Did the Yak-1 really perform like this?

[LukeFF]

Last time I checked, this is a forum for flight model discussions. Just saying...

[Bearcat]

Last time I checked, this is a forum for flight model discussions. Just saying...

 

 

Yes it is.. FMs.. Not OR... not DX9 or 10 oer whatever.. and certainly not CoD and the ATG server. So letr's keep this on topic or it will be closed.

[Finkeren]

Aye aye sir. I got carried away.

 

Back on topic.

[Juri_JS]

Sorry guys, but these endless FM discussions are a waste of time if you can't show any reliable data that proves that something is wrong in the game.

If you think the FM of a plane isn't correct, here's what you need to do if you want it fixed:

1. Find reliable information from flight tests done during or directly after the war. Don't trust anecdotal stories told by pilots 50 years later!

2. Compare the flight test data with the planes ingame performance and document the results.

3. Send the data and your test results to Han. 

[JtD]

4. Get Han's reply "you are wrong".

[Original_Uwe]

4. Get Han's reply "you are wrong".

Or no reply at all.

It never ceases to amaze me that for as good as they made the German fighters the Soviet ones turned out so dubiously.

But I suspect that comes from using soviet documents as any sort of source.

They should not be used at all.

[LukeFF]

But I suspect that comes from using soviet documents as any sort of source. They should not be used at all.

 

Funny how people like you seem to keep forgetting this rule:

 

Claiming that FM is incorrect without the required proof and starting a flame thread based on such claim is prohibited.

Edited September 6, 2015 by LukeFF

[Finkeren]

But I suspect that comes from using soviet documents as any sort of source.

They should not be used at all.

 

No, that's right. Let's not use any of the primary sources. Yeah that makes a lot of sense...

 

No wait. It doesn't.

[Bearcat]

I have pruned this thread... Regardless to what you think of the FMs .. if you have issues with them and you do not present them to the devs in the manner prescribed then you are just blowing smoke.

 

If you do present them in that fashion... and the devs do not make the changes you expect .. that does not mean bias.. it does not mean conspiracy.. it just means that they do not agree with your findings. If that is the cae the best course of action is to either get over it and carry on ... or move to a sim that you feel more acfurately reflects what yoiu think the FMs of any given set of aircraft should be.

 

This issue of debates over FMs is as old as combat flight sims and went to another level with the advent of IL2.. the original.. I have no idea where the term "Luftwhiners" originated.. the first time I heard it was in 2002 when I first came to UBI... but it is probably related to the fact that most of the FM complaints even across multiple  sims are either directly or indirectly related to German aircraft. Hence the term "Luftwhiners" which is a play on "Luftwaffe" ...

[Leaf]

So as per most forums we have a bunch of people who know the square root of f- all about aeronautical engineering thinking that, because they've found some primary sources, they can now completely re-write a flightmodel. Nice.

 

I appreciate that things can be a little odd in the flightmodel, but who am I / are we to judge? I know nothing about the calculations flightmodels are based on, how their data is collected and how the mathematical model is then written. Whilst I happily admit that, the problem is that a few people here simply won't.

 

It's the age-old problem of: the more you know, the more you know that you don't know. Or in this case, the less you know, the more you think you actually do. 

One of the many joys of flight simulators, I find, is that no two situations are ever the same. That's why there are people who continue to fly them, even after decades of gaming. But it's because of this that anecdotal evidence from the game is so..unreliable and therefore rarely used as solid evidence for FM discussions.

 

Primary evidence? Useful, but it's only a "point on the graph" as it were, you need a mathematical model to tie it all together too. Funny how people never have any suggestions for the latter.

Lastly, writing flight models is hard. Very hard. How do I know? Well, how many threads do you see on the forum that actually pin-point an issue and tell the developers exactly which aspect, under x y z conditions, needs fixing, and tells them how to do so? There are none. Just people chucking around documentation shouting "fix thiiiiis!". 

You may say that it's their job to get it right first time, but there are only two people working on FM's and there's is only so much human beings can actually do.

Edited September 6, 2015 by 19te.Leaf

[unreasonable]

.. the first time I heard it was in 2002 when I first came to UBI... but it is probably related to the fact that most of the FM complaints even across multiple  sims are either directly or indirectly related to German aircraft. Hence the term "Luftwhiners" which is a play on "Luftwaffe" ...

