PDA

View Full Version : La 7 leading edge slats



deskpilot
02-27-2009, 01:14 PM
I think I've finally found my favourite plane! I've been watching a track and trying to figure out exactly what triggers the activation of the leading edge slats. It's not that obviuos. It seems to be when I turn tight, but not all the time. Am I right that they are a lift device of some sort? One of you smart cookies is bound to know. Can you enlighten me?

TS_Sancho
02-27-2009, 01:33 PM
This is for the BF109 but its the same thing.
http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/...trol/slats/slats.htm (http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/techref/systems/control/slats/slats.htm)

Xiolablu3
02-27-2009, 02:38 PM
A good demonstration and explanation of the slats on a 109G....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...zYZo&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgvfklVzYZo&feature=related)

SKip to 8 minutes for the slats bit...

deskpilot
02-27-2009, 04:41 PM
thanks, guys that's interestng. had no idea the 109 had them too.

jamesblonde1979
02-27-2009, 05:53 PM
One thing that is missing from these leading edge slats is the *bang* they make when they pop out. I remember reading about the ones on the 109 doing so at least...

stalkervision
02-27-2009, 07:00 PM
ahhh slats..smats. the 109 drivers always bragging about those slats. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

JG52Karaya-X
02-28-2009, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by jamesblonde1979:
One thing that is missing from these leading edge slats is the *bang* they make when they pop out. I remember reading about the ones on the 109 doing so at least...

You mean hearing the slats pop out over the noise a 1000-2000hp engine slap in front of your nose is making?

ROXunreal
02-28-2009, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
A good demonstration and explanation of the slats on a 109G....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...zYZo&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgvfklVzYZo&feature=related)

SKip to 8 minutes for the slats bit...

god I had no idea the 109 cockpit is so small http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Xiolablu3
02-28-2009, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jamesblonde1979:
One thing that is missing from these leading edge slats is the *bang* they make when they pop out. I remember reading about the ones on the 109 doing so at least...

You mean hearing the slats pop out over the noise a 1000-2000hp engine slap in front of your nose is making? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You obviously didnt watch the video I posted of Reg Hallam describing how the slats work.

They are apparantly gentle and benign and there is no snatching even if they operate assemetrically, as long as they are operating properly. Watch the youtube video I posted.

JG52Karaya-X
02-28-2009, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
You mean hearing the slats pop out over the noise a 1000-2000hp engine slap in front of your nose is making?

You obviously didnt watch the video I posted of Reg Hallam describing how the slats work.

They are apparantly gentle and benign and there is no snatching even if they operate assemetrically, as long as they are operating properly. Watch the youtube video I posted. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did actually, all 5 of them some time ago, just rewatched that particular video and nowhere is he speaking about them coming out with any sort of audible sound. Just as you said he even describes them as being very benign and smooth in operation.

In case you failed to notice, my previous post was being rather sarcastic about what jamesblonde wrote (slats "popping out"), btw not trying to flame you there james http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Just wanted to point out that hearing a leading edge slat come out over your own engine is HIGHLY unlikely. If I heard a "pop" or "bang" while in flight my first concern would be to see if my aircraft is still in one piece!

I'm flying motor gliders of the likes of a Scheibe Falke SF25C and/or a Diamond Aircraft Dimona in my spare time and even these two with their Rotax engines of little over 100hp are so loud that I wouldnt hear anything moving on my aircraft

Mr_Zooly
02-28-2009, 02:26 PM
I'm pretty sure I remember reading about the slats (on the 109 at least) activating asymetrically and causing 'snatching' of the control column.
to quote Xiolablu3 "as long as they are operating properly" was maybe when the QC dept was on the ball which in wartime conditions might not have been all of the time maybe?

M_Gunz
02-28-2009, 07:30 PM
Not QC only, but field maintenance may have failed to keep dirt out and not have cleaned them.

The famous Ace who spoke with the Finns (name eludes me at the moment) told of slats deploying and going back as "psssshht".
He was #2 after Hartmann IIRC.

Buzzsaw-
02-28-2009, 07:35 PM
Salute

The slats as modelled in the game are one of the more inaccurate technical details.

For either the 109 series or La-5/7/LaGG's, the slats do not deploy at the historical speeds.

