Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

36 Excellent

About SCG_Gustav_Hagel

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Correction: wing mounted guns (by gunpods) were set to 500m, nose mounted guns were still 400m though. Those are in 109s manuals and I think they were the same for 190s. For 109 E with wing cannons, those were 200m horizontal and 400m vertical convergence, while cowl mounted machine guns were 400/400m.
  2. If they follow the planeset I've sent them then yes. I must admit though I would need to include 150oct mod too.
  3. @ROCKET_KNUT Good to see @Ala13_UnopaUno_VR won, game the game with 18/39(40?) reactions out of his own squadron. Congratulations!
  4. 9 Thanks for the generosity!
  5. Yep, totally forgot that one, it's the weirdest and the rarest of all invisibility bugs, I have no idea of the reasons, can't guess and describe since it never happened to me.
  6. It won't show unless on TacView as it's already said. Trimms you want to adjust to have a comfortable flight, i.e., exert, if possible, no forces on stick for a level flight (also you won't deflect any other surfaces which would cause extra parasitic drag). I'm not sure what you mean regarding engine speed output, you can either see manfold pressure and rpm on 190, but rpm is auto for the most efficient setting, usually, for a specific manifold pressure. Game just shows IAS.
  7. @J2_Bidu So I'll drop here this video. I'm pretty sure I've seen a more detailed one adressing this 10km bubble render distance, but I couldn't find it, it's been around 5 years since I've watched. Now the discussion which I don't think many of you analized correctly the whole diversity of this problem, and I highly doubt even the devs did: Basically we have at least 4 different problems regarding spotting in this game, which make the planes disappear: 1- Planes outside the 10km range bubble: The 10km range bubble as implies is the range which aircraft should be rendered, many other games uses different set of features and distances for spotting, for instance, Cliffs of Dover has the distance set somewhere around 13-15km iirc, at that range contact is nothing but a pixel, when comes closer it renders as a proper aircraft. Anything beyond that is invisible. Here in BoX series, apparently it used to be 10km before many improvements over the years (I could be wrong and some sort of primitive long range spotting was already before I started flying last year). Clearly we had quite an improvement after the 10km range bubble with the not-so-new now spotting system which we can see targets 40km away. In fact they are not rendered properly and they are just pixels, which partially (at least from my experience spotting that far away), don't show a continuous path of flight, they move as if by frames. Anyway this is beyond the scope but surely shows a different method of spotting beyond the 10km bubble. It seems the 10km is the distance drawn, in which contacts are rendered as proper aircrafts, although their skins are not rendered (keep this in mind). 2- Planes inside the 10km bubble and relatively close: This is another spotting problem which has 2 cases: a) Planes blending with the ground; b)Planes disappearing somewhere between 400-800m. The first (item a) is regarding a long lasting problem which has most (but not totally) to do with graphic settings, how nearby pixels between the objects and background are rendered, it seems that sometimes not only the nearby pixels blend, but makes the whole aircraft blend in the background (this main occurs in forests with dark skin/camouflage planes and sometimes against the sky). The second (item b) is a whole different bug, where sometimes zooming in or out plane simply disappears, that's what people complain (as some of you) that you were approaching the target and they suddenly disappeared, become invisible and reappears closer. I would say this is the most frequent bug (at least for me, and how I notice, as it's pretty evident) and I can guess it has something to do aircraft skins rendering, when they go from the standard layout to a custom one (from the ones already available, I'm not sure if that occurs with player made ones or if flying with the standard would avoid this problem). 3-Invisible planes: Basically this is the problem where a plane appears only if it takes an action, i.e., shooting, being shot at, turn lights on, shoot a flare etc... As many of you stated and I can guess is that it definitely has something to do on how planes come from the 10km bubble and its rendering system, which may simply affect the plane, bug it and keep it invisible. I think it also happens even with a visible aircraft beyond the 10km distance when it comes within 10km due to the different spotting method and then becomes invisible. It doesn't have a predetermined distance for the plane to show up as we've seen in many videos and from my experience. That's my 2 cents gathering up and detailing everything in a single post.
  8. What's your source? I'd love to see it since I've been working on a planeset for a server, which would benefit from that.
