PDA

View Full Version : Bf109Z have bug in flight model



Atomic_Marten
02-17-2005, 06:39 AM
I have noticed during one QMB flight that Bf109Z has bug in flight model -- my elevator and

right fuselage section was completely blown off, yet I was able to fly almost without

problems.. there was an elevator response whenever I pull a stick.(my ver. of the game merged

v3.04)

And yes.. I have a track http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v442/Atomic_Marten/Bf109Zelevator.jpg

Maple_Tiger
02-17-2005, 08:24 AM
I amazed that it's even in the game;in fact, it never even flew in real life lol.

HeinzBar
02-17-2005, 08:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
I amazed that it's even in the game;in fact, it never even flew in real life lol. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

S!,
I couldn't agree more. I respect what the effort that the 3rd party developers have done for this community. But, what is the purpose of a plane like this being included? When a modeler ask if he can create plane "X" when plane "X" was on the drawing board or didn't see production, Maddox games should politely discourage such modeling and reinforce the need for legitmate aircraft, ie, HS129, ju88, etc.

My $.02,

HB

crazyivan1970
02-17-2005, 08:59 AM
Disagree HB, that`s the best thing about this sim... there are quiet a few planes in here that i haven`t heard of. I think it`s truly unique....and to be frank with you, nobody is forcing anyone to fly those. But regardless, it`s nice to have it.

Extreme_One
02-17-2005, 09:01 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif


Variety is the spice of life! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

geetarman
02-17-2005, 11:31 AM
The whole plane's a bug.

jagdmailer
02-17-2005, 11:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maple_Tiger:
I amazed that it's even in the game;in fact, it never even flew in real life lol. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just don't fly it then!

Jagd

TAGERT.
02-17-2005, 01:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HeinzBar:
S!,
I couldn't agree more. I respect what the effort that the 3rd party developers have done for this community. But, what is the purpose of a plane like this being included? When a modeler ask if he can create plane "X" when plane "X" was on the drawing board or didn't see production, Maddox games should politely discourage such modeling and reinforce the need for legitmate aircraft, ie, HS129, ju88, etc.

My $.02,

HB <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Though I agree, more actual planes would have been better.. F3u-4, P47N, etc. We have to remember that our opinions are just that. Who is to say what the purpose is or what legitimate is, the individual user that is who. So, I think it is neat that they have the what if 46 stuff.. It helps sell the game to the XWING, QUAKE types of people out there, which in turn means more money for 1C and thus more of a chance that we will get more sims from 1C. That and nobody is holding a gun to our heads making us fly these planes or staying in a server with these planes.

VW-IceFire
02-17-2005, 01:41 PM
I hate the 109Z but I still used it in my campaign. Its a neat "what-if" aircraft and it fits into those sort of fun scenarios that you can create. Variety is good.

BBB_Hyperion
02-17-2005, 06:25 PM
Last tested in one of the later patches P38 can do the same p47 could do it too and a lot more planes its really a old bug .) Never fixed. Ai is sometimes even able to hold alt with 1 wing.

carguy_
02-17-2005, 07:02 PM
Bah flew it two times, never again.

FltLt_HardBall
02-17-2005, 07:05 PM
There is a difference between what's displayed graphically and what's going on inside the pysics engine. Sometimes a component with moderate-to-serious damage will appear to be "missing" graphicallly. There are only, what, 3 graphical LODs? (Levels of damage), so sometimes a component whose damage level is *just* over LOD 2 may end up being represented as LOD 3.

So don't stress about it too much. There are limits to what you can do with the technology.

Roll on BoB

HeinzBar
02-17-2005, 07:36 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
Disagree HB, that`s the best thing about this sim... there are quiet a few planes in here that i haven`t heard of. I think it`s truly unique....and to be frank with you, nobody is forcing anyone to fly those. But regardless, it`s nice to have it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

S! Ivan,
No offense taken by me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I can honestly say I've flown the go229 once and 109z none. I just have no interest in fantasy planes...they may as well have been in Crimson Skies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I honestly feel that planes like the 109z & g229 should never have been allowed in the sim. Those talented folks could have been put to more useful tasks if they really wanted to help the sim. Imagine the time it took to create those two planes. Now imagine what planes could have been created in their stead that the sim really needs, ie pe-2, ju88, etc.