 

You would expect given that (almost) every combat sim features German aircraft, but not Soviet, British or US aircraft. After all, if "directly or indirectly related" means either about the German aircraft or their opponents, this would include every WW1 and WW2 sim barring those set exclusively in the Far East. Hard to see how it could be otherwise if FM debates are allowed at all.  

[Finkeren]

Lastly, writing flight models is hard. Very hard. How do I know? Well, how many threads do you see on the forum that actually pin-point an issue and tell the developers exactly which aspect, under x y z conditions, needs fixing, and tells them how to do so? There are none. Just people chucking around documentation shouting "fix thiiiiis!".

While I generally agree with your post Leaf, I think you're being somewhat unfair here.

 

There are a few community members who actually do a lot of testing and try to pinpoint where things are wrong (Ze_Hairy and Celestiale comes to mind) They deserve to be heard out and have their results seriously looked at at some appropriate time (which of course is not right now in the heat of BoS plane development) The least that could be done is actually letting those few serious guys know, that they are being heard and their grievances seriously considered. Silence is no good here.

[Juri_JS]

There are a few community members who actually do a lot of testing and try to pinpoint where things are wrong (Ze_Hairy and Celestiale comes to mind) They deserve to be heard out and have their results seriously looked at at some appropriate time (which of course is not right now in the heat of BoS plane development) The least that could be done is actually letting those few serious guys know, that they are being heard and their grievances seriously considered. Silence is no good here.

They are heard, for example we have to thank Ze_Hairy for the changes to the drag caused by bomb racks on the Fw-190.

 

Another example can be found in this thread on the Russian forum:

http://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/2786-obrashenie-jaws2002-fw-190-high-speed-handling/

 

Unfortunatly the lack of response from the devs here at the English forum is creating the impression that they ignore our complaints. We would certainly have less threads like this one if the devs had better communication skills.

[Mikey]

Still no acknowledgment on yak flaps? Is it not obvious something is wrong with it?

[JG4_dingsda]

Still no acknowledgment on yak flaps? Is it not obvious something is wrong with it?

 

 

I don't believe we are tweaking FMs for those planes any longer. Jason

Edited September 20, 2015 by JG4_dingsda

[Fern]

 

no flaps

 

 

no flaps

 

 

no flaps

[indiaciki]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 17, 2015 by indiaciki

[SisyphusH]

Most of my limited multiplayer experience in BOS comes in the form of DED normal server and I am probably somewhere in the ballpark of an average pilot. When I use the 109 F-4 I feel basically untouchable against the VVS.  I can shoot down planes without much fear of being shot down. I can seemingly outclimb and outrun anything by a significant margin. If I ever feel in danger I can just run away and nothing can catch me. I remember playing offline and thinking when I try online it will be harder. In the 109 F-4 it wasn't. At least last time I played (two weeks ago), there was really nothing a VVS pilot could do.

 

If you are trying to turnfight in a 109 against a Yak-1, you are doing it wrong. But even then it seems the 109 F-4 is actually quite competitive in a turn and only perhaps marginally worse than the Yak. Then when I switch to the Yak-1 or the LaGG and I feel a substantial disadvantage--I am slower, I climb worse. Sure, if a 109 sticks in a turn for a long time (multiple circles) perhaps I could eventually shoot him/her down in a Yak-1, but most 109 pilots just zoom away with me hopelessly chasing. 

 

There is a good chance the flight models are not perfect, as it's probably a very hard thing to model with perfection. And if they are wrong, they should be addressed. Maybe the Germans are overpowered or maybe the VVS--I have no idea. I suppose I just take issue with the original poster's contention that the Yak-1 and the 109 F-4 are comparable. It seemed like the OP was saying the Yak-1 is just this god-mode plane that cannot possibly be shot down. If you cannot generally win in the 109 F-4 against a Yak-1 in this game, or at least be somewhat competitive, you are doing something wrong. 

Edited October 17, 2015 by SisyphusH

[303_Kwiatek]

There is no point of how skill you have to fight in any plane here but the point is that planes should be modeled with historical accuracy and realism which BOS unfortunaley is lacking here.

[L3Pl4K]

No Flaps for better turn used in the videos . The  Luftwaffe guncam video must be a falsification, every Yak Pilot use flaps for better turn and little burn. This is a libel of glorious rooster flaps.

