FW190 : How to fly - Please ignore or delete this -

[3./JG15_Kampf]

 

 

Well, then prove that they aren't only emotions, instead of mocking the developers like you do over and over again.   I'll quote one of the devs words here:    "Anyway, as I've said many times before, rule is: in my PM box should be a message where will be: 1. Claim detailed description, which explain all aspects of the claim 2. Supporting historical technical sources like flight manuals, flight test reports and so on, with strict pointing page and line where we should look for proofs 3. Strict flight tests in game, which shows significant difference between game and historical source. If it is - we start to investigate the claim. Two finals are possible: 1. We provide "our FM is ok" proofs 2. We fix the issue I'm hope it's clear. And, actually, it works."

 

 

Another interesting subject we touched during last week was an additional investigation of the MiG-3 behavior on its landing gear. The work has been initiated after a heated debate in the Russian-speaking community about the safe landing complexity of the MiG-3, especially in the crosswind conditions.Nevertheless, we decided to double-check the landing gear model of MiG-3 again and try to tune the settings (outside of those unknown to us) that could improve stability and control of the aircraft when moving on the ground.

 

it does not look like PM message box

[Crump]

Well, then prove that they aren't only emotions, instead of mocking the developers like you do over and over again.

 

I'll quote one of the devs words here: 

 

"Anyway, as I've said many times before, rule is: in my PM box should be a message where will be:

1. Claim detailed description, which explain all aspects of the claim

2. Supporting historical technical sources like flight manuals, flight test reports and so on, with strict pointing page and line where we should look for proofs

3. Strict flight tests in game, which shows significant difference between game and historical source.

If it is - we start to investigate the claim. Two finals are possible:

1. We provide "our FM is ok" proofs

2. We fix the issue

I'm hope it's clear. And, actually, it works."

It has been proven with multiple sources and original documentation. The word from the Dev's is they will fix it when they do the FW190A5.

[Dakpilot]

 

 

I'll quote one of the devs words here: "Nothing wrong, its only emotions...." 

 

 

 

 

 

That quote should be taken in context of when it was said and exactly in response to what ...

 

not simply trotted out as a catchall answer from all Dev's to all questions

 

what you are doing is simply trolling

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[JG13_opcode]

They've already said they'll reexamine the A-3 when the -5 comes out.

 

Might as well give it a rest until then.

[L3Pl4K]

 

 

dive

Ok, if we compare dive performance with the real world, it looks like something is wrong:

http://www.beim-zeugmeister.de/zeugmeister/index.php?id=24&L=tigeyhey

[Arsenal53]

 

I'll quote one of the devs words here: 

 

"Anyway, as I've said many times before, rule is: in my PM box should be a message where will be:

1. Claim detailed description, which explain all aspects of the claim

2. Supporting historical technical sources like flight manuals, flight test reports and so on, with strict pointing page and line where we should look for proofs

3. Strict flight tests in game, which shows significant difference between game and historical source.

If it is - we start to investigate the claim. Two finals are possible:

1. We provide "our FM is ok" proofs

2. We fix the issue

I'm hope it's clear. And, actually, it works."

 

 

I confess I am rather curious to see the sources on which the devs rely to build the flight model. and if they are also undeniable that would terminate any discussion.

I fear it is not based on suppositions as the famous report Sorenson and Warburton where dynamic stall is mentioned with an estimate of the speed and force. for me it raises questions the read speed can be good but the estimated G is questionable. how it has been estimated? with an accelerometer? or is an estimate of the pilot? the English or American pilots have they given the fact that the steering position in the cockpit FW helps mitigate the effects of G suffered?

what about other reports mentionning alsoa bad dynamic stall but also mentionning the possibility of FW to "literally hang on its propeller below 250mph"?

Eric Brown explains this event a little differently: according to him, the force applied to the stick on the elevators (because the depth is heavy in normal speed) suddenly reverse (especially if the pilot use the trim to lighten elevators) and can surprise untrained pilot to pull the stick to far backward and bring the aircraft to stall:

"The elevators proved to be moderately heavy at all speeds, particularly at above 350mph (565km/h), when they became heavy enough to impose a tactical restriction with regard to pullout from low-level dives. This heaviness was accentuated because of the nose-down pitch that was evident at high speeds when trimmed for low speeds. The critical speed at which this change of trim happened was around 220mph (355km/h), and it could easily be gauged in turns. Below that speed, the Fw 190 had a tendency to tighten up in a turn, but above 220mph, some backward stick pressure was required to hold the turn. Thus, in combat, the pilot had to be aware that if he dived on the enemy to get enough speed to follow him into a steep turn, he had to ensure that he didn't lighten his initial pull force by using the trimmer. As speed fell off in the turn, he would have a sudden reversal of stick force that could tighten the turn so much that the plane would depart dramatically into a spin. Most of the early Fw 190 pilots were, however, too well-trained to lose their cool to that extent in battle.

