PDA

View Full Version : Shockwave productions (Bf109E-3 Engine Start Procedure) and wat a detail



Pages : 1 [2]

Sintubin
01-30-2007, 03:12 PM
Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by slipBall:
A stickey off-line thread http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif...I like the idea

Me too. Hey I had a thought, one thing I do like in these complex MSFS addon start up procedures is the fact that if you skip a step or forget something, the motor won't start. Even simple things like not selecting a fuel tank. What I want for BoB-SoW are consequences of (mis)management, not only for start-up but during flight too. I want to risk real penalties if I push or go past the envelope. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

exactly

slipBall
01-30-2007, 03:26 PM
Originally posted by joeap:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by slipBall:
A stickey off-line thread http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif...I like the idea

Me too. Hey I had a thought, one thing I do like in these complex MSFS addon start up procedures is the fact that if you skip a step or forget something, the motor won't start. Even simple things like not selecting a fuel tank. What I want for BoB-SoW are consequences of (mis)management, not only for start-up but during flight too. I want to risk real penalties if I push or go past the envelope. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


You my friend think as I do...that's a great idea...with a switch of course http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Mac-the-goon
01-30-2007, 06:07 PM
Hi!
First of all - my first post over here although I'm flaying il-2 from it's release (was it a long long ago right?) and I'm reading post on this forum nearly every day.
I don't know why I decided to write today but I did it.
So back to topic - I have never played il-2 online. I even don't like to shoot in this game at all! I remember there was a topic couple of years (!) ago about people who just like to fly WWII war birds just for fun with classic rock music in the back. It is the only way I play il-2. Now I'm building a little sim-pit to have more fun while flying. I would like to have full start up procedure, complex engine management and so on. And I'm sure that I can spend half of my playing-time on the ground just trying to start up my flaying machine! I don't bother if the cockpit is clickable or not - just want all this features and gauges to have a reason to be there - as I find having super-detailed cockpits that are useless, as a mystification, L'art pour l'art, because all I have to do is to press magic "I". (Clickable would even a little get on my nerves as I'm trying to connect together all those switches I just bought :-) )
I know that the conclusion was that I should buy MFS but I just don't like this game for it's artificial graphic (it is so deeply personal that I can't explain it :-) - it's something like my opinion that EAW still has better graphic than il-2)
Maybe this sound childish but I like the feeling that I can do something that is not easy and needs lot of practice. The feeling that you are better and better is I think commonly liked! This was the only reason why I spend few days trying to land Lerche without stabilizers, and when I finally made it I was just happy... So mysterious sequence of thinks to do before and if-flight would be great.
Someone says that full start-up process would become boring after 2 days I completely disagree and I find pressing "I" each time (each day for more than 4 years ;-)) extremely boring!
I like the whole il-2 series and I hope it will be in the future more like "FLIGHT war-sim" then any other combinations of capitalized letters ;-)
Regards!

TheGozr
01-31-2007, 01:48 AM
Well well well yes the immertion is good, i try to make a real quick ingame footage, too bad youtube make it a bad quality..

Check it out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13MQvtwMwM0

leitmotiv
01-31-2007, 03:02 AM
Welcome to the the offline hotline, Mac-the-goon!

Nice work, TheGozr, that clip showed superbly the incredible mass action in BOB2.

slipBall
01-31-2007, 03:13 AM
Well well well yes the immertion is good, i try to make a real quick ingame footage, too bad youtube make it a bad quality..

Check it out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13MQvtwMwM0


With such large formation's, the game seems to run very well...thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

SeaVee
01-31-2007, 04:54 AM
Very good video GOZR!!! You should post it in the Shockwave video forums too. People will like it alot.

TheGozr
01-31-2007, 09:06 AM
Thanks but it's not a biggy just wanted to give a little " Entrevue ", I'm very picky with simulators but i can say that BOB2 has some great potentials and also a good addon to the members' Hard drive(s) it's worth it and actually real fun, the patch 2.5 is a MUST. I took the time to setup well the "bdg.txt" file, setup well my track ir with it , pedals and joy.
Lots of fun for skinners and others that want to change textures and all in the world i changed trees and it's real cool. You can see that it's a work in progress somehow it's a not a pretentious sim, i like it.. get it, full around with it and i garanty a great fun.

