Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

449 Excellent

1 Follower

About Bies

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Aviation, Mechanical engineering, Military technology

Recent Profile Visitors

1179 profile views
  1. For me both are smooth and looks great.
  2. I hate to be this discouraging guy, but when it comes to german side all planes you mentioned, except Bf-109G-10 and maybe FW-190A-9, are low serie, some close to prototype fighters. Good luck obtaining precise data, cockpits, test flight parameters documentation, manuals and other stuff. And He-219 was a night fighter and we don't have any night bombers. Not to mention the concept of domnating in some 750km/h Ta-152 or Do-335 when there were between 44 - 67 Ta-152H-1 and about 40, partially unfinished Do-335 prototypes of all variants and no evidence of a singe use of Do-335 in any combat. I read a book of a German pilot from that period, they had over 100 fighters at their airport, but they could only send patrols of 2 or 4 machines because they had no fuel and not many pilots.
  3. From: Center of Strategic and Budgetary Assessments TRENDS IN AIR-TO-AIR COMBAT IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE AIR SUPERIORITY https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/Air-to-Air-Report-.pdf 13. See S. Schallhorn et al., Visual Search in Air Combat (Pensacola, FL: Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, 1990), particularly 5โ€“11, for the discussion on visual search and the practical use of the human eye as an air-to-air sensor. FIGURE 5. VISUAL SEARCH LIMITS 15. When not focused on a distant object, the eye muscles tend to relax, resulting in a focus distance of 10 feet or less. 16. Disciplined search patterns consist of eight to twelve relatively widely spaced fixations per 90-degree horizontal sector. Aircrew in a formation are generally assigned to search a specific sector and do so in a systematic manner usually proceeding from the front to the rear of the sector slightly above the horizon, then from the rear to the front of the sector slightly below the horizon, or vice versa. The goal is to cover the sector in a reasonable amount of time with fixations spaced about 15 degrees apart. This maximizes the chances of detecting a target with peripheral vision while sacrificing little in terms of relatively low-probability long-range detections.
  4. Unfortunately one main core optimisation is the problem of nearly all current flight simulators, nothing specific to IL-2 serie, all it's competittion suffers the very same issue. I guess all this simulators will evolve to use many cores/threads in following years - this will add huge jump in performace and ability to simulate many more things like advanced weather, big amount of AI planes, even more detailed flight physics, high intensity ground combat below etc.
  5. IRL visibility was good. VR and having two offset eyes makes the bars to look far thinner and overall visibility lot better than i.e. TrackIr. When it comes to Soviets; most original Soviet made planes suffered from poor manufacturing quality (i.e. being made in furniture factories by unqualified children and women - this was really hard time for the Soviet Union) and had performance lower than official specifications or specially prepared prototypes which won government contracts. Every plane was different. P-39s made in save US with all quality control had reliable preformance close to the manual and high quality, that's the reason.
  6. 1) Clickable cockpits have no disadvantages compared to non-clickable ones from the point of veiew of a player, because you can assign controls and still use them 100% exactly as we do it in IL-2: GB if you prefer. The only disadvantage is from the point of view of development: clickable cockpits have to include more corelations and systems and modeling them is far more time consuming so you can make less planes in the same amount of time and this is important for company like 777. So i understand their choice. 2) For planes more modern than Korean War period clickable cockpits are mandatory if we want any reasonable level of realism. Without that you would have to bind literally hundreds of controls and memorize shortcuts for each key on the keyboard, with Shift, Control and Alt. I.e. to bind just buttons of three MFDs for the Hornet you would need to memorize 3x20 buttons = 120 buttons + brightness, contrast, day/night to just use MFDs alone... Good luck trying. ๐Ÿ˜‚ That's why low fidelity planes of FC3 are harder to operate than clickable full fidelity ones despite FC3 having far less systems modeled. Clicking on button with the clear name in the cockpit is easy. Memorizing hundreds of "Alt+Shift+J" is not. 3) When it comes to WWI and even WWII planes clicable cockpits are nice but not mandatory. You can memorize 30-40 keys. But noone would memorize 200-300 different key combinations for the Hornet. 4) When it comes to WWI WWII - for me - clickable cockpits are just a proof or sign of high fidelity in depth modeling of the plane, not necessity.
  7. Gonna be good anyway. People want Pacific, me also, but it's hard. After all the most important thing is quality of the sim. As long as the devs maintain current level every air campaign they model will be successfull, Pacific, Normandy, Spain, France, Italy, Africa you name it.
  8. It's a D-Day. So we are landing, ladies and gentlemen. Maybe not on a carrier deck yet. But still.๐Ÿ‘
  10. Yes, joystick or other not 0/1 controler (i.e. encoder) would be better but mouse could be possibly the worst to directly control the turret, as it is right now, because it's hard to stop the rotation finding idle position. Maybe after the rework this is going to work a lot better, they know what they are doing, they will test some ideas and find some solution i believe.
  11. When i saw the fire in the cockpit in VR for the first time i jumped from the seat.
  12. Solution can be a lot simpler - to allow moving the turret using keys instead of mouse.
  13. Today i've tried the migty Tempest. I have one question, how to use radiator? I saw only two positions: fully open, but this adds drag and fully closed, but this overheats the engine fast.
  14. Yes, it is realistic but not using mouse - since mouse doesn't have any neutral position you can easily find, when in real tank you simply stop rotating the cranks That's new system is realistic but it is usable only with keyboard or joystick or encoders or crank replicas or everything except the pc mouse. With mouse you are not able to reliably stop cranking in any chosen moment, you are overcompensating all the time and you are not able to aim efficiently. It is meant to operate with keyboard keys or yoystick like all pc tank sims to this day.๐Ÿ‘ Not by mouse like WoT.
  15. New system is diffenately far more realistic but without an option to bind keys or joystick it is (unnecessarily) very hard to use. When they will add other binding options (instead of mouse) and electro/hydraulic fast turret rotation as separate control it will be great as it was in every single tank simulators to this day.
  • Create New...