[unreasonable]

@Fern - The LW gun camera films state that the Soviet plane is a "Lagg 5", so I am unclear how these are supposed to be germane to the issue, unless you think there is a misidentification.

[bivalov]

opinion of experienced Yak-pilot -

 

 

"А.С. Вот еще какой вопрос – в бою закрылками пользовались, для уменьшения радиуса виража?

 

И.К. Очень редко. И только при атаке бомбардировщиков, в бою с истребителями – никогда. В бою с истребителями, использование закрылков ведет к слишком большой потере скорости. Ни к чему это было, у «Яка» и без закрылков вираж меньше, чем у «мессера»."

 

 

description of one real combat (2 Yaks vs. ???) -

 

"Во время одного из воздушных боев отец обнаруживает, что у него «на хвосте» висит немецкий самолет, который вот-вот откроет огонь на поражение............... Для спасения отец, по его словам, «открывает воздушные щитки». В результате самолет резко теряет скорость и немецкий самолет на скорости пролетает вперед, обгоняя самолет отца."

[MK_RED13]

Hehehe.. Biv.. its only about deceleration.. there is nothing about better turn, climb and stability which is presented in this game... very interesting is this: в бою с истребителями – никогда!!! В бою с истребителями, использование закрылков ведет к слишком большой потере скорости ...... Muhehehe..

 

BoS VIPMoF system rulezzzzzz

[C6_Claymore]

Someone can translate in english please ?

[BraveSirRobin]

There is no point of how skill you have to fight in any plane here but the point is that planes should be modeled with historical accuracy and realism which BOS unfortunaley is lacking here.

 

You should send the data you have collected which supports this opinion to the developers.

[indiaciki]

what's the point in turning better once at the loss of airpeed if you expect the airbattle to continue? I'd never go for loss of airspeed even though the other aircraft is faster.

Edited October 17, 2015 by indiaciki

[SYN_Mike77]

opinion of experienced Yak-pilot -

 

 

"А.С. Вот еще какой вопрос – в бою закрылками пользовались, для уменьшения радиуса виража?

 

И.К. Очень редко. И только при атаке бомбардировщиков, в бою с истребителями – никогда. В бою с истребителями, использование закрылков ведет к слишком большой потере скорости. Ни к чему это было, у «Яка» и без закрылков вираж меньше, чем у «мессера»."

 

 

description of one real combat (2 Yaks vs. ???) -

 

"Во время одного из воздушных боев отец обнаруживает, что у него «на хвосте» висит немецкий самолет, который вот-вот откроет огонь на поражение............... Для спасения отец, по его словам, «открывает воздушные щитки». В результате самолет резко теряет скорость и немецкий самолет на скорости пролетает вперед, обгоняя самолет отца."

google translate says:

 

AS Here's a question - in combat flaps used to reduce the radius of the bend?

 

IK Rarely. And only when the attack bombers, fighters in combat - never. In the battle with the fighters, use of flaps, leading to excessive loss of speed. Not what it was, the "Yak" and without flaps turn less than that of "Messer". "

 

 

description of one real combat (2 Yaks vs. ???) -

 

"During one of dogfighting father discovers that his" tail "hanging a German plane that is about to open fire on ............... In order to save his father, he said, "it opens the air shields." As a result, the aircraft rapidly loses speed and a German plane flying at a speed ahead, overtaking the plane his father. "

+ 1

Quote

MultiQuote

[LukeFF]

 

 

planes should be modeled with historical accuracy and realism which BOS unfortunately is lacking here.

 

...which you have still have failed to prove.  

[JtD]

Like, doing it a test where it goes 50 km/h faster than the real life counterpart under the same conditions is no proof. Wow man, the denial is strong in this one.

[Reflected]

Or an answer to the question straight from the horses mouth, a real Yak-1 pilot....

 

BoS FM is one of the best. That's exactly why the community is demanding some obvious issues to be fixed. If it was p*ss poor to begin with, nobody would give a damn.

 

It's astonishing how a large pile of tests, proofs, accounts can be neglected and dismissed when it comes to the FW 190's or the Yak's performance.

 

 

This being said, a 109 still dominates the fight if flown right. I can also see that if the Yak was better than the Spit V, how the FW190 was a terror to the RAF. But it's not about this. It's about addressing some issues that are obviously there, not a fragment of imagination of a bunch of "Luftwhiners".

[SR-F_Winger]

Well said Reflected. I really hope the devs come to an insight.