igitur70
01-31-2007, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by Mac-the-goon:
Hi!
First of all - my first post over here although I'm flaying il-2 from it's release (was it a long long ago right?) and I'm reading post on this forum nearly every day.
I don't know why I decided to write today but I did it.
So back to topic - I have never played il-2 online. I even don't like to shoot in this game at all! I remember there was a topic couple of years (!) ago about people who just like to fly WWII war birds just for fun with classic rock music in the back. It is the only way I play il-2. Now I'm building a little sim-pit to have more fun while flying. I would like to have full start up procedure, complex engine management and so on. And I'm sure that I can spend half of my playing-time on the ground just trying to start up my flaying machine! I don't bother if the cockpit is clickable or not - just want all this features and gauges to have a reason to be there - as I find having super-detailed cockpits that are useless, as a mystification, L'art pour l'art, because all I have to do is to press magic "I". (Clickable would even a little get on my nerves as I'm trying to connect together all those switches I just bought :-) )
I know that the conclusion was that I should buy MFS but I just don't like this game for it's artificial graphic (it is so deeply personal that I can't explain it :-) - it's something like my opinion that EAW still has better graphic than il-2)
Maybe this sound childish but I like the feeling that I can do something that is not easy and needs lot of practice. The feeling that you are better and better is I think commonly liked! This was the only reason why I spend few days trying to land Lerche without stabilizers, and when I finally made it I was just happy... So mysterious sequence of thinks to do before and if-flight would be great.
Someone says that full start-up process would become boring after 2 days I completely disagree and I find pressing "I" each time (each day for more than 4 years ;-)) extremely boring!
I like the whole il-2 series and I hope it will be in the future more like "FLIGHT war-sim" then any other combinations of capitalized letters ;-)
Regards!

I like your approach very much. I could also spend hours on the ground trying to start and re-start that damned engine, or walking around just to visit the neighbourhood. Well I've read many threads that insist on the immersion feeling, and I support them all. Let's just hope that SomeOne else will read them as well. The most fascinating thing in Oleg's Sow project, if full-realistic, as he plans to mix a land and naval sim in the flight sim, should be the fact that nobody could easily jump in a nearest vehicle (plane, tank, jeep, boat, U-boat,..) not knowing exactly how it works and how to use it. You would need to get a real skill, even as a basic infantryman, and you would let others manage things you don't master. Then, maybe, a videogame would become a historical and respectfull evocation of the hardness of war, far away from indecent and childish approaches like, for example, BF2 et ali.
That kind of virtual approach, if well-leaded, could be even more powerfull than cinema, thanks to its interactivity.

Hope you enjoy my neologisms.

leitmotiv
02-01-2007, 03:42 AM
I agree, igitur70. The one flaw in Oleg's BOB approach may be that he is not going detailed enough to satisfy the most sophisticated consumers. All across the board in flight sims, submarine sims, and tank sims people are wanting more and more control detail, not just better graphics. The first time I tried Shockwave's He 219 for FS9, I was amazed by all the detail. You could operate the engines with all the real controls, turn on the gunsight (you had to use 6 DOF to correctly position your head to use the gunsight), and the total effect was to make you feel like an operator. All that was missing was the boom, and, with all the systems modeling, this seemed insignificant.

der-blaue-max
02-02-2007, 03:45 AM
Hallo,
sorry, my English is not the best, but i hope somebody can help and understand me.
I love to fly IL-2, but after i read abaut FSX and the schockwave addon, i have downloadet it from the Webside. But there I found nobody who can Help me?!?

I know it`s not the right Forum, but maybe someone can help me: http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

When I start the free Flight in FSX the engine of the ME 109 is still running. So i stop running the engine (left side/down yelow fuel off).
Now I want to start the Engine but it`s impossibile.
Engine Starting

Cockpit Check - COMPLETE ( does the engine controll that?)
- Hold brakes. (do i have to? because of the Engine ?)
Turn the battery switch ON. (where is it) ( I have nothing turned off, so it has to be on ??)
Recheck fuel supply ON. (o.k.)
Turn the magneto switch on BOTH. (o.k.)
Set fuel cutoff control to ON. (o.k.)
Use manual fuel pump to pressurize the fuel lines. (o.k.)
Prime engine if cold using priming pump (3-4 shots). (o.k.)
Turn master ignition switch ON. (o.k.)
Engage starter switch until the engine starts.
(Nothing Happens http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif)

The prop turns on and stop without starting.
Can somebody help me.



When i read the Handbook there is :"Battery on".
- I dont know where it is??

I start the engine like the Engine in the Movie
Startupprocedure on Youtube but the Engine is still not running??

Is there somebody who understands me and who could help me ??

Is there a way the Mission starts with no engine on?

How do i have to stop the Engine the right way?

I don´t know why, but in the other Forum ond the FSX Forum nobody answers! I think nobody understands my English or some kind of that??!!??

SeaVee
02-02-2007, 04:33 AM
der-blaue-max,

I can understand the questions fine. Not sure why no one has answered you. Did you post this at the Shockwave WOP forums?