  9. There we have a weak person with no proof based arguments. It's easy to ignore than to admit one is wrong, couldn't expect anything less from a sophist.🤣
  10. Still looking where I stated RoC increased while deploying flaps, maybe it's possible as we know 7 degrees isn't a great deflection and you stated wrongly that L/D decreases no matter the flap deflection which is PLAIN wrong. Show me your papers and evidences, I'm still here waiting after a day. I said it could be Gradient, since RoC wouldn't greatly benefit from that, and for the translation it is what mostly makes sense, I said after all it COULD be, it's an hypotesis and as someone who has a masters, you should well know the scientific method. 1) Not necessarily, if someone is trying to climb trying to achieve max gradient without flaps, might lag behind of someone who is using, check again the graph of AoA, flaps degree and Lift curve. 2) LIFT is increased to a certain point with flaps, check the papers. Seems like you have quite a problem to read and interpret. 3) maximum climb gradient IS close to stall (1.2 times, while optimal climb speed for 109 is around 230-250km/h, far from 160-180km/h), again, you are wrong about simple aerodynamics.https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/maximum+gradient+speed#:~:text=The air speed at which,times the basic stalling speed. 4) Never said he was right, this is why we are discussing since anecdotes are just anecdotes. As I presented in many papers, L/D ratio doesn't decrease with flaps deployment, check graphs and papers. Despite that little mistake your thought could be right.
  11. You can keep talking, your lack of proof and just plain arguments show how bad you are at your analysis and engineering. Keep thinking you are right and every book and other source is wrong, you will go far this way👍 You should know by the way there's a slight difference from engineering back then and now, that we have CFD. Found this paper, what will be your excuse now? Maybe it's wrong and you should tell to all those scientists and engineers, maybe tell NASA this paper is wrong too: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20150006019.pdf I don't brag about my education, I'm currently doing my Bachelors work in Physics and at the same time doing Aerospace Engineering in one of the best universities in my country, which is actually one from the Federal government. My Engineering Bachelors are the same level as your Bachelor+Master in Europe, since Engineering is 5 years rather than 3 as in most Engineerings from Germany, while Physics 4. So before you start bragging and coming here with ad hominem arguments, present us some information proof based rather than unfounded plain words. Now back to OP statement from the book. It was never mentioned RoC, but rather angle of climb. This is well known since flaps increase lift (until a certain degree) and reduces the minimum stall speed. What OP might be referring is rather than RoC but Climb Gradient, which, in this case could make sense, as flaps increase the lift for certain climb angle. The limitations are obvious as the max AoA is reduced and thus wouldn't be efficient compared to the case for 0º flap deflection, but as the statement shows it's mininum climb speed (close to stall) related we can pretty much deduce Walter Schuck is talking about the Gradient itself. Would be interesting to see if nothing was also lost in translation as we can't say anything with total certainty since we don't have any 3D model to analyze it that right now.
  12. Nope, L/D doesn't always decrease. Again, educate yourself. Handbooks state ~15º for take off iirc (because it does increase LIFT!). Flaps reduce the max AoA though and that's why it's not widely used in every situation. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Illustration-of-the-effect-of-flaps-on-the-lift-curve-The-numbers-shown-are-typical-of_fig1_273923634 https://www.quora.com/At-what-point-do-flaps-provide-more-drag-than-lift Read the introduction on page 4 of the paper (or page 5 of the pdf) http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/arc/rm/2622.pdf Here there's an AMAZING graph on Appendix A https://www.mdpi.com/2073-8994/12/5/828/htm Note: "As explained in the introduction, the TEF concept is based on lift increase, when the flap is deployed on the pressure side (negative β angles), and lift decrease when the flap is deployed on the suction side (positive β angles) of the airfoil." The graph: Again, read first, educate yourself and then comment something useful. Edit: Just saw you said you had a degree, maybe it's time to throw it away? Or time to educate yourself and read some more papers.
  13. 7 degree flaps are more benefit for lift than drag, maybe you should educate yourself a little bit more of simple aerodynamics before saying things are BS? In case you are in doubt, look at any book of Performance and Stability, also here explains in simpler words: https://www.boldmethod.com/learn-to-fly/aircraft-systems/how-flaps-work/
  14. Have you ever considered that I was already flying when he joined? 🤔
  • Create New...