Which is one of the reasons we see such interesting low speed behaviours from these aircraft and the reason why we do not see historical turn performance.

na85
03-01-2009, 01:24 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

The slats as modelled in the game are one of the more inaccurate technical details.

For either the 109 series or La-5/7/LaGG's, the slats do not deploy at the historical speeds.

Which is one of the reasons we see such interesting low speed behaviours from these aircraft and the reason why we do not see historical turn performance.

Ummm.

Leading-edge slats are designed to prevent flow separation at high angles of attack, so shouldn't the slats deploy at a particular AoA and not at a particular speed? You can get the same AoA at more than one speed.

Bremspropeller
03-01-2009, 05:46 AM
For either the 109 series or La-5/7/LaGG's, the slats do not deploy at the historical speeds.

Slats deploy primarily at AoA, not at speed, deleted. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Do not use such words.

JG52Karaya-X
03-01-2009, 06:59 AM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Which is one of the reasons we see such interesting low speed behaviours from these aircraft and the reason why we do not see historical turn performance.

You mean like almost every 109 being undermodelled in turning performance!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

The only 109 that has its turn time spot on is the G-2. The Fs take longer for a 360° turn at constant speed/alt than the G-2 when they should actually do it faster (~19 seconds). And dont even mention the G-6, that thing turns on default loadout as if it was carrying gunpods... takes 2 seconds more for a complete turn than what it should (23 vs 21 seconds).

So, yeah, you're right http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

HuninMunin
03-01-2009, 07:09 AM
Originally posted by Mr_Zooly:
I'm pretty sure I remember reading about the slats (on the 109 at least) activating asymetrically and causing 'snatching' of the control column.
to quote Xiolablu3 "as long as they are operating properly" was maybe when the QC dept was on the ball which in wartime conditions might not have been all of the time maybe?

The redesigned mechanism of the Friedrich fixed that problem.

@ Buzzsaw
Yeah sure slats got nothing to do with AoA and g-load. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
And anyway you are wrong.
Slats are not modelled individually ingame.
There are just Cl and Crit AoA and adjusted curves for the planes that use them.

Xiolablu3
03-01-2009, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
You mean hearing the slats pop out over the noise a 1000-2000hp engine slap in front of your nose is making?

You obviously didnt watch the video I posted of Reg Hallam describing how the slats work.

They are apparantly gentle and benign and there is no snatching even if they operate assemetrically, as long as they are operating properly. Watch the youtube video I posted. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did actually, all 5 of them some time ago, just rewatched that particular video and nowhere is he speaking about them coming out with any sort of audible sound. Just as you said he even describes them as being very benign and smooth in operation.

In case you failed to notice, my previous post was being rather sarcastic about what jamesblonde wrote (slats "popping out"), btw not trying to flame you there james http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Just wanted to point out that hearing a leading edge slat come out over your own engine is HIGHLY unlikely. If I heard a "pop" or "bang" while in flight my first concern would be to see if my aircraft is still in one piece!

I'm flying motor gliders of the likes of a Scheibe Falke SF25C and/or a Diamond Aircraft Dimona in my spare time and even these two with their Rotax engines of little over 100hp are so loud that I wouldnt hear anything moving on my aircraft </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Sorry I quoted the wrong person, I was talking to JamesBlonde who you replied to...

Xiolablu3
03-01-2009, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Not QC only, but field maintenance may have failed to keep dirt out and not have cleaned them.

The famous Ace who spoke with the Finns (name eludes me at the moment) told of slats deploying and going back as "psssshht".
He was #2 after Hartmann IIRC.

Gunther Rall?

M_Gunz
03-01-2009, 12:33 PM
That's him.

buddye1
03-01-2009, 12:50 PM
Interesting discussion on the Slats.

In BOBII, we modelled the slats based on AOA and A/C speed for the 109 and 110.

Our research showed that pilots reported hearing a loud bang when the slats deployed and hit the stops so we did model the sound.

ElAurens
03-01-2009, 02:27 PM
The reason the G2 turns so well is that it is several hundred kilos lighter than it should be.

Be sure.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

HuninMunin
03-01-2009, 02:31 PM
You is wrong, be sure.

Bremspropeller
03-01-2009, 02:55 PM
The reason the G-2 turns so well is that it's modelled correctly.
The other versions just turn too bad in-game.

