Rise of Flight vs IL-2 BoS / BoM flight dynamics...

[Guest deleted@50488]

Dear All,

 

as a total Fan of the 1C /777 flight Dynamics and overall Physics modeling, which presently I consider the best among all of the sims I ever used, and having bought RoF but seldom have played it, I was wondering what are the main differences, flight dynamics wise, between the two tittles ?

 

I believe 1C /777 merged experience from both teams to build what we have in il2 BoS / BoM, but I've heard and read all sorts of positive comments about the flight dynamics in RoF.

 

The few times I started and used RoF for a while I did in fact like the sensation of flight, and I found rather plausible the simulation of flying those ww1 glorious machines, but honestly it appeared to me that they behaved more or less the same way.

 

Taking off with the various Axis and Allied fighters gave me more or less the same torque effects, and flying, appart from differences in speed and roll rates between the models I tried, didn't reveal much of a difference between models.

 

I would liek to know your opinion.

 

Thx!

Edited June 2, 2016 by jcomm

[Bando]

They do certainly not behave the same way. If you really feel like that, I don't know if we're flying the same ROF.

Each aircraft has it's own character, just like the ones in BO*.

It's another era, another war and the machines were in development, so there is a huge difference between late war models and mid/early war models.

Also the way they fired their machine guns was difficult at first. Ask Roland Garos.

 

For what it was designed for (a WW1 sim) it is superb imo.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Don't get me wrong Dando,

 

I was not suggesting RoF's flight dynamics aren't excellent, but just that probably due to the real nature of the modeled aircraft probably they weren't that much different in terms, for instance, of prop effects IRL.

 

I see that torque and propwash effects are generally mild compared to the ww2 fighters we have in BoS / BoM, but that makes sense of course, given the power of their engines, even if the power / weight ratio can be high forthose ww1 machines...

[BraveSirRobin]

Both games use the Digital Nature engine, so they both have similar physics models.

[Original_Uwe]

It's a big reason why I've fallen out with BoS&M.

Every time I fly the 109, it feels as weighty as a DR1. No sense of weight, inertia, or general feeling that it's a 6000 pound war machine with 1500 hp, but more a fast kite.

In RoG I find this fairly appropriate, less so here.

[Urra]

It's a big reason why I've fallen out with BoS&M.

Every time I fly the 109, it feels as weighty as a DR1. No sense of weight, inertia, or general feeling that it's a 6000 pound war machine with 1500 hp, but more a fast kite.

In RoG I find this fairly appropriate, less so here.

I was hoping to make separate post on how many would like to add a little drift after stick movement. (1-2%), to make all aircraft feel a little more weighty ~ momentum.

[BraveSirRobin]

It's a big reason why I've fallen out with BoS&M.

Every time I fly the 109, it feels as weighty as a DR1. No sense of weight, inertia, or general feeling that it's a 6000 pound war machine with 1500 hp, but more a fast kite.

In RoG I find this fairly appropriate, less so here.

 

They would probably climb a lot better if they were modeled with the same weight as a WW1 aircraft.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Interesting how our views ( siimmer views ) can be show us the same in  so different perspectives.

 

I fly for real at 36 years, and I have elected IL-2 BoS BoM my preferred flight simulator ever, regarding the modelling of prop aircraft because I find exactly details like the sense of inertia and response to controls at different speeds and AoAs extremely realistic.

 

I even dropped DCS because I was just using it for the ww2 birds, and indeed I find them even better modeled, flight dynamics wise, in BoS / BoM, not to talk of the damage models, immersive scenery, and so on...

 

Yesterday I re-installed RoF and took it for a ride. When configuring my controllers I recalled how handy that possibility to "tweak" our axis curves to such a level of detail really makes a difference. I wish we could have that in IL-2 ...

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I put my stick sensitivity for pitch at 80% after experimenting with the MiG-3 and LaGG-3, and the aircraft get really heavy at that point, in a good way. Try that out Uwe, it might work for you

[Lusekofte]

This is why I stuck with Russian planes, German planes got a too light feeling. While Russian planes really give you a amazing feel of physics. But I have a very good impression on all ROF planes

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

German planes got a too light feeling.

