Start-up procedures

[Sokol1]

But start procedure is already showed (in less "automated" plane):

 

 

Nothing about fuel cock or magnetos... set some levers and press I (or E).

Hope that anyone complain that is too "complex".

 

Sokol1

Edited September 24, 2013 by Sokol1

[Chill31]

I have some time working with WWII aircraft, and I don't think the essence of the plane is in the start up procedure.  Are some of them more intricate than others?  Sure.  However, getting the airplane running is not as difficult as keeping it running in flight and using it to fight. 

 

I think you would find it MUCH more entertaining and insightful if the start up was simple and realiable. ie. you are pretty much assured of getting the motor running and flying the plane. 

 

The part of engine and systems management that would really add immersion is the in flight management of fuel systems, cooling systems, hydraulic systems etc.  These mundane activities are an annoyance when cruising the plane around.  While using the plane in combat, your ability to use these systems appropriately now has major implications on the outcome of the fight.

 

So I would vote no to complex start up.  BUT I would vote yes for complex engine/systems management.

[Cybermat47]

I usually just let the autopilot take off, due to my lousy rudder skills.

[FuriousMeow]

I have some time working with WWII aircraft, and I don't think the essence of the plane is in the start up procedure.  Are some of them more intricate than others?  Sure.  However, getting the airplane running is not as difficult as keeping it running in flight and using it to fight. 

 

I think you would find it MUCH more entertaining and insightful if the start up was simple and realiable. ie. you are pretty much assured of getting the motor running and flying the plane. 

 

The part of engine and systems management that would really add immersion is the in flight management of fuel systems, cooling systems, hydraulic systems etc.  These mundane activities are an annoyance when cruising the plane around.  While using the plane in combat, your ability to use these systems appropriately now has major implications on the outcome of the fight.

 

So I would vote no to complex start up.  BUT I would vote yes for complex engine/systems management.

 

I concur with this. I'm also all for a myrid of difficulty options so that not all systems require management (not everyone has a HOTAS with all the buttons/rotaries/hats/switches to accomodate it).

 

Properly managing the aircraft's systems so that fuel, for instance, is managed properly so that the optimal distance is attained but at the same time the appropriate tanks are drained first, or equally, so the aircraft has a proper CoG should it have to enter combat interests me. Sitting there and pumping the fuel cock 3 or 4 times and then switching on one magneto then the next and pressing I to insert the starter round in the motor (for some aircraft) is uninteresting and does little more than waste time.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I have some time working with WWII aircraft, and I don't think the essence of the plane is in the start up procedure.  Are some of them more intricate than others?  Sure.  However, getting the airplane running is not as difficult as keeping it running in flight and using it to fight. 

 

I think you would find it MUCH more entertaining and insightful if the start up was simple and realiable. ie. you are pretty much assured of getting the motor running and flying the plane. 

 

The part of engine and systems management that would really add immersion is the in flight management of fuel systems, cooling systems, hydraulic systems etc.  These mundane activities are an annoyance when cruising the plane around.  While using the plane in combat, your ability to use these systems appropriately now has major implications on the outcome of the fight.

 

So I would vote no to complex start up.  BUT I would vote yes for complex engine/systems management.

 

But surely if you need to manage the engine systems in flight they need to be managed on the ground. I don't really care about chocks/magnetos etc but those same engine systems need to be set up for take off. I would be disappointed if everything you spawned at the airfield everything was ready to go. Lets be honest it's not exactly rocket science in say CLOD/Il2/ROF to get the engines started and take off, it can be done in seconds unless we are talking more about the DCS style in which case I would fully agree. I don't have any inclination to spend 5 minutes clicking switches before take off.

[VeryOldMan]

But surely if you need to manage the engine systems in flight they need to be managed on the ground. I don't really care about chocks/magnetos etc but those same engine systems need to be set up for take off. I would be disappointed if everything you spawned at the airfield everything was ready to go. Lets be honest it's not exactly rocket science in say CLOD/Il2/ROF to get the engines started and take off, it can be done in seconds unless we are talking more about the DCS style in which case I would fully agree. I don't have any inclination to spend 5 minutes clicking switches before take off.

 

Not rocket since  but you maybe SURE that  compelx startup procedures can easily kill  50% in sales. Because  the majority of market    cannot pilot a plane.