At best the 109z & go229 have guesstimated FM & DM. It just seems like a waste of good talent for this sim. If there was to be an addon called IL2:1946, then the planes would have been neat.

HB

Badsight.
02-17-2005, 09:04 PM
first 2 replys to the thread starter are just spam (110% proof) & should recieve not only a life-time ban & a HardDrive meltdown in their next 3 systems but a firm , hard kick in the nether-reigons

only joking

.

.



( apart from the ban & the meltdown & the kick in the ***)

Giganoni
02-18-2005, 03:01 AM
Can you tell Badsight is really itching for a Shinden? As for the 109z, that sure seems like a glaring bug Atomic. As for fantasy planes I like em, gives me something to put in for 46 campaigns or "what if" battles.

Cragger
02-18-2005, 03:42 PM
I have a track of an F4F that continues to fly around in circles minus its right wingtip and minus the pilot.

LeadSpitter_
02-18-2005, 04:23 PM
p38 use to be able to fly with 1 boom missing now it cant, still i dont think oleg and crew should even take the time to bother with the 109z its banned in ever server.

Obi_Kwiet
02-18-2005, 11:10 PM
I bet the real 109z would have stunk. Projected performances of planes like those always tend to be a bit optimistic.

3.JG51_BigBear
02-19-2005, 12:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:
p38 use to be able to fly with 1 boom missing now it cant, still i dont think oleg and crew should even take the time to bother with the 109z its banned in ever server. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think something should be ignored because it is banned online but I think that since it seems to be used so infrequently by the community as a whole Oleg should focus on other stuff.

Lukki
02-19-2005, 03:33 PM
Go-229 isn't pure fantasy..was flown.

And why is everyone talking about plane X not being suitable for the game when the real topic is the missing elevator and elevator response?

Weird.

PBNA-Boosher
02-19-2005, 06:52 PM
Don'tchya hate how people get off topic at times?

Some things about this sim are weird. I remember back in AEP 2.04 my P-40M lost its rudder yet I still had rudder control. It normally doesn't happen often, but when it does it is quite interesting, lol.

3.JG51_BigBear
02-19-2005, 07:21 PM
This problem might be a limitation with the planes visual model. Perhaps there isn't a complex enough visual damage model to allow for some large amount of damage to a feus without making the whole thing disappear. Just an idea.

Atomic_Marten
02-20-2005, 01:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PBNA-Boosher:
Some things about this sim are weird. I remember back in AEP 2.04 my P-40M lost its rudder yet I still had rudder control. It normally doesn't happen often, but when it does it is quite interesting, lol. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. On one occasion I have cut He111Zw in half and the left part continue to fly for some time (was in shallow dive), and that also looks extremely weird. I haven't save track tho.

3.JG51_BigBear you can be right with your guess. I tend to think so, too.(about lack of detail in visual model).

I think that weird a/c behaviour can't be seen regularly, only sometimes it happens.

FltLt_HardBall
02-20-2005, 05:52 PM
Read my post on the first page.

I already said that 3 days ago. Sheesh.

3.JG51_BigBear
02-20-2005, 08:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FltLt_HardBall:
Read my post on the first page.

I already said that 3 days ago. Sheesh. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL, that's kinda funny. Sorry bout that.

Atomic_Marten
02-21-2005, 12:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by FltLt_HardBall:
There is a difference between what's displayed graphically and what's going on inside the pysics engine. Sometimes a component with moderate-to-serious damage will appear to be "missing" graphicallly. There are only, what, 3 graphical LODs? (Levels of damage), so sometimes a component whose damage level is *just* over LOD 2 may end up being represented as LOD 3.

So don't stress about it too much. There are limits to what you can do with the technology.

Roll on BoB <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif I have also overlook that.

Nice explanation m8. I agree. It must be that way, because that won't happen every time when Bf109Z lost elevator part.(I have run on more bugs over time spent on flying in this sim but never so big like this). Also must say that I have never experience something similar with other flyable aircraft (elevator response where should be none because of damage inflicted).