ElAurens
03-01-2009, 03:22 PM
The in game G2 is on the order of 500 lbs underweight.

And I agree that the Fs are not correct in the turn, they should be the best flyers of all the 109s.

HuninMunin
03-01-2009, 03:27 PM
And still it barely reaches it's historical subtained turntimes.
It's climb is something else though, be sure.

ElAurens
03-01-2009, 03:35 PM
Table of 109 weights, in game vs. real...

G-2 - 2830 kg(game) - ~3100 (IRL)

F-2 - 2880 kg ( game) - ~2728 kg (IRL)

F-4 - 2900 kg ( game) - ~2890 kg (IRL)

From this (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=5732&page=7) thread at the banana forum.

jamesblonde1979
03-01-2009, 04:23 PM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jamesblonde1979:
One thing that is missing from these leading edge slats is the *bang* they make when they pop out. I remember reading about the ones on the 109 doing so at least...

You mean hearing the slats pop out over the noise a 1000-2000hp engine slap in front of your nose is making? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I mean exactly that. Look it up.

Dave Southwood, 109 pilot:
"One interesting feature is the leading edge slats. When these deploy at low speeds or in a turn, a 'clunk' can be heard and felt, but there is no disturbance to the aircraft about any axis. I understand that the Bf109E rolled violently as the slats deployed, and I am curious to know the difference to the Gustav that caused this."

JG52Karaya-X
03-01-2009, 04:55 PM
Yes the Bf109G2 is too light when compared to its real life counterpart by a few hundred kg but so what if it hits real life data?

The Soviets tested a captured G2 and found it to achieve a topspeed of 666km/h at altitude

The G2 does the same ingame

The Soviet also tested its turntime for a complete circle at constant speed and altitude and found it to be at around 20secs

The G2 does that ingame in around 20.6 seconds

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v639/Karaya/Bf109G2-4turnrate.jpg

Here's the soviet test which shows a gondola equipped G2, a clean fighter G2 as well as a clean fighter G4. Each plane has two turn times shown, one for a left hand turn, one for a right hand turn.

The 2nd, higher turn time for the clean G2 seems to be bugged as its considerably higher than the 1st and even higher than the turntime for the G4 in the same direction. The G4 is slightly heavier so the G2 turntime in this particular direction must be erronous.

From simple deduction one can guestimate that turntime for the G2 lies thus somewhere in the order of 20.0 - 20.5 seconds for a complete turn at constant speed/altitude.

Now lets see the ingame data

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v639/Karaya/capture_02032009_004123.jpg

Shows 20.6 seconds so actually higher than what Soviet tests suggest.

About time to climb I cant say much but I think its fair to say that its reasonably correct, especially in a relative sense as pretty much every fighter in IL-2 is overmodelled in climb

piper_
03-01-2009, 06:50 PM
~S~

For those interested in the use of leading edge slats.

I have the privilege to regularly fly a restored 40+ year old Helio S.T.O.L aircraft that has Handley Page leading edge slats, two on each wing…the same as on a 109 and Feiseler Storch. They (Helio) were used by CIA/Air America in Cambodia, Laos etc.
The model we fly was one of only a handful that escaped capture by the Khmer Rouge, and still has the glass fuselage blister, and the camera port installed on the floor for recon operations. Various models had hard points for bombs and rockets, some even had 20mm guns replacing the left hand door position…amazing aircraft.

They, (slats) deploy at critical angles of attack only, and reduce stall characteristics, regardless of airspeed, sometimes asymmetrically, sometimes in unison; in fact you cannot stall a Helio conventionally. When the a/c is on the ground, you can push in the slats in/out with a single finger. It doesn’t matter if they are in or out before for take off as they sort themselves out accordingly.

When slats are out, we can fly (with full flap) at only 26mph! Partly due to the fact that the wing has ‘aileron interceptors’ just behind the slats, they provide full aileron deflection roll rates at low speeds, something that ww2 a/c did not have.

Sometimes, and rarely do I hear a loud bang, although usually when I am concentrating on a short final approach, or obstacle clearance, they ‘jump out at me’ with a dull ‘whump’, which can produce a quick snap of the neck as I look out at the leading edge of the wing and watch them deploy…then I forget about them.