 

My conclusions are that you could turn fight in an fw190 if you were aware of the above and were well trained and experienced enough to remember it in combat."

 

all this gives me the impression that it's always chosen the low option for a camp and the best for the other.

as I have already said if there is such a gap between the qualities "ingame" and debriefings of protagonists of the time, at least to believe that they will contribute to making a huge bluff, it smell a rat.

Edited November 6, 2016 by Arsenal53

[Danziger]

 

 

Another interesting subject we touched during last week was an additional investigation of the MiG-3 behavior on its landing gear. The work has been initiated after a heated debate in the Russian-speaking community about the safe landing complexity of the MiG-3, especially in the crosswind conditions.Nevertheless, we decided to double-check the landing gear model of MiG-3 again and try to tune the settings (outside of those unknown to us) that could improve stability and control of the aircraft when moving on the ground.

 

it does not look like PM message box

Probably because they have already been doing a lot of work on landing gear physics in the very recent past while FM personnel are swamped with work on new planes to meet BoK timeline. That's probably the idea behind looking over the A3 when they begin working on the A5.

[wtornado]

Wait until next year and find out.

 

It is hard to judge this game anymore when there.

is so much WIP.

 

By the middle of next year a lot of the stuff should be fixed by then.

 

I do not play anymore waited so long for a co-op mod I stopped playing completelyhahaha.

[SJ_Butcher]

wow guys it's hard to believe that developers said they are going to fix the FM in other game iteration, FM in my opinion is the most important thing, this is a simulator and the game should be 100% accurate or really close to it, if they are focused in bringing more planes and other secondary things without fixing the current planes it means they only want money from us. Fix the current planes, then add new planes and stuff....

[Danziger]

It means the people who approved their budget expect them to deliver on time. The fact that they will be able to rework an older product while working on a similar new product is a bonus. They could always delay it to a break between releases but I think most people would agree that working on the old 190 at the same time as the new 190 (when everyone will be focused on all things 190) is a good idea. I don't think trying to fix the A3 in a few stolen moments right now would get the best results. When the time comes 190s will get their full attention.

[Irgendjemand]

It has been proven with multiple sources and original documentation. The word from the Dev's is they will fix it when they do the FW190A5.

I understand. And many of us that followed the threads know. The problem is that there is no frikkin official word to us in the DD (or did i just miss it?!). Wouldnt have been that hard to just say so dammit?

Even thou i totally trust you on your word its STILL nothing but hearsay that the FW FM will be reworked. Thats the problem and the reason why quotes like this and sarcasm are coming up.

Edited November 6, 2016 by Irgendjemand

[Arsenal53]

They've already said they'll reexamine the A-3 when the -5 comes out.

 

Might as well give it a rest until then.

 i didn't read it somewhere...

 

in the current state a simple Lagg 3 IA average outperforms a FW 190 in 1 vs 1, whereas with any other aicraft it is a formality, it is very disappointing especially for a premium edition aircraft.

Edited November 6, 2016 by Arsenal53

[JG13_opcode]

i didn't read it somewhere...

Han told me personally via PM.

[LukeFF]

 

 

this is a simulator and the game should be 100% accurate or really close to it

 

You are fooling yourself if you think the game will ever be 100% accurate. 

[SJ_Butcher]

You are fooling yourself if you think the game will ever be 100% accurate. 

 

I don't understand why is soo imposible, maybe there is Russian bias here, we know the devs are Russians and in some games Germans are really hard to play because the Russian bias, in World of Tanks the famous Serb once said, never ever will be a German vehicle better than a Russian tank, and today after 6 years of development that statement is still true, German vehicles are for the high skill players and the Russian tanks are the most noob friendly vehicles, it's just sad that every good game is Russian, they tend to bias their charts, data in order to look better in history when in reality we know that they only won because the Germans were overwhelmed by the entire world, but 1 vs 1 GG. Back on topic is not so hard to just check and recheck the information available and try to see whats its really wrong and fix it, specially if you charge money for just one damn plane, they should at least provide it close to 100% accuracy 

Edited November 6, 2016 by SJ_Butcher

[Arsenal53]

Han told me personally via PM.