 

Even DCS has to provide a  easy startup or they would   just FLOP as a product.  If i was forced to learn the  procedures and  switches to every plane, I would   certainly never again buy extra planes  

Edited September 25, 2013 by VeryOldMan

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Yeh I agree on DCS, I can't be bothered learning all that stuff even though I did buy A-10. it just put me off.

 

ROF/IL2/CLOD and probably BOS is way simpler. If people are put off by stuff like that they can easily fly without complex engine management (in ROF you can switch off individual components of CEM/FM like the rads or miixture) so I doubt it's going to be a big deal.

 

I guess it all comes down to us having options

[102nd-YU-devill]

Definitely complex start-up procedures should be in, however only if we have as detailed engine menagement, otherwise it has no purpose.

And this has nothing to do with a clickable cockpit. If you want full immersion, build a switch box as some people suggested. Clickable cockpit is not manageable in flight and is a completely unnatural interface, bringing very little to immersion.

But why do I want everything to be as detailed as possible in a combat simulator?

As other people said, the complexity is an important part of a combat SIMULATOR. "Simulator" is different than "game" in that it sacrifices player comfort for providing as real as possible a challenge.

 

When I fly the IL2 1946 I do it only in a SEOW battle. For those who don't know, this means one or two missions per week, for which you have to be ready, briefed, trained with your teammates. You assemble 60-100 people organized in squadrons and you fly a mission of 2 or sometimes 3 hours from take off to landing and your best reward is to come back alive. Sometimes, out of this total mission time, combat takes only a few minutes. You are at the edge of the endurance of your plane, and the edge of your personal endurance since you have to fly the thing for 2 hours without pause or stop and without letting your guard down. These kind of missions are the absolute best in recreating a "realistic feel" of any combat simulator I've ever tried; and I've tried every single one made for a PC from 1993 onwards.

 

Anyway, back to the point: immersion of such a mission can only be enhanced by introducing more realism even at the start up sequence. You start with a full squadron of 12 planes lined up at an airfield, you have to fly for a long strech until you get to your target, so knowing the proper procedure for a correct and timely engine start is an essential challenge in maintaining a cohesiveness of your squad. Has nothing to do with civilian flight training, and it was a real task in WW2 pilot missions. So, why take it away?

 

Of course, I am not at all against having simple engine menagement options or start-up options. Different people want different things, but robbing a SIMULATOR of complexity because people like it simple is completely BS! Nobody here is advocating that "simple" mode should not exist, so why do people deem it necessary to advocate that a "complex" mode (for everything that can be modelled as complex) should not exist in a sim? There are plenty of "World of Airplanes" type products on the market that cater to this, so if someone wants to call this a "sim" then by all means don't be shy to make it as complex as possible, limited only by computing power requirements and designer/historical knowledge.

 

I do need to say one more thing: I have never been dishartened by a steep learning curve of a game or a sim, but the thing that gets me down the most is a bad control assignment interface in game options. I do not know why, but most of the newer sims are doing a terrible job at this, including RoF. I feel developers are trying to invent hot water and over-engineering it in the process. And the result is a terribly complex and unwieldy interface.

[Dakpilot]

"I do need to say one more thing: I have never been disheartened by a steep learning curve of a game or a sim, but the thing that gets me down the most is a bad control assignment interface in game options. I do not know why, but most of the newer sims are doing a terrible job at this, including RoF. I feel developers are trying to invent hot water and over-engineering it in the process. And the result is a terribly complex and unwieldy interface".

 

THIS...by all means allow for as much tweaking as possible but make the basics SIMPLE and easily accessible to even the newest beginners, setting up pilot head/camera assignments in ROF for example, is far from intuitive, works great and is superb in execution but NOT easy for the beginner who is new to this genre

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[LLv44_Mprhead]

 

"I do need to say one more thing: I have never been disheartened by a steep learning curve of a game or a sim, but the thing that gets me down the most is a bad control assignment interface in game options. I do not know why, but most of the newer sims are doing a terrible job at this, including RoF. I feel developers are trying to invent hot water and over-engineering it in the process. And the result is a terribly complex and unwieldy interface".