If you are genuinely interested in aviation, and Handley Page slats, watch this video to see what I am talking about, pay attention at 2:30 and 3:40 for a good look at them. Or you might catch us at Oshkosh. ?


Helio Link: http://video.google.com/videop...-8090875474584011710 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8090875474584011710)


Handley page link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slats


Air America link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_America_(airline)


Helio at Oshkosh: http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/C-FEFT.html

The Helio. http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l119/piper_frags/piper/Helio1.jpg
Regards: piper.

M_Gunz
03-01-2009, 07:39 PM
Gamd Data weights and various other attributes all results from tweaks done to Historical Data due to trying to match FM's to
historic charts as best possible given time and manpower available.

Consider that Home Desktop PC is not capable of running high fidelity modeling and combat environment in full actions in real
time at even slide-show framerates -- or anything approaching that environment.

So why not give the people who Made The Sim AT ALL at least some of the Credit and Slack they deserve? HUH?

To pick into the Game Data and at Every Little Difference between game and your favorite charts and come parading that up
again and again and again is nothing short of WHINING LIKE LITTLE KIDS.
Somebody call 9-1-1 for the WHAAAAMBULANCE!

VW-IceFire
03-01-2009, 08:35 PM
Originally posted by ElAurens:
Table of 109 weights, in game vs. real...

G-2 - 2830 kg(game) - ~3100 (IRL)

F-2 - 2880 kg ( game) - ~2728 kg (IRL)

F-4 - 2900 kg ( game) - ~2890 kg (IRL)

From this (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=5732&page=7) thread at the banana forum.
I think its fairly well known that the Bf109G-2 "weighs" much less than its real life counterpart. But that doesn't matter too much I don't think if the other performance attributes...the stuff that matters (i.e. turn, climb, dive, acceleration, etc.) works. I suspect the weight thing isn't a mistake or omission but a hack to make something in the FM work.

HellToupee
03-01-2009, 09:40 PM
it might hit some performance numbers but not the feel, as it is it still feels a much lighter plane than the f4, compare the turn charts the g2s turn curve is shifted to the left, when a heavier plane should be to the right.

Buzzsaw-
03-01-2009, 10:15 PM
Originally posted by na85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

The slats as modelled in the game are one of the more inaccurate technical details.

For either the 109 series or La-5/7/LaGG's, the slats do not deploy at the historical speeds.

Which is one of the reasons we see such interesting low speed behaviours from these aircraft and the reason why we do not see historical turn performance.

Ummm.

Leading-edge slats are designed to prevent flow separation at high angles of attack, so shouldn't the slats deploy at a particular AoA and not at a particular speed? You can get the same AoA at more than one speed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct they deploy at a certain angle of attack.

There are a number of historical tests out there available for anyone who wants to check them. They show the slats deploy at a certain speed when the aircraft is held in level flight.

For example:

G2:

Stalling Speeds

20. "Stalling speed is 102 m.p.h. indicated with wheels and flaps down, and 112 m.p.h. with wheels and flaps up. With wheels and flaps up, the aileron controls become noticeably lighter at about 140 m.p.h. when the slots open. There is a slight and quick vibration when just approaching the stall, and with wheels and flaps up or down there is no tendency to drop a wing, while aileron control remains throughout the stall. "

The Finnish MT-215 test also notes 225 kph as the speed the slats open in level flight.

Another re. G6:

f. Stalls and Stall Warning.

"Automatic Handly-Page type slots are provided on the outboard leading edges of the wing. They extend at about 240 kph indicated."

Anyone who is interested in testing will note the game's 109G2/6 slats do not open at these noted speeds.

Same applies for the La-5/7 slats. The tests which are available for these aircraft show different speeds for the opening in level flight when compared to the game's versions.

Buzzsaw-
03-01-2009, 10:24 PM
Originally posted by piper_:
~S~

For those interested in the use of leading edge slats.

I have the privilege to regularly fly a restored 40+ year old Helio S.T.O.L aircraft that has Handley Page leading edge slats, two on each wing…the same as on a 109 and Feiseler Storch. They (Helio) were used by CIA/Air America in Cambodia, Laos etc.
The model we fly was one of only a handful that escaped capture by the Khmer Rouge, and still has the glass fuselage blister, and the camera port installed on the floor for recon operations. Various models had hard points for bombs and rockets, some even had 20mm guns replacing the left hand door position…amazing aircraft.

