Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1442 Excellent

About SYN_Requiem

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

3638 profile views
  1. Here's one example. See if you can find the airplane in this picture. Click the spoiler to see where it actually is with the distance.
  2. A Tacview screenshot isn't sufficient evidence honestly. You can look at these flights I made where @Floppy_Sock created great videos with graphical G overlays from the tracks. He's also made a Fw190 example himself. AFAIK The reason the airplanes that have G-suits have them is because historically when those airplanes were in service they were standard issue to the pilot, so there's no need for it to be a modification. The system we have isn't perfect and I don't think we can expect it to be, but I think it has definitely improved people's thinking of how to fly these airplanes when fighting. It rewards smooth flying and punishes rapid ham fisted efforts (which I've been guilty of plenty of times in a Tempest or Spitfire!) Feel free to have a read through the whole "WOW Physiology Thread" though: This folder has 9 videos showing Bf 109, P-51, and Spitfire flight test examples with G forces overlayed. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jmQO_dOuTkRjYBSJTTX-HLMs43SZMAxu Floppy Socks Fw190 example.
  3. I completed this video before I left for my upgrade class, but had a couple of things to add to it so had to release it today. This is the last video until after I get done with my training (although I may fly a little MP here and there). Cheers!
  4. I've already made a large post about this issue in another thread so not repeating myself here, but along with what you say here is when an airplane either climbs above after an attack, or is already above you by only a few thousand feet, if that.... You totally lose them against the sky as they blend in which is absolutely crazy and should not happen. Spotting airplanes against the sky is incredibly easy in RL because there's nowhere for it to hide with plenty of contrast. In Il-2 once that airplane blends in with the sky above me I literally count about 10-15 seconds and start another break turn as even though I can't see them it's likely they're on their way back down.
  5. There is a script mission editors can add to flak which can increase their firing rate by 10x. I used to use it Rise of Flight to create huge flak bursts around airplanes using Low AI setting to compensate. It looked awesome as you could make 4 entities act like 40 were shooting.
  6. Nice shooting! I never realised the 262 existed in MP outside Berloga (joking), any time I looked for it there was always "0x Me262" LOL You must be a patient one ๐Ÿ˜
  7. I'm out of "reactions" for a bit, but thanks again everyone for sticking your head in and posting. I'm already prepping myself for Minnesota weather by shoving my head in the freezer for 30 mins a day!
  8. I appreciate the well wishes very much! Cheers everyone, it's definitely going to be a different experience in the left seat but I'm looking forward to it. Apparently it's a good gig as I'm told you get to fly with your favourite Captain every trip! YouTube wise the vids will continue in 2020 once I'm finished with upgrade training ๐Ÿ˜Š
  9. Someone out there must have Pilot McPilotface...๐Ÿ˜Š
  10. I meant when the visibility changed again just after the initial patch to create the extra visibility setting after the initial backlash to the flaws in what we know as the alt visibility now. It was an amazing difference to not need to "zoom in" to maximum so often while performing every single scan of a sky sector or losing sight of someone when they go a few thousand feet above you when they should be clearly silhouetted against the sky (which has always been the case). Just being able to sit in the cockpit and look around without all the zooming, for me, made the Il-2 experience more immersive but unfortunately I could see contacts from MUCH too far away which ruined my depth perception of estimating how far away the targets were. Outside of 5nm I'm fine with fighters looking like a dark grey/black shape that transitions to a very light grey by 7nm so it blends into the background, but for larger airplanes their distance would be further. The problem with this is I don't think our monitors have the pixel density to do this justice with how we see in RL without some form of small scaling. I'd still take that tradeoff though if it's done right compared to what we have at the moment.
  11. For me and I'm sure many others, the graphic settings and monitor calibration are irrelevant factors as they are NOT what changed. It's only since the latest hotfix adjustment to spotting that I suddenly have more issues spotting things. I'm talking things like maintaining tally on a bandit or even just staying visual with a wingman barely a kilometer away. Assuming high environmental visibility, which is what we have in the sim, we should be seeing fighter sized targets easily to 5nm (9km), but out to a max of around 7nm (13km). When I was learning to fly and while flight instructing I would not only see small general aviation airplanes at 5nm routinely, but regain the tally quickly after looking away. In the airliner I fly now I have no problems seeing planes like the CRJ, E175, B737, A320, etc at rear aspect etc out to 15-17nm (27-37km). A little further if they're turning and showing greater planform. C17, A380, etc can be seen even further still. Yes, of course they're bigger but I'm seeing them much further and wouldn't expect to see fighters out that far personally. I'd honestly take the alternate visibility over what is currently used on most MP servers even with it's flaws right now. Just because the math is right doesn't mean it's being displayed, or even can be displayed, correctly on a monitor as we would see in RL so there needs to be a compromise somehow. As I've joked about, if I can't see anything I may as well go fly DCS. I'll have bad spotting there too but at least I'll have radar LOL But hey... this is all anecdotal evidence so whatever ๐Ÿ˜Š
  • Create New...