was dumb of me /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
I'll make another track and post it


http://members.cox.net/miataman1/wurger.bmp

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 09:11 PM
You don't have to completely remake the track. You can record .ntrk's off of exsisting .trk files. Just run the .trk, and when you get to the point you want, start .ntrk recording.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
07-26-2003, 01:34 AM
i always thought the jug could turn with any plane over 20,000 ft and over 25,000 ft it could outturn any plane. is this not correct? its modelled that way in several previous sims that i own too. people are saying the jug is big and heavy and cant turn with the light planes. but this is incorrect. isnt it ?

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of the 11 time Champions Team AFJ. 6 Years Flying http://www.world-data-systems.com/aerofiles/albums/userpics/p47-22.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-26-2003, 01:56 AM
Does it matter Red? Who is up there to fight?

Da Buzz
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<center>
The Plane That Really Won The War

<center>
http://www.aviapress.com/engl/est/est72216_1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 08:14 AM
The flight engine doesn't handle extremely high altitude flight very well, and 7500m is pretty high up for it.

Harry Voyager

http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDLAswcqmIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKM6!o3fu!kBnWVh BgMt3q2T3BUQ8yjBBqECLxFaqXVV5U2kWiSIlq1s6VoaVvRqBy Q/Avatar%202%20500x500%20[final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 08:53 AM
Red, above 25,000feet, the lack of air inevitably turns all planes to pigs. When at 25k, you'd need about two~three times the speed you need at 5k to actually complete one loop. The turn radius becomes huge, for all planes, and the P-47 is not an exception.

However, in the tactical sense, it is fair to say that there is some inkling of truth in what you mention - although the P-47 would not necessarily 'out-turn' something in a sustained turn fight at that altitudes, at least not in the way you seem to be thinking.. but the very fact that the altitude is so high makes it essential for all planes fighting up there, to be very fast.

Since high speeds apply an absolute limit on every human pilot in the form of high +G blackouts, regardless of the turn performance of the plane, a high alt fight would inevitably limit the limit turn performances of some plane types. The faster the planes fly, the lower the relative difference in turn ability.

Also, the power output of the P-47 retains very good levels, which would no doubt benefit the plane by giving a smaller degradation margin in the turn performance, as compared to other planes, which would suffer as their max output drops by hundreds of HP.

In that sense, the high alt fights are very different from the belly-scratching fights down at tree-top - planes use huge amounts of area in maneuvering, the whole area where a fight occurs, becomes very much larger, planes catch speed at a tremendous level even with small dives, the controls begin to lock up quicker than usual, and the closure, and extension speeds are much higher.



-----------
Due to pressure from the moderators, the sig returns to..

"It's the machine, not the man." - Materialist, and proud of it!

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 10:24 AM
kweassa wrote:
-
- Red, above 25,000feet, the lack of air inevitably
- turns all planes to pigs. When at 25k, you'd need
- about two~three times the speed you need at 5k to
- actually complete one loop. The turn radius becomes
- huge, for all planes, and the P-47 is not an
- exception.
-

High altitude is an examplar of the adage "In the
Kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is king". I.e.
when all planes are like dogs, the least canine dominates.

XyZspineZyX
07-28-2003, 05:23 PM
good news for Jug-whiners:

in beta 0.8 the JUG with bombracks can outclimb 109G6 early and late ; 190A4 and LA5FN above 2700m in a low degree climbing angle with ca 360IAS .

http://mitglied.lycos.de/kubanskiloewe/ubootsig.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 08:25 AM
EmbarkChief wrote:

"Just wondering, has the P-47 EVER been accurately portrayed in any sim? Every sim that I've flown the P-47 in it was a DOG."

Aces High portrays the P-47D-11, D-25 and the D-30. All three have largely simular charcteristics, but subtle differences.

There were simular debates on the performance of the P-47, but generally, people, including the dedicated P-47 pilots, are content with it(except from time to time they keep on whining about how they want a P-47M /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif )

Basically, it's got it all - bad sustained turns, uninspiring climb rates for the cons.... good roll at all speeds, deadly firepower, tough durability, exceptional in high speed instantaneous turns, ablility to use combat flaps upto high speeds, fast speed, excellent control authority at high speeds, excellent high alt performance, excellent zoom characteristics, and that wonderful power dives for the pros - ain't no 109 or 190 catches the P-47 in Aces High.