In any event, I copied, pasted your query at the forums there. Someone should answer shortly. Here is the thread link: http://shockwaveproductions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=60640#60640

I'd try to help more myself but I am not familiar enough with the WOP complex engine management stuff. Others surely will be able to. Good luck.

Black Sheep
02-02-2007, 04:47 AM
I suspect I know what it is - your battery may have drained, as FS (stupidly) lets the battery drain to nothing over five minutes or so. There are ways around this using a seperate program called FSUIPC.

Anyway, when you cut the engine, switch the battery off immediately so that it isn't being drained - the battery switch (if memory serves me) is right next to the magnetos.

The mags are on the upper left hand side of main panel, labelled 0, M1, M2, M1+2; the battery switch is the red button to the left.

When you want to start the engine, run through the checklist but leave turning the battery on until you're ready to start up.

Hope this helps http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

der-blaue-max
02-02-2007, 04:56 AM
Originally posted by Black Sheep:
I suspect I know what it is - your battery may have drained, as FS (stupidly) lets the battery drain to nothing over five minutes or so. There are ways around this using a seperate program called FSUIPC.

Anyway, when you cut the engine, switch the battery off immediately so that it isn't being drained - the battery switch (if memory serves me) is right next to the magnetos.

The mags are on the upper left hand side of main panel, labelled 0, M1, M2, M1+2; the battery switch is the red button to the left.

When you want to start the engine, run through the checklist but leave turning the battery on until you're ready to start up.

Hope this helps http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Thank you very much.
Your are the first answers in this Problem.
I can not get into the Forum of shockwave, the Moderator does not answer my Login???.

Yes, there is a red dot next to the magnetos, but i can not click it with the mouse ?!!

Black Sheep
02-02-2007, 05:09 AM
Are you clicking on the mag lever by mistake ?

The battery switch is circled in red below:

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p3/Cougar_II_photos/Battery.jpg

If you still don't have any joy, I'll double check when I get home this evening.

der-blaue-max
02-02-2007, 06:47 AM
Originally posted by Black Sheep:
Are you clicking on the mag lever by mistake ?

The battery switch is circled in red below:

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p3/Cougar_II_photos/Battery.jpg

Thank You,
I tried to go into Forum Shockwave but the Moderator dont reply my Lockin, so i can not go in??!!

I found the red Button and try to press it.
I can do nothin.

The only way is to start with strg+E, but this is not the right way.
When i do it, i want to do it right!

I thin maybe i dont stop the Engine in the right way, so that it is brocken?
Or do I have to pass the whole Pre takeoff Check.

But i can not beleve that things like Test Brakes or flaps at 20 degrees don´t allow the Engine to start??

It´s a long time ago i have to write or speak englisch!
I had an Italian Girlfriend 15 Jears ago. That was the last time i had to speak in English.
What a girl........................ http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif



If you still don't have any joy, I'll double check when I get home this evening.

Manta_150GCT
02-02-2007, 06:53 AM
Hello,

Black Sheep is right on everything. If you turn off the engine without shutting down your battery, you won't be able to start up the engine once again. Batteries drains way too fast in FSX (at least).

Remember to map in your keyboard keys configuration the command "Battery on/off". I had to do it because I can't start up the battery clickin' on the red button (it seems it doesn't work).

Cheers

Manta

BillyTheKid_22
02-02-2007, 07:28 AM
http://www5.plala.or.jp/yoshinox/photo/109-00.gif



http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Bf109-3 with Cat!!!

Black Sheep
02-02-2007, 07:37 AM
Of course.

My bad, I'm still using FS2004, not FSX; I'd guess that for whatever reason there's some kind of issue with clicking the battery switch in FSX that Shockave will need to correct with a patch - they're usually pretty good with this.

As Manta_150GCT suggests, you'll need to assign a keystroke to battery on / off to accomplish this step.

PM me if you still have problems so we don't drag this thread to far of topic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

In case it's of any use:

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/wingsofpower/solo/manual/bf109_cockpit_diag.jpg

der-blaue-max
02-02-2007, 09:39 AM
Thank You,
i will test it

BillyTheKid_22
02-02-2007, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by Black Sheep:
Of course.

My bad, I'm still using FS2004, not FSX; I'd guess that for whatever reason there's some kind of issue with clicking the battery switch in FSX that Shockave will need to correct with a patch - they're usually pretty good with this.

As Manta_150GCT suggests, you'll need to assign a keystroke to battery on / off to accomplish this step.

PM me if you still have problems so we don't drag this thread to far of topic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

In case it's of any use:

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/wingsofpower/solo/manual/bf109_cockpit_diag.jpg


Great <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">NICE</span>!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

leitmotiv
02-02-2007, 09:52 AM
Correct me if I am wrong, but in FS9 couldn't you set up a cold start by running your flight, shutting down your engine on the runway, and saving the flight at that point?

