Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About ARM505

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Cape Town, South Africa
  1. You'd have thought a Duck would be at home with that much water. Jokes aside, I'm not really sure what they thought would happen - I mean, it looks kind of like it was a pretty obvious risk, even with a war going on, why break a plane like that? I've operated from fields with that much mud and water in a DHC6 Twin Otter (Twotter!) but it's a) a STOL aircraft, and b) we fitted them with the 'high flotation' tires, which are bigger and can ride over mud and water better, despite your tires giving no grip or directional assistance. It's really tough, and we broke Turbine Daks in the same conditions in exactly the same way as the video. Maybe I can dig up some of the photo's. But yeah, obvious nose-over was obvious.
  2. I just finished 'A Higher Call' detailing the Franz Stigler/Charlie Brown story, and while it doesn't go into a lot of detail, it does give some insight into the pilots mentality, especially towards the end of the war (the 'we were the Luftwaffe!' feeling he describes while in JV44), and their attitude to politics (dismissive). I thought it added something. I'm re-reading the slightly more dry 'The First and the Last' by Galland (which should still be read, but deals a bit more with strategic questions).
  3. Also, if you press F10, it saves that POV as the 'default' POV and resets the Track IR to that view when you reset it. I don't know if I'm talking about the same thing, but I had to move around in my chair IRL until I had the view I wanted with the gun sight centered, then press F10 again. Then I could move back to where I wanted to sit (IRL) and reset the Track IR, and the view would be back to where I had set it with F10. That's probably a bad explanation.
  4. I think they've been particularly harsh on engine abuse in the sim, and for good reason IMHO. IRL, you got your plane, and generally stuck with it. You babied it as much as you thought you needed to, because it had to last you for the next fight and high pressure situation (literally) as well. In the sim, you get a sparkling example of mechanical perfection each and every time you step into your aircraft, regardless of how worn those impressive skins look. This is one issue I've often had with sims - because you get a fresh aircraft every time, people expect routine use of WEP/Emergency power like it's not a thing. 60 in HG (which most of them could probably survive) would just become routine, so the sim has to punish us somehow to bring us more in line with reality. I did love the A2A simulations (for FSX/P3D) 'persistent' aircraft servicing for this reason. You could baby 'your' plane as you saw fit, and the mechanical log would keep track of the parts wear and tear. So.......I'd expect a real Allison to handle more than the sim allows, but expect the sim to be harsh with us for the reasons stated. Without persistent damage modelling, I don't know an easy way around this.
  5. I actually managed to fly on one engine, but you need more than max continuous to maintain altitude. The duck is, unfortunately, grossly underpowered. The old joke about the second engine just taking you to the scene of the accident is very true with this bird.
  6. Lurker here, just bought the collectors BoK. BoM on the cards for next month. So nice to have such a great WW2 sim, here's wishing you guys all the best for the future........looking at VR quite seriously now, need to borrow my bro's Rift.
  7. No, of course he was very good. And insanely lucky too. But my point is that even the best Ju87 pilot here would not, on average, last even 10% of Rudels missions against online opponents, IMHO. Online opponents are simply more aggressive and have better gunnery than the average line pilot in WW2, but thats my opinion.
  8. I just finished reading Rudel's 'Stuka Pilot', and the most compelling thing that jumped out constantly was that he wouldn't have lasted a second vs online humans - he seemed to take it as a matter of routine that he would be able to successfully evade whatever fighters happened to be trying to stop him on the way to the target and back. He was quite dismissive of 99% of the Soviet pilots, and it sounds like he caused at least one ace to crash while this guy was chasing him. Online, what human fighter will let a Ju87 go without engaging (and more than likely killing), or make just one pass and go home? No, reading the book just made me aware of how utterly unrealistic online combat simming is - you're going up against people who've had as much gunnery practice as they've had free time to put into it, who do not fear death even slightly, who receive brand new aircraft all the time, who have a wealth of online information to study from, who are intimately familiar with their oppositions aircraft (because they can fly them whenever they want!), who are sitting in a comfortable office chair after having a decent nights sleep, who are well fed (as are you, but anyway hopefully you see my point) etc etc........compare that to conditions at the front in WW2.....I would go so far as to say that if you want a realistic mission, you must have AI in some of the roles. Otherwise the numbers must be adjusted to unrealistic levels if you still want a decent game (ie bombers get murdered by fighters online, far more so than IRL, hence increase the bomber numbers if you still want a decent game - just an example). I totally get the need for AI to have a decent game, and allow noobs/infrequent online players a chance to feel productive in online simming, and keep them engaged long enough. Who knows, maybe they stick around long enough to get some real online skill going.
  9. Yeah, same thing here the other morning (I am down in the ass end of the planet, but anyway) - for some reason it took twenty minutes to get into the game, then another I only tried successfully two hours later. I can only assume they'll do the right thing and allow some kind of offline play a la Rise of Flight, which then syncs when you're connected again.
  10. Wow, this guy lives (lived?) close to my house, nice find.
  11. Perfect is the enemy of good enough - whether this matches real blueprints or not, THIS is an FW190 cockpit that feels like an FW190 cockpit, and we can see it looks like the videos and pictures we see online, and we have useable visibility. So, at least to me, I fly it without obvious errors jumping out at me which is all one needs. It's that 'suspension of disbelief' thing again. So I'd just like to add my vote to the 'nailed it!' side of things - great job, well done. :D
  12. I fly with 30% fuel all the time IRL So I have no such qualms...do it, you'll appreciate it.
  13. I'm a pilot too, and that means a weird lifestyle, combined with family means no real time to practice much, and given that I'm often at work when others are playing, no time to join squads or anything like that. I used to play IL2 online with mates all the time before the children came along, but nowdays I don't practice enough and don't feel like being an easy target for somebody online all the time - single player messing about with quick missions is where it's at for me, plenty fun enough. Even for somebody who used to do it (like me) it would be a daunting task getting back into it. Plus there's the constant adrenalin overload (I get enough of that from EVE and World of Tanks) which means I'd actually rather just relax and not get into ultra-competitive mode! Frankly the whole multiplayer gaming craze is pretty much overrated if you ask me, and might have contributed to the complete stagnation of decent AI development in games :D
  • Create New...