They, (slats) deploy at critical angles of attack only, and reduce stall characteristics, regardless of airspeed, sometimes asymmetrically, sometimes in unison; in fact you cannot stall a Helio conventionally. When the a/c is on the ground, you can push in the slats in/out with a single finger. It doesn’t matter if they are in or out before for take off as they sort themselves out accordingly.

When slats are out, we can fly (with full flap) at only 26mph! Partly due to the fact that the wing has ‘aileron interceptors’ just behind the slats, they provide full aileron deflection roll rates at low speeds, something that ww2 a/c did not have.

Sometimes, and rarely do I hear a loud bang, although usually when I am concentrating on a short final approach, or obstacle clearance, they ‘jump out at me’ with a dull ‘whump’, which can produce a quick snap of the neck as I look out at the leading edge of the wing and watch them deploy…then I forget about them.

If you are genuinely interested in aviation, and Handley Page slats, watch this video to see what I am talking about, pay attention at 2:30 and 3:40 for a good look at them. Or you might catch us at Oshkosh. ?


Helio Link: http://video.google.com/videop...-8090875474584011710 (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8090875474584011710)


Handley page link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slats


Air America link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_America_(airline)


Helio at Oshkosh: http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/C-FEFT.html

The Helio. http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l119/piper_frags/piper/Helio1.jpg
Regards: piper.

These were the planes the CIA used to ship guns in to the anti-communist forces, and to ship heroin out to market. (that's how they paid for the guns)

One of the reasons why some 40% of the US troops in Vietnam in the '70's used heroin in country.

Very useful aircraft for landing in small jungle clearings.

stalkervision
03-01-2009, 10:48 PM
I want one right now! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

HuninMunin
03-01-2009, 11:52 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by na85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

The slats as modelled in the game are one of the more inaccurate technical details.

For either the 109 series or La-5/7/LaGG's, the slats do not deploy at the historical speeds.

Which is one of the reasons we see such interesting low speed behaviours from these aircraft and the reason why we do not see historical turn performance.

Ummm.

Leading-edge slats are designed to prevent flow separation at high angles of attack, so shouldn't the slats deploy at a particular AoA and not at a particular speed? You can get the same AoA at more than one speed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct they deploy at a certain angle of attack.

There are a number of historical tests out there available for anyone who wants to check them. They show the slats deploy at a certain speed when the aircraft is held in level flight.

For example:

G2:

Stalling Speeds

20. "Stalling speed is 102 m.p.h. indicated with wheels and flaps down, and 112 m.p.h. with wheels and flaps up. With wheels and flaps up, the aileron controls become noticeably lighter at about 140 m.p.h. when the slots open. There is a slight and quick vibration when just approaching the stall, and with wheels and flaps up or down there is no tendency to drop a wing, while aileron control remains throughout the stall. "

The Finnish MT-215 test also notes 225 kph as the speed the slats open in level flight.

Another re. G6:

f. Stalls and Stall Warning.

"Automatic Handly-Page type slots are provided on the outboard leading edges of the wing. They extend at about 240 kph indicated."

Anyone who is interested in testing will note the game's 109G2/6 slats do not open at these noted speeds.

Same applies for the La-5/7 slats. The tests which are available for these aircraft show different speeds for the opening in level flight when compared to the game's versions. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll paraphrase:
The slats are just an animation.
They have no direct influence on the FM as control surfaces.

@ Icefire
I think you are right on the money.

As for the Friedrichs feeling to heavy in comparison; the problem lies with those, not with the G-2 - several issues lead to that effect.
And as far as climb is concerned, the G-2 does have more power then the F-4.
Wich is far more important then weight with both planes using the same airfoil.

na85
03-02-2009, 02:31 AM
Originally posted by HuninMunin:

I'll paraphrase:
The slats are just an animation.
They have no direct influence on the FM as control surfaces.

Obviously

M_Gunz
03-02-2009, 04:34 AM
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 ElAurens:
Table of 109 weights, in game vs. real...