Aaron mentioned the planes feel the same, but he might have been using the combat-trim feature. Without combat trim, the planes, are largely different in feel. For instance, the Hawker Typhoon IB in AH, is a totally different plane when you fly it without any auto-trim feature.. it's a beast to handle. Likewise, the F4U-1 Corsair flies like a kitten with the combat-trim.. take it off, and the torque forces are really powerful to handle. God knows how many Corsairs I've ruined on landings when I started playing it.

All in all, if anyone tries the P-47s, or see how the talented use them in AH, I think they'll feel pretty content about the P-47 portrayed there.





-----------
Due to pressure from the moderators, the sig returns to..

"It's the machine, not the man." - Materialist, and proud of it!

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 08:31 AM
Oh.. and just for a fun comparison, here are the roll-rate comparison tools for AH planes. The minor differences in figures between variants(ie. Fw190A-5 and the A-8, or the P-47D-11 and the D-25 and etc..) have been 'rounded out' into an average number.

It's not an official data HTC released, only a player contributed tool, but the testing process is considered pretty much accurate represantation of plane performance in AH.

Notice the P-47 in AH does about 80dps at 400mph TAS.. little more than 4 seconds to complete a 360 roll. Not bad, huh?

http://kingcat.hihome.com/rollrate.html


ps) oh, these roll figures are low alt testing at 75% fuel.

ps2) Yeah, about 6 seconds for a 360 at 400IAS, just like you want it, Harry.

-----------
Due to pressure from the moderators, the sig returns to..

"It's the machine, not the man." - Materialist, and proud of it!

Message Edited on 07/29/0304:38PM by kweassa

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 03:50 PM
kweassa wrote:
- Aaron mentioned the planes feel the same, but he
- might have been using the combat-trim feature.

True, I was. Maybe I should turn that off and reasses.
Thanks for the pointer to that. I think I turned it
on years ago in AH before I'd got the hang of trimming
and I've probably left it on ever since!

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:05 PM
Blind_Joe_Death wrote:
- Can't speak for any of the other versions, but in
- Beta 8 the Jug's roll has been improved somewhat but
- not nearly enough. It's still a big fat wallowing
- pig, with the crudest cockpit graphics of any plane
- in FB. http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wwii/books/cockpit/TN_Republic%20P-47D%20Thunderbolt.JPG I dunno BJD..........
-
- (Also it's got a new bug: when you fire the guns,
- the engine sound cuts out. Same with the MG-armed
- Hurricanes; apparently eight guns and up does
- something to the engine sound. But then the sound
- is buggy as hell anyway; I think that's the main
- thing they're trying to fix right now.)

I think you may be able to change the settings in your sound setup.... I did that and it helped.
-
- If the P-47 in the official patch is anything like
- it is in Beta 8, Chimp, you're not going to be
- happy. Doesn't affect me, I don't fly the plane,
- but I know you're a big Jug fan.

It is definitely better....dives very well, climbs much better..the roll rate is still a little slow but it is adequate..and PDG compared to what it was...
-
- (As distinguished from a big-jugs fan, which I admit
- myself to be.)

Hey...I'm a big jugs fan too!! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

Message Edited on 07/29/0311:06AM by Bearcat99

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 04:14 PM
KIMURA wrote:
- And how's about pitch during firing the guns as it's
- actually doing, esp. in turns - I'm in doubt that's
- accurate.
-
<img
- src="http://www.geocities.com/kimurakai/SIG/262_01
- 011.jpg">
-
-
- "Kimura, tu as une tªte carrée comme un sale boche!"

Yes how can a 7 ton fighter shake so bad from 8 MG? I have seen gun camera films from 47's and they show the firing to be pretty steady on at the target.
-

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 07:14 PM
Sniper762x57 wrote:-
Yes how can a 7 ton fighter shake so bad from 8 MG?


7 ton Fighter ?
Think with 7 tons´it belongs to the Bomberclass/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



http://mitglied.lycos.de/kubanskiloewe/ubootsig.jpg