 

THIS...by all means allow for as much tweaking as possible but make the basics SIMPLE and easily accessible to even the newest beginners, setting up pilot head/camera assignments in ROF for example, is far from intuitive, works great and is superb in execution but NOT easy for the beginner who is new to this genre

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

 

Never was a truer word said! Both DCS and RoF (also CloD in some degree) are terrible in this sense. And please, don't come here to tell me "but it's really quite simply...", it really isn't. Setting up basic controls should be something that someone opening up controls menu in flight sim for the first time in his life can do in less than ten minutes.

 

I know this is something that developers easily get kind of blind of, since ofc it's easy when you know the system inside out, thus ending up building stuff "from engineers to engineers" so to say. Everything in user interface should be tested with average joe test persons, with someone who doesn't have any previous experience. And if person like that can use UI without too many problems, you know you are doing something right.

[Langer]

Maybe there is a possibilty to extend the complex motor management to the cfs and make it optional for single and multiplayer mode. 

[LukeFF]

Never was a truer word said! Both DCS and RoF (also CloD in some degree) are terrible in this sense. And please, don't come here to tell me "but it's really quite simply...", it really isn't. Setting up basic controls should be something that someone opening up controls menu in flight sim for the first time in his life can do in less than ten minutes.

 

No, it is really quite simple. Between the tutorial video put out by Jason and what I've written in the manual, it isn't exactly rocket science to set up controllers in ROF.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFUxCm9CIgg

Maybe there is a possibilty to extend the complex motor management to the cfs and make it optional for single and multiplayer mode. 

 

Not gonna happen.

[Gort]

Yeah, it would really suck if I had to call my wife in to crank the inertial starter for me everytime I re-set.

[Gort]

Tank and fuel controls should be modeled.  You are talking airplanes that had voracious appetites for aviation fuel especially at their limited over boost conditions.  Mismanagement of fuel did happen and could have grave consequences in a fight.

 

Many wing tank equipped aircraft will experience fuel starvation when the aircraft is banked into the non-empty tank.  Keep in mind that aircraft do not fly wings level in a crosswind to maintain a steady altitude state making it very difficult to keep the aircraft aloft if you find yourself banked into the non-empty tank. 

 

That is not mention the weight imbalance issues which is the main reason for management of fuel. 

 

Again, some WWII aircraft managed the fuel for the pilot as well.  Not modeling that gives the advantage to aircraft which historically demanded a higher pilot workload.

Really? Which ones? You are talking about uncoordinated flight on an airplane without a feed tank or fuel sump and aerobatic fuel pickup?

[Gort]

I put fiddling with control configurations as one of the things I despise in flight sims. They are a necessary evil, but too tedious is many sims, which is the same issue with clickable cockpits.

 

It's not the idea of complex management, it's the implementation.

 

Once we all have large computer touch screens, this issue will fade from our consciousness. Reaching to touch a cockpit switch or control with your finger will be far more enjoyable than the mouse pointer method we use today.

 

Let's revisit this in 2019.

Edited October 9, 2013 by Victory205

[Crump]

Really? Which ones? You are talking about uncoordinated flight on an airplane without a feed tank or fuel sump and aerobatic fuel pickup?

Any wing tank equipped aircraft that the pilot mismanaged fuel resulting in a dry tank.

 

Any questions?

[Dakpilot]

No, it is really quite simple. Between the tutorial video put out by Jason and what I've written in the manual, it isn't exactly rocket science to set up controllers in ROF.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFUxCm9CIgg

 

The video is great but for the first time user how easy is this to find? a link to this, or the vid and others should be included with the official release.

 

When you have been around flight sims for years it may not be rocket science but to a new user I stand by my point that it is daunting, and making this accessible to newusers should be very high in priorities

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[=BLW=Pablo]

 

Start-up procedures are interesting for those little flies.

after a while it becomes boring and tiring.

 

~S~

 

[[RG]Flanker1985]

The more realistic the better. ---------- Always 

[Karost]

I vote 2

It should stay in difficult option toggle  for engine management and start up procedure.

[BMA_West]

Can we have some middle ground?

Exactly

[Marcomies]

In my opinion there's no point going deeper in the start-up modeling than what it is now. Without interactive cockpit it's just boring and waste of resources.