 

Wait and see, but I'm rather skeptical.The care given to some other aircraft (MiG recently) prove that these gentlemen devs are capable of producing very sharp things quickly; how long ago there are discussions about the FW?

Edited November 6, 2016 by Arsenal53

[Crump]

I was told by Han on the 27th of October.

[SJ_Butcher]

I was told by Han on the 27th of October.

 

Told you what?

[ShamrockOneFive]

 i didn't read it somewhere...

 

in the current state a simple Lagg 3 IA average outperforms a FW 190 in 1 vs 1, whereas with any other aicraft it is a formality, it is very disappointing especially for a premium edition aircraft.

 

Premium was renamed to Collector and this was a very good idea. Premium aircraft in this series don't mean that the aircraft is better which is why Premium had a bad name. The Premium part was where we paid money to get more aircraft.

 

Wait and see, but I'm rather skeptical.The care given to some other aircraft (MiG recently) prove that these gentlemen devs are capable of producing very sharp things quickly; how long ago there are discussions about the FW?

 

There were and are plenty of discussions about the FW190. Some of those lead to the "fineness adjustments" that we are all now having difficulty with. The problem in my mind is this... We want the solution: A FW190 that flies a bit more like its reputation suggests. The devs want the data so that they can produce the most accurate simulation currently available to them. So if new data replaces old data and the aircraft becomes more like the way we want it then that's good. Until then we're not really sure what we want them to change specifically.

 

The MiG-3 got some extra care because they just changed the whole landing gear suspension system and it stands to reason that such a system may need some fine adjustments. When the FW190 was changed a few times the devs very likely paid attention immediately after. But it comes back to specifics and we don't yet have enough to prove a change. I hope that we do. Its a bloody difficult aircraft to fly right now.

[LukeFF]

 

 

I don't understand why is soo imposible, maybe there is Russian bias here, we know the devs are Russians and in some games Germans are really hard to play because the Russian bias

 

 

 

This conversation is doomed to go nowhere but down so long as people cling to this "Russians are biased" excuse.

[3./JG15_Kampf]

 

 

Posted Yesterday, 13:29 JAGER_Kampf, on 06 Nov 2016 - 00:13, said: Another interesting subject we touched during last week was an additional investigation of the MiG-3 behavior on its landing gear. The work has been initiated after a heated debate in the Russian-speaking community about the safe landing complexity of the MiG-3, especially in the crosswind conditions.Nevertheless, we decided to double-check the landing gear model of MiG-3 again and try to tune the settings (outside of those unknown to us) that could improve stability and control of the aircraft when moving on the ground. it does not look like PM message box Probably because they have already been doing a lot of work on landing gear physics in the very recent past while FM personnel are swamped with work on new planes to meet BoK timeline. That's probably the idea behind looking over the A3 when they begin working on the A5.

 My post was directed at those who always comes with phrase like 'MP messages along with the evidence in this format .... .... ....'. when discussing something about fw190.

I still believe a lot in this SIM. But why tell a few with MP on fw190 A3 will be re-evaluated when leaving the A5? It could be disclosed to the forum as was done with the revaluation announcement of problems in the MIG. This fact creates impartiality.

anxious for DX11

[Bearcat]

I don't understand why is soo imposible, maybe there is Russian bias here, we know the devs are Russians and in some games Germans are really hard to play because the Russian bias, in World of Tanks the famous Serb once said, never ever will be a German vehicle better than a Russian tank, and today after 6 years of development that statement is still true, German vehicles are for the high skill players and the Russian tanks are the most noob friendly vehicles, it's just sad that every good game is Russian, they tend to bias their charts, data in order to look better in history when in reality we know that they only won because the Germans were overwhelmed by the entire world, but 1 vs 1 GG. Back on topic is not so hard to just check and recheck the information available and try to see whats its really wrong and fix it, specially if you charge money for just one damn plane, they should at least provide it close to 100% accuracy 

 

On that note.