G-2 - 2830 kg(game) - ~3100 (IRL)

F-2 - 2880 kg ( game) - ~2728 kg (IRL)

F-4 - 2900 kg ( game) - ~2890 kg (IRL)

From this (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=5732&page=7) thread at the banana forum.
I think its fairly well known that the Bf109G-2 "weighs" much less than its real life counterpart. But that doesn't matter too much I don't think if the other performance attributes...the stuff that matters (i.e. turn, climb, dive, acceleration, etc.) works. I suspect the weight thing isn't a mistake or omission but a hack to make something in the FM work. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure, but there are other attributes tweaked down as well to get the match the dev team was able to.
Holding only one of those up without showing the others in balance... call it what you want, just not "full truth".

Just to repeat, the dev team did the best they could with the time and what-all they had. They spent a LOT of time on
these things though there were a LOT of models as well. The devs include at least two accomplished Aero-Engineers.
This work is to their credit, it is like they signed their names to it.
But I am sure somebody will eventually mod up something that a group here likes better and names "more real" on some
basis or other. There are people here with the credentials to begin to be able to get away with that. I'd like to
see their original source data and find what guesstimates they made just for fun because surely it will be impeccable.
There are also people who critique the artwork in museums like the Louvre, I am sure they have better on display as well.

joeap
03-02-2009, 07:36 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:

Sure, but there are other attributes tweaked down as well to get the match the dev team was able to.
Holding only one of those up without showing the others in balance... call it what you want, just not "full truth".

Just to repeat, the dev team did the best they could with the time and what-all they had. They spent a LOT of time on
these things though there were a LOT of models as well. The devs include at least two accomplished Aero-Engineers.
This work is to their credit, it is like they signed their names to it.
But I am sure somebody will eventually mod up something that a group here likes better and names "more real" on some
basis or other. There are people here with the credentials to begin to be able to get away with that. I'd like to
see their original source data and find what guesstimates they made just for fun because surely it will be impeccable.
There are also people who critique the artwork in museums like the Louvre, I am sure they have better on display as well.

"More real" eh? Already happened you can see it at the banana forum, what a joke. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

HayateAce
03-02-2009, 08:02 AM
Nice to see more folks coming to the realities of the underweight, overclimbing 109 G2.


200 kilos, be sure.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

One of the great fallacies that this game has attempted to promote is that the 109 was a turn-fighting aircraft. It was not. But, the online blue players wanted a turning 109, so who was Oleg to deny them this. He wanted game sales, not truth.

b2spirita
03-02-2009, 08:10 AM
Well given that the largest market is presumably the us, does that make all us planes overmodelled also?

Bremspropeller
03-02-2009, 08:16 AM
It was not

It was, when flown correctly.

JG52Karaya-X
03-02-2009, 09:31 AM
Originally posted by HayateAce:
Nice to see more folks coming to the realities of the underweight, overclimbing 109 G2.


200 kilos, be sure.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

One of the great fallacies that this game has attempted to promote is that the 109 was a turn-fighting aircraft. It was not. But, the online blue players wanted a turning 109, so who was Oleg to deny them this. He wanted game sales, not truth.

Ah, what would an anti-109 slashing be without HayateAce popping by to repeat his conspiracy theories over and over and over and over and over again..

Like a broken record

Doesnt matter to you that I actually posted real life turn time test data one page ago, huh?

On the other hand our dear friend here never even posted a single piece of evidence supporting his claims that "insert blue aircraft here" is overmodelled.

The only thing he's good at is slinging dirt. Once he's got his hands full of it he wont stop until the thread's locked, a true genius's work!

Well just keep on whining that Oleg and the world are so unfair to you and put that tinfoil hat of yours back on, will ya?

jamesblonde1979
03-02-2009, 10:08 AM
Aye caramba. Madre dios, there's a whaambulance on it's way to this thread guys.

anarchy52
03-02-2009, 12:53 PM
anyone who fooled arond with FM knows very well that using real data for FM parameters will not give you the historical performance. Best results for tweaking the performance in my experience is by manipulating the wing area(s) and weight. Level speeds are relatively easy to tweak, but climb rates are particulary hard, especially because we don't have the documentation, but that's another story.

It's tricky: you need more speed - you reduce wing area, but you lose the turn time, you need to increase the climb rate you reduce the weight but you gain on the turn rate...