Bearcat99
02-02-2007, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by Manta_150GCT:
Hello,
Black Sheep is right on everything. If you turn off the engine without shutting down your battery, you won't be able to start up the engine once again. Batteries drains way too fast in FSX (at least).
Remember to map in your keyboard keys configuration the command "Battery on/off". I had to do it because I can't start up the battery clickin' on the red button (it seems it doesn't work).
Cheers
Manta

LMAO.....
Can you imagine the rants in ORR if something like this happened in BOB. "Oleg the battery drain is biased in German planes"..."The mags on the American planes are PORKED man!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif To top it off the guy goes to Shockwave.. and doesnt even get an answer...LMAO..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
He has to come here.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

We can gripe all we want to ... but we have an absolutely FANTASTIC community here.... even though we don't hear from Oleg like we used to... Anybody remember the Friday updates... like clockwork..every Friday... so uhh yeah even though we dont hear from Oleg as much... the folks here are chock full of good info man. This is by far and away one of the best communities on the web if not THE best. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

der-blaue-max
02-02-2007, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
Correct me if I am wrong, but in FS9 couldn't you set up a cold start by running your flight, shutting down your engine on the runway, and saving the flight at that point?


So here i am back!

SeaVee put my question az the Forum from Shockwave after a short time there is the answer:


That's the FSX "toggle" starter issue.

The temporary fix: edit the AIRCRAFT.CFG file
1. First backup the file!
2. Find the "[piston_engine]" section
3. Then find this line:

normalized_starter_torque= 0.035

4. Let it take shape like this:

normalized_starter_torque= 0.1

Now the starter should start up the engine (of course you have to set the fuel lever back to OPEN if you stop the engine this way)

The Engine Starting list refers to "COLD START" - common term in MS flight sims. I would ask on some FS/FSX forums for details, I'm sure there will be the answers this time

regards
ROB

This works fine for me.

I would like to thank Rob and you for Help.
IL2 is the best http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

But sorry, I can not answer ROB and say "Thank You" at Shockwave. The Mod had not open my acount till now.

I think and Hope there are more People who find Help in this Post, cause the Aircraft from Shockwave a 1a. I hope in a Year BOB is the same.

Greetings from the German IL2 Forum.

leitmotiv
02-02-2007, 10:06 AM
If you enjoy the Shockwave 109E, der-blaue-max, you will enjoy the brand new Flight Replicas Bf 109K-4 for FSX.

http://secure.simmarket.com/product_info.php?products_id=2173

leitmotiv
02-02-2007, 10:34 AM
OK, I just checked with FSX---the procedure I described above worked: stop your engine just as your flight starts on the runway. Hit Alt and use the toolbar to find Save. Save your flight. End the current flight. Start the flight over and your aircraft will have its engine off (cold start). Glad I remembered this---I've been very annoyed by the aircraft starting flights in a high speed taxi in FSX, too.

BillyTheKid_22
02-02-2007, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
If you enjoy the Shockwave 109E, der-blaue-max, you will enjoy the brand new Flight Replicas Bf 109K-4 for FSX.

http://secure.simmarket.com/product_info.php?products_id=2173



http://www.granddadshobbyshop.com/HAS08070.jpg


Bf109K-4

TheGozr
02-02-2007, 11:14 AM
Can you delete your own comment Bearcat99? that would be usefull http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

leitmotiv
02-02-2007, 01:12 PM
Zealotry is the height of tedium.

BaldieJr
02-02-2007, 01:19 PM
If I were Oleg I'd create another company and port 1c models to FSX for singular sale.

TheGozr
02-02-2007, 03:48 PM
BaldieJr
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif .

Nimits
02-02-2007, 09:34 PM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
I agree, igitur70. The one flaw in Oleg's BOB approach may be that he is not going detailed enough to satisfy the most sophisticated consumers. All across the board in flight sims, submarine sims, and tank sims people are wanting more and more control detail, not just better graphics. The first time I tried Shockwave's He 219 for FS9, I was amazed by all the detail. You could operate the engines with all the real controls, turn on the gunsight (you had to use 6 DOF to correctly position your head to use the gunsight), and the total effect was to make you feel like an operator. All that was missing was the boom, and, with all the systems modeling, this seemed insignificant.

