Turning with the P51and tempest vs 109s. Changed on last path?? in FM / AI discussion Posted 3 hours ago · Edited 3 hours ago by [TLC]YIPPEE 15 hours ago, ZachariasX said: There, you direct the aircraft with the rudder and then press the stick *in the direction of the ball* to keep it centered. While you might think this is unimportant for a combat sim, I‘d say this is central to learn how to aim with that aircraft. It is not that it is not unimportant. It is that getting this kind of thing right has demonstrated itself to have a inverse relationship to getting general performance correct. In a perfect world we would have both, but ill take general performance over specific for a combat sim any day of the week. It is absolutely more important to have correct climb rates etc, than it is to mimic certain aspects of control behavior. I am speaking generally here so save me the example that is the exception of the rule, because clearly there will be some. Speaking of just controlling planes in the shape of said plane, I could care less about a combat sim if the game modeled every nuance of control behavior to the point of it being exactly like real life if the two planes in the game didnt have correct turn rates or climb rates with sufficient relative accuracy. With ww2 planes It has to be down to around 2% or extremely meaningful differences in performance occur. A relative speed difference of 10 mph on the deck matters more in most cases than failing to model plane X's adverse yaw. Especially when the most important behaviors could just be scripted. 15 hours ago, ZachariasX said: You really think they do? A hammer head (not sure we‘re talking about the same maneuver here) is a very, very difficult maneuver to perform with these aircraft. Maybe ask @F/JG300_Faucon about hammer heads. He knows. But with those high performance fighters, it is barely possible to make such a turn in the direction of the prop torque. Against the prop torque, you would not do that on real life at all. Even with a Bücker Jungman, a plane that just oozes happiness when doing (what is today) mild aerobatics, a hammer head against the prop is extremely difficult and by just missing the timing for a second, it will send you down backward, often followed by an inverted spin (that however looks like a steep spiral but requiring opposite input to exit) that sends your speedometer needle faster toward Vne than you like and what was an aircraft for two fingers to control now requires both you arms and most of your strength. Yeah I dont disagree with this in a general sense. Ive spoken to some people with real stick time behind some of these planes as well and the hammerhead was something I discussed once. The person I spoke to essentially said that it is doable but it would be much easier to just let the plane fall backwards and then reverse course at the apex of the climb. However, "this or that is hard" loses alot of its meaning in a sim because people routinely become proficient at doing things no one IRL would likely ever become good at due to risks and time considerations alone. 15 hours ago, ZachariasX said: I‘m really happy that these scripted UFOs are in the dumpster of history now as they share very little with actual flight. They had about as much to do with flight as the current stuff does. The current stuff just has its own issues. BOTH are wrong. 15 hours ago, JtD said: That, btw., is also specifically stated to be impossible in the NACA report, where the P-47s30 does not reach the full stall in the wave off condition (flaps down, power on (2550/42.5)), because rudder is insufficient to maintain control. That happens at about 85mph IAS - the wing part stalled and rudder fully deflected. In game using the same settings, I climb it at around 73mph no problem. No stall, no control problem, everything peachy. WRONG. By seat of pants, by engineering theory and by a historical source. Sure its wrong. By 10mph. But this does nothing to explain why the plane should be able to flop about at whatever speed we want to placard it to. I seriously doubt changing the stall speed by 10mph is to going to stop the in game plane from being able to do what it does broadly speaking. Also both of you are somewhat misunderstanding my position. I am not saying that what we see in game corresponds to a real P-47. No airplane is this game does. I do not know of a single plane in this game that exhibits specific flight behaviors that remind me of what is described in flight manuals or pilot anecdotes. Not on the whole anyway. The point is that the only thing we can really judge in my opinion, is the general aircraft performance. Stall speeds, climb rates, top speeds, etc. Clearly we can know some quirks as well to the extent that they were described by pilots and that their languages was precise enough. But there are lots of things in this game that might be right, somewhat right, etc, that I dont think anyone on here regardless of their education can really know for certain where to draw the line at: short of modeling the entire plane in some kind of CFD(and even then...). I have already said that I dont think the turn rate of the plane is correct at 22deg/s. Clearly the flight model is not correct yet even in general performance. So I think it is fairly obvious @JTD that I am not arguing for a specific speed at which any of this might be possible if I dont think the turn rate is correct. What I am saying is that I dont know that general way the plane handles at slow speeds would change much if you tweaked any of the specific values. And I dont know how any of you could possibly know for certain that the plane couldnt be handled in general in this fashion with full down flaps given that no one here to my knowledge has the resources to do a sufficiently complex aerodynamic check. NOTE ALSO, that this is just one handling characteristic, and some may be provable false and others not. Nobody in the real world tested this for obvious reasons. Given that this is the second time a sim (with totally different FM methods) somehow have come to agreement on the specific handling characteristics of this plane at very low speeds with max flap, I think it is at least worth considering that there may be some truth to it.