Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

463 Excellent

About jcomm-il2

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Google Earth...
  • Interests
    Aviation, airplanes and aviation, and airplanes, and girls near airplanes or inside them... only... Ah! Airplanes too!

Recent Profile Visitors

1748 profile views
  1. Couldn't have put it better! Than you Rolling_Thunder - excellent view / explanation of why WT has such an almost addictive effect on me that makes all other feel and look dumb these days ... And honestly I don't find WT anymore "arcade" than IL-2 Great Battles when played in Simulator mode - I actually find that in some aspects aircraft performance appears sometimes closer to the historical data, and there isn't that woobliness that still plagues IL-2...
  2. I noticed that no matter at what altitude I increase or decrease RPM when MP at or bellow 41", there will be no tendency for it to move opposite of RPM. For instance on ground, with MP at, say, 30", RPM reduction should increase MP and the way around. This is due to the blower kicking in above a given MP ( usually 41" ). [SOLVED(?)]: Either I was not looking with sharp eye or something changed in an interim update, but today I was able to test this effect at a very low MP setting while doing engine tests on ground. Bellow around 13" MP the RPM regulations affect MP in the opposite way - incease RPM, MP drops and the way around. It's a slight variation, but it's there. Probably the blower in the modeled P51 kicks in a lot lower then in more modern models?
  3. Well, I started flight simming seriously around 1993, and played most of the tittles, mostly civil, you can name, as well as some not even known to most simmers... My experience with combat flight simulation started with CYAC, a couple of well known attack heli sims, Janes WW2 Fighters, then Combat Flight Simulator and a couple ww1 sims too. Did try the initial version of IL-2 by Oleg, then skipped pretty much all stuff after that one, and returned by the hand of DCS after the fate of MS FLIGHT in 2012. I was tempted by the P51d, and really liked that sim ( still follow the news about it ) but then in 2014 someone offered me IL2 Battle of Stlaingrad, and it became my goto combat flightsim. I even stopped playing PSX, ELITE IFT, X-Plane and P3D to become an almost full time IL2 player. I was once called attention into War Thunder, tried it ( some 3 years ago ) and found it so so so Arcade that I couldn't even believe the guy who told me to try it did actually play t too... Well, things change, and last year I revsited War Thunder, found about the "Simulator mode", Battles and EC, and decided to give it a new try. War Thunder turns out to be the only flight simulator I play these days, and since I never played any other type of games in a PC, it's in fact something I couldn't really expect to happen only 2 yrs ago. When I think about it the reason - for me is probably the fact that there is always something interesting and immersive to do in WT, the sceneries even if reduced and not accurately pretending to represent rw theatres of War, are great, with lots of interesting details, the skies look a lot more interesting than in either IL2 or DCS, and if I look realistically at the level of accuracy and feel of flight, even though ground physics are simplified, in the air most aircraft have performance and feel that doesn't at all disappoint me.
  4. I just wonder if this recent update to X-Plane 11 might be of some interest for the Devs here at 1C / 777 since I believe X-Plane and IL-2 share very much in common regarding the modeling of flight dynamics... The part of the video where Austin starts talking about delayed wash and how it can cause aircraft perturbed in pitch to react less abruptly - wooble less - when the control are returned to neutral is around min 35:00... https://youtu.be/WROEk_Jv33w?t=2129
  5. Have you properly set the new trim controls ? or... Might it be due to the new physiology simulation, limiting the forces that your pilot can apply ?
  6. Do you know - I wasn't even aware this patch had been released !!! Now I have a full work day ahead before I get back home - but please give me some feedback on that P51d and how it performs! Puleeeeeeeze!!!!!
  7. Just did one at 16+ Mbps! Not bad at all for my home link.
  8. It would be great to have some way of setting date / time for a quick mission from inside the game without having to use the Mission Editor. It would be even better if the best adapted seasonal version of teh underlaying map could automatically be selected based on the Date.
  9. But, Motoadve, in your real life simulated dogfights did wake turbulence really play a role ? I do identify it all of the time in my towing times ( I only fly gliders ) but, I never thought about it's relevance for instance during a dogfight between my Me109 E and whoever I'm after πŸ™‚ unless it's a bomber...