And this is just as much a part of being a fighter (or bomber) pilot as being able to execute a 70-degree dive bombing run or pull of a successful high-side pass. If the simulation engine is going to be as high fidelity as Maddox claims, then putting in the controls for realistic systems management should not be all that hard (speaking, of course, as a programming ignoramus among equals), since the implication to me is that those systems should be operating in the background anyway. If realistic engine start up would get boring for the minority that plane mostly online dogfights than fine, it can be a realism toggle just like no icons, padlock, and a dozen other settings. But for me, I want to be able to actually pretend for little bit I really am a 1940s fighter jock, not just a desktop driver with a nice video card and HOTAS.

Sintubin
02-02-2007, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by Black Sheep:
Are you clicking on the mag lever by mistake ?

The battery switch is circled in red below:

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p3/Cougar_II_photos/Battery.jpg

If you still don't have any joy, I'll double check when I get home this evening.

is this the famous shockwaves BF109 from the video?

It looks good )) for that close up

Sintubin
02-02-2007, 10:39 PM
Originally posted by Nimits:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
I agree, igitur70. The one flaw in Oleg's BOB approach may be that he is not going detailed enough to satisfy the most sophisticated consumers. All across the board in flight sims, submarine sims, and tank sims people are wanting more and more control detail, not just better graphics. The first time I tried Shockwave's He 219 for FS9, I was amazed by all the detail. You could operate the engines with all the real controls, turn on the gunsight (you had to use 6 DOF to correctly position your head to use the gunsight), and the total effect was to make you feel like an operator. All that was missing was the boom, and, with all the systems modeling, this seemed insignificant.

And this is just as much a part of being a fighter (or bomber) pilot as being able to execute a 70-degree dive bombing run or pull of a successful high-side pass. If the simulation engine is going to be as high fidelity as Maddox claims, then putting in the controls for realistic systems management should not be all that hard (speaking, of course, as a programming ignoramus among equals), since the implication to me is that those systems should be operating in the background anyway. If realistic engine start up would get boring for the minority that plane mostly online dogfights than fine, it can be a realism toggle just like no icons, padlock, and a dozen other settings. But for me, I want to be able to actually pretend for little bit I really am a 1940s fighter jock, not just a desktop driver with a nice video card and HOTAS. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

agree

Sintubin
02-02-2007, 10:41 PM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
I agree, igitur70. The one flaw in Oleg's BOB approach may be that he is not going detailed enough to satisfy the most sophisticated consumers. All across the board in flight sims, submarine sims, and tank sims people are wanting more and more control detail, not just better graphics. The first time I tried Shockwave's He 219 for FS9, I was amazed by all the detail. You could operate the engines with all the real controls, turn on the gunsight (you had to use 6 DOF to correctly position your head to use the gunsight), and the total effect was to make you feel like an operator. All that was missing was the boom, and, with all the systems modeling, this seemed insignificant.

yes treu

Freelancer-1
02-02-2007, 11:22 PM
I'd just be happy to look down and see my feet on the pedals. Being an invisible pilot really kills the immersion for me.

Oh yeah. It'd be nice if they sounded more like planes and less like playing weird samples on a synth http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Cheers,

Ugly_Kid
02-02-2007, 11:25 PM
Exactly, IMO the cockpit workload back then was not any less than in a modern fighter with all the radar knobs, and the machine that goes bing. It was different, but it was not less, this is partly while the ergonomics did not have such a priority - there was need to do lot of subsystem management and monitoring. I think the peak was reached with the first jets somewhere at Korea, beginning of Vietnam and then gradually reduced. The instruments weren't in cockpit for nothing.

FB started the right way and with right intentions. The CEM was never perfected and instead lots of band-aid plaster was added to the code disabling many features due to gamers exploits, magneto dive-break and eternal prop-pitch changes come to my mind. Would be i.e. nice to have fuel switch so that one could maybe to try to put down the engine fire that leads to explosion in 2 seconds and so on.

Boost management and monitoring the manifold pressure would be really something, better modeling of prop contol. There are lots of thing to improve in fact. It was pity that Emil manual prop pitch was changed and automatic was added, allthough the manual pitch did not work very well, Shockwave does this again better in their Emil...

leitmotiv
02-03-2007, 02:54 AM
I am grateful to the FS9 users on this forum who did a fantastic job of bringing its virtues to the attention of the rest of us last summer. I had FS9, but I wasn't using it, but, inspired by the posts, I took it up again, and I soon preferred it to IL-2 because I was beginning to enjoy the satisfaction of learning how to correctly use the flight systems of WWII aircraft. I am far from being a masterful operator, but I now have a greater appreciation of how the airplanes functioned. My flying is infinitely better because I use FSX.

slipBall
02-03-2007, 03:10 AM
Originally posted by Nimits:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
I agree, igitur70. The one flaw in Oleg's BOB approach may be that he is not going detailed enough to satisfy the most sophisticated consumers. All across the board in flight sims, submarine sims, and tank sims people are wanting more and more control detail, not just better graphics. The first time I tried Shockwave's He 219 for FS9, I was amazed by all the detail. You could operate the engines with all the real controls, turn on the gunsight (you had to use 6 DOF to correctly position your head to use the gunsight), and the total effect was to make you feel like an operator. All that was missing was the boom, and, with all the systems modeling, this seemed insignificant.