Viper2005_
03-02-2009, 01:21 PM
This suggests to me that there is something wrong with the model...

anarchy52
03-02-2009, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
This suggests to me that there is something wrong with the model...

No, just that the model is a good enough aproximation, not a high fidelity aerodynamic simulation engine.

M_Gunz
03-02-2009, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
This suggests to me that there is something wrong with the model...

It runs on a PC with many planes at once while modeling damage and individual bullet and shell trajectories plus all the graphics.

Uhhhhh, hellllloooooo? The word is not "wrong" so much as "possible", no?

People want to say underweight but not also perhaps too high drag, maybe slightly underpowered as well....

So somebody tweaks it a different way to change one corner and that changes another not payed attention to yet and HURRAH! MORE REAL!

OTOH people can stop their blot-clot whining and just take things as they are and ACCEPT THE LIMITS OF THEIR OWN HARDWARE.

But OHHH NOES! Duh HISTOWY! Duh HISTOWY! We is sooooo attached to whut we's want! It's not WEAL!
WHAAAAAAAAAAA! He's gut a bigger cookie den I did! WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! I wunt a betta toy! WHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

F___ing babies only have spoil anything like a good time for anyone else with their constant self-centered noise.
If it ain't one thing it's something else even when they have advantages of their own and know every bit of that.
One way to tell how well the balance is is simply that the whining comes from ALL SIDES, not just one.

HayateAce
03-02-2009, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by b2spirita:
Well given that the largest market is presumably the us, does that make all us planes overmodelled also?

You have presumed wrongly. The largest market for this sim is NOT the U.S. A larger percentage of U.S. players actually paid for their copies, but there are fewer U.S. players.

U.S. planes are coincidentally mis-modeled.

stalkervision
03-02-2009, 02:45 PM
Who has cookies here... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Mr_Zooly
03-02-2009, 02:53 PM
Me wantee popcorn for the show http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif
Hasnt this been a disputed topic for like years now?
the term bad penny springs to mind.

b2spirita
03-02-2009, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by HayateAce:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by b2spirita:
Well given that the largest market is presumably the us, does that make all us planes overmodelled also?

You have presumed wrongly. The largest market for this sim is NOT the U.S. A larger percentage of U.S. players actually paid for their copies, but there are fewer U.S. players.

U.S. planes are coincidentally mis-modeled. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Proof?

And i want proof that us players are less likely to obtain games illegaly too.

M_Gunz
03-02-2009, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by HayateAce:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by b2spirita:
Well given that the largest market is presumably the us, does that make all us planes overmodelled also?

You have presumed wrongly. The largest market for this sim is NOT the U.S. A larger percentage of U.S. players actually paid for their copies, but there are fewer U.S. players.

U.S. planes are coincidentally mis-modeled. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

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

Oh you poor thing.

A full diaper stinks for the exact same reason.

HayateAce
03-02-2009, 04:38 PM
Typical response from the likes of you. But then nobody ever accused you of being the sharpest tool the ol' shed.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

HayateAce
03-02-2009, 04:39 PM
Oh yes, you've just joined my distinguished ignore list, congrats.

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

HayateAce
03-02-2009, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by b2spirita:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HayateAce:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by b2spirita:
Well given that the largest market is presumably the us, does that make all us planes overmodelled also?

You have presumed wrongly. The largest market for this sim is NOT the U.S. A larger percentage of U.S. players actually paid for their copies, but there are fewer U.S. players.

U.S. planes are coincidentally mis-modeled. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Proof?

And i want proof that us players are less likely to obtain games illegaly too. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There was info from 1C Maddox about a high percentage of pirated copies from Russia for instance. The info went on to state the most US copies were rightfully purchased. It's on these forums in a dusty drawer somewhere. Look it up yourself.

BTW you illegally spelled "illegaly."

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

HuninMunin
03-02-2009, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by na85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HuninMunin:

I'll paraphrase:
The slats are just an animation.
They have no direct influence on the FM as control surfaces.

Obviously </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It does not seem to be obvious looking at statements in this thread.

HuninMunin
03-02-2009, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by anarchy52:
anyone who fooled arond with FM knows very well that using real data for FM parameters will not give you the historical performance. Best results for tweaking the performance in my experience is by manipulating the wing area(s) and weight. Level speeds are relatively easy to tweak, but climb rates are particulary hard, especially because we don't have the documentation, but that's another story.