[Reflected]

I'm studying for my PPL theory exam. There was this one question:

 

The climb rate can be improved by lowering flaps. True/false

 

Obviously it's false, because as you lower flaps you get more lift but also a lot more drag, which in total decreases climb rate.

[303_Kwiatek]

...which you have still have failed to prove.  

Many FM issues was proved here you know about these the true is that there is no will to fix these issues.  I wonder how it will be if in next addons there will come later versions of russians superplanes like Yak-1B, Yak-3 or LA5F and LA5FN ?  I wonder what roll rates would have La5F ( FN) which was improved over LA5 in these area ,  what dive speeds would have next russian planes when actually they got extended maximum dive speeds, whats maximum speeds they would have if even now Yak-1 or Lagg-3 were way too fast at altititude, what climb rate if even now Yak-1 got better climb rate then Fw 190 A-3 (  RL A-3 at emergency power got 2 m/s better climb rate then Yak-1 at full power)

 

Thats why i abandon to buy addons after BOS

Edited October 18, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek

[SR-F_Winger]

Kwiatek., thats exactly what i am afraid of as well.
If FMs of later russian and othjer allied planes shape up to be overdone just like the LA5 and YAK-.1 we have right now there is practically no point in flying blue anymore but pure masochism.

I still hope for the better. I am not sure but i will defionately think more than twice before i preorder another IL2 addon.

[303_Kwiatek]

Only hope is that western front planes will be more accurate in historical performacne and realism -  look P-40. For russian planes i got very low hope.

[Dr_Molenbeek]

what climb rate if even now Yak-1 got better climb rate then Fw 190 A-3 (  RL A-3 at emergency power got 2 3 m/s better climb rate then Yak-1 at full power)

 

Might be misinterpreted as "Yak-1 climbs too good in BoS" which is not the case, it's the 190 that does not climb as it should after 1200m (and only in winter).

[303_Kwiatek]

Yes Fw 190 A-3 climb too worse in BOS winter condtions.   It had climb rate like RL Fw 190 A-3 in ISA condtions.

 

But how you know that only in winter?   I think in summer conditons in BOS/BOM A-3 would have derated climb rate comparing to RL data. All planes in summer/spring maps will have worse climb rate then in winter.

 

RL Fw 190 A-3 ( 2 cannons version) in ISA condtions  got 16.5 m/s at 1.32 Ata at sea level  and at emergency power 1.42 Ata 2700 RPMS should have about 18 m/s.   For comparions RL Yak-1 69 series got 15 m/s in ISA conditons ( radiator open? )

Edited October 18, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek

[Dr_Molenbeek]

Yes Fw 190 A-3 climb too worse in BOS winter condtions.   It had climb rate like RL Fw 190 A-3 in ISA condtions.

 

No, above 1200m in winter it still climbs better than it does in ISA conditions, but definitely not as it should (+~4m/s bonus as all other planes), which is imo because of a bad winter "transition" of kommandogerät.

 

But how you know that only in winter?   I think in summer conditons in BOS/BOM A-3 would have derated climb rate comparing to RL data. All planes in summer/spring maps will have worse climb rate then in winter.

 

From my tests in ISA conditions, it was underperforming by ~3% at climb power, and overperforming by ~3% at full power, in climb.

 

RL Fw 190 A-3 ( 2 cannons version) in ISA condtions  got 16.5 m/s at 1.32 Ata at sea level  and at emergency power 1.42 Ata 2700 RPMS should have about 18 m/s.   For comparions RL Yak-1 69 series got 15 m/s in ISA conditons ( radiator open? )

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/18519-need-help-fw190-diving/?p=292757

 

"Fw 190A-3: 15m/s (~15,5m/s without MG FF/Ms) at climb power and 18,5m/s (~19m/s without MG FF/Ms) at full power.

 

Yak-1: 15,5m/s at nominal power and 25% radiators."

[303_Kwiatek]

I think you  got wrong data for A-3

 

16,5 m/s - German data for A-3

 

 

and for export version Aa-3 - 16 m/s

 

 

 

 

 

Conlusion is that A-3 at 1.3 Ata 2400 RPMs ata should climb similar to Yak-1 69 series but at 1.42 Ata  2700 RPM emergency should definitly outclimb Yak-1 which is not true in BOS.

Edited October 18, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek

[MK_RED13]

The only answer we will get from the devs (or admins) is a locked thread!