PDA

View Full Version : Overestimated comparison with WWII



zugfuhrer
02-11-2004, 12:22 PM
Many topics in this forum is about the caracteristics of the airplane so and so, it lacks rollrate, it climbs to fast etc.
I think that everything in the real flight caracteristics cant be correct for the virtual aircraft. The laws of physics and aerodynamics are so complicated that the Maddoxcreated flightmodel cant make this correct.

For example the P40 is a wery good glider, turn of the engine at 2000 m and se how long you can glide, etc etc.
The best similarities are that you se a cockpit that looks like the one in your choosen plane, if you take a outside view you se a plane that looks like the one you choosen.

The statistics from the history also talks against that the aircrafts has the real benefits and disadvantages.

For example the days before the battle of Kursk a VVS airfleet tried to bomb the bases of the germans to stop their airactivity.
VVS choose the time and the place for the attack.
They had to abort the operations due to their heavy casulties.
At this part of the front VVS had numerical superiority.
This wont match the outcome of VOW or VEF.

So enjoy the game for what it is and fly your favourite plane, but dont compare it too much with the planes that flew during WWII and dont get angry if the Jug flies like a brick, and the Me-262 torches its engine frequently.

zugfuhrer
02-11-2004, 12:22 PM
Many topics in this forum is about the caracteristics of the airplane so and so, it lacks rollrate, it climbs to fast etc.
I think that everything in the real flight caracteristics cant be correct for the virtual aircraft. The laws of physics and aerodynamics are so complicated that the Maddoxcreated flightmodel cant make this correct.

For example the P40 is a wery good glider, turn of the engine at 2000 m and se how long you can glide, etc etc.
The best similarities are that you se a cockpit that looks like the one in your choosen plane, if you take a outside view you se a plane that looks like the one you choosen.

The statistics from the history also talks against that the aircrafts has the real benefits and disadvantages.

For example the days before the battle of Kursk a VVS airfleet tried to bomb the bases of the germans to stop their airactivity.
VVS choose the time and the place for the attack.
They had to abort the operations due to their heavy casulties.
At this part of the front VVS had numerical superiority.
This wont match the outcome of VOW or VEF.

So enjoy the game for what it is and fly your favourite plane, but dont compare it too much with the planes that flew during WWII and dont get angry if the Jug flies like a brick, and the Me-262 torches its engine frequently.

XyZspineZyX
02-11-2004, 12:48 PM
What are you talking about?

This is a *simulation* it is supposed to simulate these planes, for which volumes of data exists. Therefore, it should be "like" the planes it's simulating.

And it is also simulating earth physics. So, when the in-game performance doesn't match up for whatever reason, people have every right to mention this. The design team wants it to be accurate as well. That's the whole reason for the exercise.

tsisqua
02-11-2004, 12:51 PM
Never in the history of flight simulation has so much attention been paid to the details of flight characteristics of individual a/c . Just spend a little more time in ORR, and you will see that an effort HAS been made. Although not perfect, it is a GOOD virtual representation.

Let the comparisons continue.

Tsisqua

http://server5.uploadit.org/files/tsisqua-nedChristie.jpg
Tsalagi Asgaya Galvladi

zugfuhrer
02-16-2004, 02:25 PM
I agree with you, the graphics are very good, but the flightmodels arÔ┬┤nt.
I disagree abut the details of flight.
The P40 glides almost twice as good as a german plane and 40% better than the second best allied one, there is much to be done about the characteristics of individual a/c.
Maddox wont publish the data about drag, lift etc and wont give us the calculus used to calculate the aerodynamics.
By the way what is ORR?

Zen--
02-16-2004, 02:35 PM
No comments really, but I agree on one point: It is very difficult to write a physics engine that models real world behavior, the very fact that they have done as well as they have is a tribute to Maddox.

I think the point he is trying to make is that it's a big job, so maybe the community ought not to nitpick if things are not 10000% accurate, in otherwords there an inevitable amount of error that will creep in due to the complexity of the programming task.


At least thats the way I read it anway

-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen

zugfuhrer
02-16-2004, 03:06 PM
So you agree with me, that dont try to make any historical conclusion about the WWII based on this game.
I agree with you, they have made a good job but it can be better.
Microsoft managed to show their air- and damageprofile-files so why dont maddox.

For example the Flying fortress needed 12 hits from a 20 mm cannon in the reargunners area to kill it. Thats why their B-29 was so hard to kill.