And this is just as much a part of being a fighter (or bomber) pilot as being able to execute a 70-degree dive bombing run or pull of a successful high-side pass. If the simulation engine is going to be as high fidelity as Maddox claims, then putting in the controls for realistic systems management should not be all that hard (speaking, of course, as a programming ignoramus among equals), since the implication to me is that those systems should be operating in the background anyway. If realistic engine start up would get boring for the minority that plane mostly online dogfights than fine, it can be a realism toggle just like no icons, padlock, and a dozen other settings. But for me, I want to be able to actually pretend for little bit I really am a 1940s fighter jock, not just a desktop driver with a nice video card and HOTAS. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I could not agree more...Shockwave, with their Flying Tigers release, also due out in 2007. Will have a edge over 1c Maddox, for the full real "starts" seeker's amoung us.

bazzaah2
02-03-2007, 03:34 AM
Originally posted by slipBall:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nimits:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by leitmotiv:
I agree, igitur70. The one flaw in Oleg's BOB approach may be that he is not going detailed enough to satisfy the most sophisticated consumers. All across the board in flight sims, submarine sims, and tank sims people are wanting more and more control detail, not just better graphics. The first time I tried Shockwave's He 219 for FS9, I was amazed by all the detail. You could operate the engines with all the real controls, turn on the gunsight (you had to use 6 DOF to correctly position your head to use the gunsight), and the total effect was to make you feel like an operator. All that was missing was the boom, and, with all the systems modeling, this seemed insignificant.

And this is just as much a part of being a fighter (or bomber) pilot as being able to execute a 70-degree dive bombing run or pull of a successful high-side pass. If the simulation engine is going to be as high fidelity as Maddox claims, then putting in the controls for realistic systems management should not be all that hard (speaking, of course, as a programming ignoramus among equals), since the implication to me is that those systems should be operating in the background anyway. If realistic engine start up would get boring for the minority that plane mostly online dogfights than fine, it can be a realism toggle just like no icons, padlock, and a dozen other settings. But for me, I want to be able to actually pretend for little bit I really am a 1940s fighter jock, not just a desktop driver with a nice video card and HOTAS. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I could not agree more...Shockwave, with their Flying Tigers release, also due out in 2007. Will have a edge over 1c Maddox, for the full real "starts" seeker's amoung us. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have to agree with this. The thing I have found is that more detail, more realism is what I look for now and the WOP series for FS9 has been a real eye opener for me.

Still we don't know what Oleg is and isn't going to do, I just hope he reads this thread and realises that there is demand for WOP levels of realism? Will be a real shame if BOB just turns out to be Il2 plus. I mean, why go to all the trouble of modelling dynamic weather if you're not going to put the same level of realism into what the point of the sim is - the plane?

leitmotiv
02-03-2007, 04:46 AM
You hit the nail on the head, bazzaah2. Maddox has been lucky because for years their only competition was the dead on arrival, CFS3, and, only in the fall of 2005, BOB2, which appeared to be dead, too, until it was revived last year. Shockwave clearly intends to be a player in the WWII combat flight sim market. They have great people working on their projects. Maddox has to beware of swerving too far over in their efforts to please their online market, which doesn't seem to be very concerned about much more than fighting online, because their bread and butter is the offliners. Right now everybody but the onliners is being better served by Shockwave right now with their better AI, 6 DOF, and working cockpits. When Shockwave offers online, the competition will really heat up.

SeaFireLIV
02-03-2007, 05:21 AM
This kind of Shockwave-Oleg competition is good since it`ll help Oleg to see what needs doing offline. Sometimes I do notice a certain `arrogance` from Oleg on some aspects of his sim (sorry, Oleg). It`s a natural response to great success.