 

But I like realistic star-up animations, currently not all necessary buttons are pressed and magnetos are almost teleporting around, I hope this will be different in final game.

[69thGlowplugv]

Wow, what planet are you full real guys on?? The original COD release bombed because it was way to complex in a way that added little to the point of game: dogfight and drop bombs. New users gave up (i.e., look at the sales) and experienced IL-2 1946 guys (like me) just wanted to fly the damn plane. All this detail is nice, but will (or does) the new game provide detailed charts, checklists, power settings versus altitude, etc. so you can actually put in the right settings. Hey, "real" pilots had that. Without something for each plane that explains what the modelers did, it is hopeless trial and error search. For me, cut the crap and put in the bare minimum to get the plane flying and put your real work into plane flight models.

[FlatSpinMan]

I'm fine with the Normal mode for now - start up the engine and get going (carefully).

I'm still not that happy with my control mappings so, in my limited playing time, I mainly want to fly around, maybe blow something up. Later I might explore the more complex things.

 

As things stand, that's very doable for those who like to, while for those who are more simulation- or detail-oriented, there's the more detailed Expert mode.

[Nen]

Well giving that starting the DCS Mustang is dead easy after reading a 6 lines check list, I can't see the fear of some people about "complex" procedures. Another issue is to implement it in the sim. But that is another matter.

Even with that, it can be done in DCS style with a "cheat" key that do it for you. I can't see why both systems can't coexist. 

I personally enjoy doing everything on my own following the checklist. 

• 0

• Quote
• MultiQuote
• Delete
•  
•  

[Half-DevilPorkChop]

i voted for the complex start but, i dont like waiting for the engine to warn up.

[snowsnipersnow_sniper]

in the "custom" settings you can check "warmed up engine"

[Good991]

would like the choice

[-NW-ChiefRedCloud]

I prefer complex to semi-complex ..... But this isn't about me is it? The devs have to come up  with a middle ground I guess to hopefully have a broader player base. Something for every one but not to drive off say NEW blood (money). I've seen a few things that I don't like but I'm trying to look at the full ball of wax and not just one or two things. The new floating interface, Compass, speed, & altitude, is ok but I would like to see, if there isn't already and I just don't know of it, an option for the more informative one in anticipation of Brand NEW pilots to BoS. I will learn to read my gages then turn this off personally. But a New pilot may need all the aids he/she can get.

 

I don't want my senses over loaded but I do want to feel like it's MY responsibility to get the plane up and flying and into the mission. If there is a good compromise, then we'll see. Just because I like or dislike, is no reason to change things. But considering it and perhaps commenting on it, might help.

 

Chief

Edited September 15, 2014 by -NW-ChiefRedCloud

[BM357_TinMan]

I vote for being able to assign keys to the different things that should be done (magnetos, primer, throttle, starter, etc) for each aircraft and allowing us to have a "difficulty" setting tick that we could set.
Some people aren't interested, and this is fine, just use "E" like it is now, but some of us would really like it.

And, I'm in the "clickable cockpits aren't necessary" camp (I do think that they are kind of cool, but...)

Edited September 15, 2014 by TynMahn

[Guest deleted@30725]

I was a bit disappointed when I finally realised I could not play with anything in the cockpit except the most basic of stuff. Unlike in Cliffs of Dover where you have almost free reign to play to your hearts content. It makes starting with the engine off pointless when you can let the ai turn the plane on and are harshly reminded this is a game with rules and 'you can't do that'. Kinda frustrating the first time I pressed E and I could not stop it doing stuff. It may as well fly the plane too.

 

I guess I'm in the small minority that it just as happy starting, and flying the plane around for 20 minutes than getting straight into some mad combat. I wish they could have enabled it under expert.

 

I'll never get to fly or fly a bf109 so a game is a close as I can get. The look, feel and flying is cool. I just wanted that satisfaction of knowing that I took off all by myself especially after they put all that work into the game. Oh well. Maybe in a future update.

 

DCS and cliffs of dover for my start up nerdgasms.

Edited September 19, 2014 by deleted@30725

[Tompa_73]

Voted complex, it isnt that hard when you learn it and you learn it pretty fast.

This would be so awesome to do in expert mode, full complex engine management

with no radar on map and maptools too for that matter.....ah...the dream...