It's tricky: you need more speed - you reduce wing area, but you lose the turn time, you need to increase the climb rate you reduce the weight but you gain on the turn rate...

Well you could do that when you have no clue about how the basic FM modelling in this sim works and just want to "fool around".

PS
If anarchy52 is a different name for someone I might know, give a wink http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

M_Gunz
03-02-2009, 07:18 PM
Why don't some people realize that a PC combat flight sim FM can not be any more exact to real than a globe can be mapped
onto a flat surface? Some places can be close but others will not. Deal with it.

I say some because _most_ seem to understand, it's only a minority that can't accept a best effort with any grace at all.
For those I say that your constant b!tching is a low form of insult to Maddox Games and the rest of the Community.

IL2 series has been a triumph in how well it works at all yet there are those who just have to b!tch and whine.
Maybe in 20 years or so the state of computing and software can give you what is real and still you won't be happy, the
planes only flew like they did for experts because they flew them AS experts. The poor pilots did not share the same
success that so many gamers want to measure the planes by.

Any sim that lets a gamer without full and proper training plus the very rare TALENT required become an accomplished Ace
and fly the planes just as well as the Aces did is seriously far less real than IL2. It's not perfect, just the best so far.

anarchy52
03-03-2009, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by HuninMunin:
Well you could do that when you have no clue about how the basic FM modelling in this sim works and just want to "fool around".

PS
If anarchy52 is a different name for someone I might know, give a wink http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

It seems that maddox fooled around just the same.

PS no, i don't think I know you.

joeap
03-03-2009, 12:07 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Why don't some people realize that a PC combat flight sim FM can not be any more exact to real than a globe can be mapped
onto a flat surface? Some places can be close but others will not. Deal with it.


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif YES!!!!

na85
03-03-2009, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by HuninMunin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by na85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HuninMunin:

I'll paraphrase:
The slats are just an animation.
They have no direct influence on the FM as control surfaces.

Obviously </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It does not seem to be obvious looking at statements in this thread. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that's just because some people don't understand that the aircraft in the game don't actually fly. I.e. the ailerons don't actually impact some virtual air and make the aircraft roll, or increasing the size of the prop won't change the speed of the aircraft, etc.

M_Gunz
03-03-2009, 02:35 PM
Some people think that an FM that meets limited chart specs within 1% is therefore 99% correct.
The specs being top speed, best climb, best turn and the like.

If that is true then the old tabled FM's were the best thing ever seen in flight simulation! They hit 100%!

WTE_Galway
03-03-2009, 02:54 PM
Originally posted by na85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HuninMunin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by na85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HuninMunin:

I'll paraphrase:
The slats are just an animation.
They have no direct influence on the FM as control surfaces.

Obviously </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It does not seem to be obvious looking at statements in this thread. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that's just because some people don't understand that the aircraft in the game don't actually fly. I.e. the ailerons don't actually impact some virtual air and make the aircraft roll, or increasing the size of the prop won't change the speed of the aircraft, etc. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually in X-Plane thats exactly what happens virtual air hits virtual control surfaces and calculations get done.

But in Il2 thats not the case.

I would however argue that if the slats are animated to operate at a certain point there is a very good chance they are also taken into account at that point in the FM.

Bremspropeller
03-03-2009, 03:21 PM
Actually in X-Plane thats exactly what happens virtual air hits virtual control surfaces and calculations get done.

Unfortunately, for calculating real aircraft and maneuvering, your normal PC won't be anywhere near sufficient.

X-plane also simplifies a lot, which in turn again leaves room for speculation and whining.

na85
03-03-2009, 03:29 PM
Originally posted by WTE_Galway:

Actually in X-Plane thats exactly what happens virtual air hits virtual control surfaces and calculations get done.

But in Il2 thats not the case.

I would however argue that if the slats are animated to operate at a certain point there is a very good chance they are also taken into account at that point in the FM.

X-plane makes a lot of simplifying assumptions.

The kind of CFD (computational fluid dynamics) calculations required to calculate aerodynamic forces over even a simple airfoil are extremely demanding in terms of processing time.

Over an irregular and aerodynamically messy object like an aircraft the calculations required become exponentially more complicated.