CFS3 was rubbish, but I`ve heard that FirePower with the patch has done much to change this, so I may (horror!) consider looking at it again. I`m only considering it cos the same guys who did FirePower apparently did BOBwov, which is a surprise. But if it`s still as bad as before I`ll never look at it again.

leitmotiv
02-03-2007, 05:50 AM
Even FIREPOWER couldn't save CFS3---I went back to it last summer just to fly Lancaster bomber missions. Stalls are horrible, and the dumb print-outs of damage and flight events are dreary. These really hurt the otherwise very good OVER FLANDERS FIELDS (0 torque for example). There is going to be yet another CFS3 mega-mod coming soon---it will be interesting to see if they can make a sow's ear into a silk purse:

http://www.medairwar.com/

slipBall
02-03-2007, 06:32 AM
This kind of Shockwave-Oleg competition is good since it`ll help Oleg to see what needs doing offline


Yes this is good, but he should be aware already of the threat that Shockware is. He should at least be matching what is already out as far as engine managment in flight simulator, and shockwave. All he has to do, is read the reviews of Bob 11, the realism is applauded by every major reviewer. I said it before, but realism, in regards to virtual pilot interaction with aircraft, with difficulty switching, is the future of combat flight sim's.

Nimits
02-03-2007, 12:50 PM
Firepower and Over Flanders Fields are great, it is just CFS3 that is horrible. The whole putting new wine in and old wineskin thing.

Quite frankly, if BoB2:WoV (a) had a bona fide career mode (never been to fond of playing general in the flight sims) and (b) had Pacific War planes, ships and theaters (starting to come with the Flying Tigers game), I would probably have stopped playing Pacific Fighters entirely.

leitmotiv
02-03-2007, 02:26 PM
Every time I see the B5N2 and B6N2 in the nonflyable list in the QMB I feel had. A Pacific War sim with no death or glory carrier torp plane missions was like a Battle of Britain sim with no German bombers.

TheGozr
02-03-2007, 02:59 PM
ok here a bit of footage short.

The SPit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI3LDUrm4H8

Just testing some things

BillyTheKid_22
02-03-2007, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
ok here a bit of footage short.

The SPit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI3LDUrm4H8



http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Sintubin
02-03-2007, 06:57 PM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
ok here a bit of footage short.

The SPit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wI3LDUrm4H8

Just testing some things

where is that from?

GR142-Pipper
02-03-2007, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by Sintubin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
It's easy for these guys to portray such a high level of detail, afterall they only model a handful of planes, how many do we have? Next to 200?

quanty is not that inportant for me quality is like this awsome detail plane </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes. We have far too many planes to adequately support in flight/damage/weapons modeling. Quality over quantity any day.

If possible, I would make the detail start up procedures optional from the client side (i.e. each user). For those who want to do it, fine; for those who don't, they don't have too.

GR142-Pipper

GR142-Pipper
02-03-2007, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sintubin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
It's easy for these guys to portray such a high level of detail, afterall they only model a handful of planes, how many do we have? Next to 200?

quanty is not that inportant for me quality is like this awsome detail plane </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes. We have far too many planes to adequately support in flight/damage/weapons modeling. Quality over quantity any day.

If possible, I would make the detail start up procedures optional from the client side (i.e. each user). For those who want to do it, fine; for those who don't, they don't have to.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sintubin
02-04-2007, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sintubin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
It's easy for these guys to portray such a high level of detail, afterall they only model a handful of planes, how many do we have? Next to 200?

quanty is not that inportant for me quality is like this awsome detail plane </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes. We have far too many planes to adequately support in flight/damage/weapons modeling. Quality over quantity any day.

If possible, I would make the detail start up procedures optional from the client side (i.e. each user). For those who want to do it, fine; for those who don't, they don't have to.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE> </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that is wat we are praying for mate

der-blaue-max
02-05-2007, 03:53 AM
Hallo, I am often in the European Forum but not here cause of the Language! Some Posts before I asked You for help to Start the bf 109 Shockwave.

I think its like in the European Forum we have 1000 or more post, where we ask for a better sound in IL-2. Oleg says: With a better Soundcard it`s o.k. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

My opinion was: "o.k. a better sound is nice but not more....."

After flying Wings of Power I am very very happy with this sound. Its like flying a real Plane only caused in the Sound. Normaly MS Flighsim is not my game.

I can not belive that Oleg don´t want to change this, or Oleg is not able to change this.
If there would be IL-2 with a better Sound, like Wings of Power, I would pay a full Price Game to have this in IL-2.

Is there realy no way to change the Sound or to make many Fanposts to wish a better Sound.
till he is doing it......

In the European Forum the People say: "You waist Your time" I can not belive this!
In this Forum there are so many People after so many Years, like in no one other Game.


Sorry for my bad English
We have to do something.

slipBall
02-05-2007, 04:13 AM
yes the sound is amazing in the Shockwave 109. I think that Oleg knows this, and we should see a better sound engine in SOW. After all, he has to compete with them

leitmotiv
02-05-2007, 04:43 AM
The one thing that definitely impressed me when I played the first (deeply flawed) version of BOB2 was the ripping, crackling, popping sound of a Merlin when an RAF fighter flew right over my Bf 110C. Scared the wits out of me it was so realistic---was like being at Duxford watching the real thing.

der-blaue-max
02-05-2007, 05:06 AM
Originally posted by leitmotiv:
The one thing that definitely impressed me when I played the first (deeply flawed) version of BOB2 was the ripping, crackling, popping sound of a Merlin when an RAF fighter flew right over my Bf 110C. Scared the wits out of me it was so realistic---was like being at Duxford watching the real thing.