  10. I'm not sure I understood the options above... - When you guys say: "two 12.7 mm" do you mean the gondola version, the 700 or the 300 ammunition versions ?
  11. I am really looking fwd for the P-51D in IL-2. Somehow there were always some aspects I seriously doubt about in the way it was modeled in DCS. And then, I will be looking fwd for the day Devs announce the introduction of fuel management, and resulting asymmetric fuel loads in aircraft that have that problem, losing fuel from one tank, etc... πŸ™‚
  12. Thanks for sharing motoadve ! πŸ‘ So, he didn't comment about the huge amounts of tail-heavy trim required for landing, under a quite wide weight range ( fuel + amno ). I still think there is something strange with that aspect of the P-47 FDM. Strangely, I seldom can play any of the glider simulators I have used - and I guess I used all available variants ever marketed. They all felt so far from reality that the only soaring sims I started using are those that come with my navigation softwares πŸ™‚ But there are surely many examples of rw pilots, some professional, who use flight simulators as "simmers" too. We can find some excellent examples at the Aerowinx PSX forums. I never tried VR with the modern technologies. I believe I will skip it in this life. I'm almost 100% sure it would get me really dizzy...
  13. In May Geronimo553 posted in a thread about playing IL-2 in career mode some suggestion for optimal graphics performance. Since then I have been using this settings, actually reducing a couple of parameters on he left column, and haven't had better results ever. That thread and Geronimo's post will probably get "lost" among the many posts in this forum, so, I decided to leave a link here today just as a reminder:
  14. Mea-culpa too... Thinking about the point in Go_Pre's post I sort of agree with he's view, and why ? Well, not implying this is the motivation of anyone who uses this sort of tag - "as a real pilot" - I have to admit that I 99% of the time stamp it in a thread, uselessly trying to support my "evidences" with a supposed acquired experience, when in fact my RL experience is after all not a factor when the subject is the analysis of a flight simulation software and the way it models flight dynamics having in mind that it's users are going to be interacting with it through various types of hardware controllers, most of which aren't even close to being considered adequate, and even more having in mind, in my particular case, that I only fly gliders !!! Ridiculous, I must admit πŸ˜• It's indeed the kind of tag, I use to somehow - uselessly - try to give more weight to my view... and it's after all, and most of the time, even if we don't want to admit it, some kind of "need for recognition", and not in it's most pure intent, but rather in a much more - useless - pride-oriented mood. I seldom read such tags from Dakpilot, didn't even notice LuseKoft, Go_Pre and many other for sure are/were owners of a pilot license. I do know, and somehow feel "jealous" about the fact that guys like Syn-Requiem, who is a dedicated user of IL-2 and a very cooperative member with he's instructional videos, fought for he's dream of becoming a professional pilot, took a hiatus from flight simulation, and is now flying for a job, fulfilling he's dream. Does he need to keep saying in his posts and / or youtubes, that he is now an ATPL ? No.... So, and again not trying to apply the same interpretation to what makes motoadve, and myself, sometimes use these "being a pilot..." tag, and ehehe, I even try to - uselessly - emphasize it with that additional mention to "for more than ... years..." 😎, I have to admit I do see the point of Go_Pre's post, and actually sympathize with he's view / hint. Most of the time when posting such tags, I'd better know, as some at these forums actually do know, how to present my arguments in a much more scientific, supported way - using physics, and particularly flight dynamics but also knowledge about flight simulation techniques and the particular features of the aircraft being modeled in this sim. Some guys are living encyclopedias of ww2 aircraft and armament! Go_Pre's point fits beautifully to my mindset, when writing those tags - I have to acknowledge it! Suggestion...: Let's move on and continue to discuss the aspects we find, as simmers, which is exactly what we are around here and whenever discussing flight simulation games, and not trying to show our "credentials" but rather, try to present some sound / mathematical / scientific-based arguments to support our ideas, like some actually do around here - many times making me pick a pencil and a sheet of sheet of paper to try to better understand / reach what they're passing.
  • Create New...