 

-snip-

 

You say this in virtually every post but it's still completely unsubstantiated, entirely unquantified and it seems the majority of people don't agree with your impression that you seem to be trying to push as a fact.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

SG, the Bf-109F/G does seem to suffer from some instability that most describe either as jumpiness, wobble or lightness, which is to be addressed eventually as time allows according to the developers' team.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Yes, but that is an issue with the rudder modeling and not the weight or physics. The problem with the OP hypothesis is that physics applies to the two sims differently or the BOS aircraft have no weight. Both are patently false. The problem is two fold. There seems to be an expectation by some that fighter planes should fly on rails, they don't. There IS, however, an acknowledged flaw in the 109 rudders. I don't fly the BOM E model but I've heard it is largely solved with that one. Simply landing a FW with a proper flare vs an improper flare will tell you these aircraft are VERY heavy. This physics engine is the best available on a PC, period.

 

Physics is physics.

Edited June 3, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[Lusekofte]

You say this in virtually every post but it's still completely unsubstantiated, entirely unquantified and it seems the majority of people don't agree with your impression that you seem to be trying to push as a fact.

 

 

Is that a fact?

And shall I quote you all the time you quote someone and say exactly that every time you disagree. Are there some kind of license having a opinion?

I fly LW planes in COD, I simply do not like the Helium effect some LW planes got . Like HE 111 and 109 . I am more positive towards the JU 87 and 110, JU 88 seems good but just tried it a couple of times. Like you I got my subjective opinions , and I like to express them without your censorship , thanks. I suggest you block me or something. I do not care, just leave me alone 

Blah , I hardly fly this game anymore so it does not matter anyway

Edited June 3, 2016 by 216th_LuseKofte

[Guest deleted@50488]

 The problem with the OP hypothesis is that physics applies to the two sims differently or the BOS aircraft have no weight. Both are patently false. The problem is two fold. There seems to be an expectation by some that fighter planes should fly on rails, they don't. There IS, however, an acknowledged flaw in the 109 rudders. I don't fly the BOM E model but I've heard it is largely solved with that one. Simply landing a FW with a proper flare vs an improper flare will tell you these aircraft are VERY heavy. This physics engine is the best available on a PC, period.

 

Physics is physics.

 

@HerrMurf: This is not what I wanted to state with the OP HerrMurf... Quite on the contrary because I do not share the opinion that BoS / BoM aircraft feel, in any way, light... Quite on the contrary, which some simple calculations involving just static margin and some extrapolation would confirm.

 

My original question was more one of the RoF physics model being simpler, something I just confirmed to not be the case since I re-installed and have been using it during the last days, and actually finding that both sims, even if developed by elements of both teams by that time not merged, still provide, as you say and I fully agree with, the best flight dynamics and overall physics modeling among all flight simulators I have used ( haven't tried Aerofly v2 yet, but that's another league... )

Edited June 4, 2016 by jcomm

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Sorry, I misused the term OP. I meant the one just above my last post which is implying what I stated.

 

Sincerest apologies.

Edited June 4, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[Guest deleted@50488]

No problem and actually no apologies needed at all :-)  I just wrote to emphasize that I do find BoS / BoM / RoF flight dynamics unique !

[unreasonable]

 

My original question was more one of the RoF physics model being simpler, something I just confirmed to not be the case since I re-installed and have been using it during the last days, and actually finding that both sims, even if developed by elements of both teams by that time not merged, still provide, as you say and I fully agree with, the best flight dynamics and overall physics modeling among all flight simulators I have used ( haven't tried Aerofly v2 yet, but that's another league... )

 

Glad you have explored RoF a little more: there is no doubt that the aircraft have very distinct characteristics - from light rotaries, pushers, monoplanes through to heavier late model planes, the technique required to fly well varies considerably. 

 

That is not to say that every RoF model is right: some of them could be improved, and many of them roll too well, but that is fine tuning rather than anything to do with the underlying physics assumptions, I believe.

 

There may well have been some changes when BoS was developed, but anyone who has not tried RoF can rest assured that the feeling of flying those wonderful contraptions is there to be enjoyed.

[ShamrockOneFive]

It's a big reason why I've fallen out with BoS&M.

Every time I fly the 109, it feels as weighty as a DR1. No sense of weight, inertia, or general feeling that it's a 6000 pound war machine with 1500 hp, but more a fast kite.

In RoG I find this fairly appropriate, less so here.

 

Not the first time you or someone on this board has said that... And I was inclined to believe you until I flew the Dr.I (very recently) in Rise of Flight and the two couldn't be further apart. Just IMHO.

Edited June 9, 2016 by ShamrockOneFive