Yes BOB2 has a nice sound, but Wings of Power is much more better.
I think Oleg is an Enginer who likes to have perfect flying Planes, but sound and things like that is not so his...... (I dont have the Word).

I would say IL2 sounds like an old Mobile, BOB2 like a Mobile with new polyphone ringtone
and Wings of Power is like my ghettoblaster......

slipBall
02-05-2007, 05:27 AM
I think Oleg is an Enginer who likes to have perfect flying Planes, but sound and things like that is not so his...... (I dont have the Word).



"important" "not a big deal".... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

bazzaah2
02-05-2007, 05:44 AM
to be fair, 46 sounds very decent on my setup, with rich multilayered sound.

But it's not really in the same league as some of the planes I have in FS9; the WOP P51 and Real Air Spit XIV both sound absolutely terrific.

VMF-214_HaVoK
02-05-2007, 06:19 AM
Man, this thread still going strong. Perhaps you convinced Oleg to give these features a second look. Time will tell.

Grue_
02-05-2007, 01:25 PM
I have a pretty expensive sound card and tweaked everything but the Merlin and DB's in IL-2 still sound exactly like the 5hp Briggs & Stratton in my dad's lawnmower.

I've been immersed in FS9 for ages now with payware aircraft from warbirds to the PMDG 747 and have learned a lot from it.

I find it satisfying to use real life cockpit procedures to start, fly and shutdown the aircraft. With practice you can start up the plane without thinking about it too much, especially something simple like a Spit.

If you can't be bothered you press Ctrl-E (same as I in IL-2) and take off.

I've been flying a Do-27 recently and it's introduced new levels of complexity to the flight simulation. For example the cabin starts to shake on final approach when you throttle the engine back. Amazing.

Quality over quantity for me.

leitmotiv
02-05-2007, 03:07 PM
Agree 1000%!!!!

jasonbirder
02-05-2007, 03:37 PM
I thought FB/AEP/PF was billed as a Combat Flght Sim to me that means there must be as much emphasis on the flying and the simulation as on the combat part...

To me more realistic start ups...engine management...fuel management...navigation....sytems and checklists such as those we get in the WoP birds would go along way towards making this more realistic...and to me as a simmer...more realistic means more enjoyable

I was really hoping this was the route that we were going to get with BOB-SOW, the initially more limited planeset giving more opportunity for each to be more detailed...unfortunately I get the impression its just going to be what we have now but with nicer graphics...

Abbeville-Boy
02-05-2007, 03:40 PM
Originally posted by jasonbirder:
I thought FB/AEP/PF was billed as a Combat Flght Sim to me that means there must be as much emphasis on the flying and the simulation as on the combat part...

To me more realistic start ups...engine management...fuel management...navigation....sytems and checklists such as those we get in the WoP birds would go along way towards making this more realistic...and to me as a simmer...more realistic means more enjoyable

I was really hoping this was the route that we were going to get with BOB-SOW, the initially more limited planeset giving more opportunity for each to be more detailed...unfortunately I get the impression its just going to be what we have now but with nicer graphics...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif i hope oleg reads thread and acts

BFawlty
02-05-2007, 04:47 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bearcat99:
LMAO.....
Can you imagine the rants in ORR if something like this happened in BOB. "Oleg the battery drain is biased in German planes"..."The mags on the American planes are PORKED man!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif"QUOTE]

I thought we wouldn't be seeing any more American birds in 1C games?

Dedicated offliner here also! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

BF

VMF-214_HaVoK
02-05-2007, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by BFawlty:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bearcat99:
LMAO.....
Can you imagine the rants in ORR if something like this happened in BOB. "Oleg the battery drain is biased in German planes"..."The mags on the American planes are PORKED man!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif"QUOTE]

I thought we wouldn't be seeing any more American birds in 1C games?

Dedicated offliner here also! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

BF

Of course you will. You just wont see the manufacturers name in the planes description. For instance Grumman F6F you would just see F6F, which is ok by my. Once again people speak about things they are unsure of. Oleg has never said there would be no more US planes in his sims. SOW will kick off the new series and you can bet your *** there will be US planes to follow.

Oh and lets not forget the Korean war stand alone game. Now I can speak of something Im not quite sure of. But I would almost bet a pay check on it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif