Ridiculous 109 pitch rates

[FTC_Riksen]

I just tried this so called "exploit" and it is just impossible to reliably control the plane nevermind shoot at anything with it. I dont see how people are using this ... Im not saying it is your case Haza, but a lot of the claims of exploiting, cheating, etc come from people misjudging the other's energy or netcode issues but hey, if it is unrealistic im in the "fix the issue boat" as well.

[9./JG27DefaultFace]

If there was ever an exploit that does nothing to help you in a fight this would be it..... Haza I'm pretty sure I know which fight you're talking about here. There was no stabilizer trim involved.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I just tried this so called "exploit" and it is just impossible to reliably control the plane nevermind shoot at anything with it. I dont see how people are using this ... Im not saying it is your case Haza, but a lot of the claims of exploiting, cheating, etc come from people misjudging the other's energy or netcode issues but hey, if it is unrealistic im in the "fix the issue boat" as well.

Are talking about stabilizer and elevator on same axis?

[9./JG27DavidRed]

Are talking about stabilizer and elevator on same axis?

 

I just tried this so called "exploit" and it is just impossible to reliably control the plane nevermind shoot at anything with it. I dont see how people are using this ... Im not saying it is your case Haza, but a lot of the claims of exploiting, cheating, etc come from people misjudging the other's energy or netcode issues but hey, if it is unrealistic im in the "fix the issue boat" as well.

if the whole thread really is about this stab and elevator mapped on the same axis, then im with Riksen here, i dont see how this should give you an reliable advantage. at best your burning energy like a champ.

anyway, sure the devs can avoid the possibilty to map them to the same joystick axis IN GAME...this will not change the fact that there is 3rd party joystick software out there though...and with those programs it will still be possible to do exactly that...i think there is nothing the devs can do against this so called "exploit" which in my opinion would only harm the person using it anyway.

[FTC_Riksen]

Are talking about stabilizer and elevator on same axis?

Yes. Thats what you guys are talking about right? If not, please accept my appologies. I'll read the whole topic later ...

[Guest deleted@83466]

Yes. Thats what you guys are talking about right? If not, please accept my appologies. I'll read the whole topic later ...

 

 

I didn't read the entire thread either and I think they are referring to that, but also in part to the rate at which stabilizer trim can be applied when it is mapped to an axis.  So, if I have the trim mapped to a lever and I slam the lever backward or forward, it almost instantaneously moves the stabilizer to that position?  I don't know actually, because I have one of those Saitek Trim Wheels, and to go from full nose up to full nose down requires 9 complete revolutions of the wheel, thus limiting the rate at which the stabilizer can be moved. 

 

Anyway, the BF-109 is the only aircraft in which the stabilizer (or elev trim in other planes) can be mapped to an axis or a wheel, and I actually wish I could use my Trim Wheel for more than just that one plane.  The solution to any problem or "exploit" that may be in use, whether it is actually useful or not, is to simply put a speed limiter on the rate at which stab/trim can be applied, so that rapidly moving an axis to a position doesn't instantaneously put the stabilizer or trim tab at that position.  Pretty sure that is what they have done in DCS for WW2 aircraft that have an actual wheel:  You can map it to an axis and move the axis back and forth as quickly as you want, but the rate is limited, and you can't go from full nose up to full nose down instantaneously.  It is simulating the time it takes to turn the wheel to the desired position (which is pretty quick, but you certainly don't get the "flying tail" effect, that some are complaining about here).

Edited June 10, 2017 by Iceworm

[9./JG27MAD-MM]

What you got from this exploit only you lose your hole Energy? as Hunter you make only a high YoYo and he is completely out of Energy?

[Dr_Molem]

What you got from this exploit only you lose your hole Energy? as Hunter you make only a high YoYo and he is completely out of Energy?

 

Anyone thinking further will have a strong desire to say "No.".

[Haza]

What you got from this exploit only you lose your hole Energy? as Hunter you make only a high YoYo and he is completely out of Energy?

 

 

I guess your assumption is that in this sim/game, players are using the 109 as it was intended?  However, it is amazing the number of engagements when playing Red that I'm involved with against a 109, where this engagement is on the deck with relatively low energy.  However, that said, whether it is high or low, as per the OP, I think it would be advantageous to put this potential issue to bed.  Additionally, I would like to see the VVS flap issue looked at, as Blue guys are very quick when the trim stab issue is raised in chat to mentioned that VVS flaps are being abused.  I realise that as a PC sim it is difficult to factor in the constraints of a real physical pilot, such as being able to operate in the I-16 aircraft the throttle, flaps and landing gear whilst still being able to manoeuvre, something which I would have thought would have created such a high work rate for a RL pilot that it would perhaps just not be physically possible to do.  

 

However, being a realist, I do not believe that I'm some PC gamer WW2 ace who is the best, however, all I humbly request from the developers, it is make this sim as accurate as possible within the constraints that they have.  Being beaten by a better player is one thing and I acknowledge that we have some very good computer game players here, but being beaten because the program allows it to happen, for me is just very disappointing.  

 

Thats said, now I'm aware of the trim stab ability, would I use it?  I doubt it as I always try and zoom and boom in a 109, although it appears most times to end in a boom of fire for me and thankfully always a parachute that always opens 100% of the time (Thankfully this is not historically mapped).

[9./JG27MAD-MM]

Doesn't want to claim they shouldn't fix such behaviour have nothing against it, but on low Speed does the same cost a lot of Energy to pull this Trim Stab Move not to mention you can aim a shot with this or Fly serious same as Yak pull heavy lead with Flaps deployed (sometimes at least :D

You have only to keep in Mind sometimes follow direct your Opponent is not the best way to succeed..

But anyway they let see what the FM updates bring...

[mb339pan]

I just tried this so called "exploit" and it is just impossible to reliably control the plane nevermind shoot at anything with it. I dont see how people are using this ...

+1

[III/JG52_Otto_-I-]

Sigh. Trimming was easy at beginning and early stage of the dive because airspeed hadn't yet produced control forces sufficient to impede said trim adjustment.

This doesn't imply that trimming down is any more or less difficult than trimming up. I can't believe this is what you understood it to mean.

 

 

BTW I supplied not one, but two, sources supporting this. And if you search this forum for "109 trim" you will find that I and others have collectively supplied several other historical reports and records of interview which all corroborate this assertion. Mr Physics and Mr Reality also concur that as airspeed increases the force required to deflect a surface into the airstream increases. So, in short, I base it on several period reports and my sound understanding of the mechanics of flight (BSc (Physics) + postgrad study in aeronautical engineering + a few hundred hours of stick and rudder time). No hours in these ...

but plenty of hours in these ...

 

 

Dear friend:

I'm amazed that a guy like you, who have flyed a real modern fighter, as you said, and don´t knows how a THS (trimmable horizontal Stabilizer) works,.. a basic thing in the formation of a military pilot.

All AIRBUS fleet was equipped with THS, is the best trimmer system for high speed airplanes, and like Bf-109, in the Airbus airliner; THS works as, pitch axis back-up manual control (with a minimal hydraulic power help).

BTW there are many pilot reports about the dive recovery with Trimmable Stabilizer in the Bf-109, from Finnish, Germans, and Spanish pilots. That is not a "exploit" the use of the THS for recovery a Hight speed dive, it is the really way to do it in a Bf-109.

 

You have the German Bf-109 dive test here translated to english here:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/Diving_Test_109F_W.Nr.9228_ger_eng.pdf

 

And you can read in this test how they can recover the dive with and without the Horizontal stabilizer trimmer.

 

Note: In the in last chart Vw means TAS

 

 

Edited October 3, 2017 by III/JG52_Otto_-I-

[Guest deleted@83466]

I think there are only two valid arguments being put forth here:

 

1) Bf-109 stabilizer should not be able to be co-mapped to the elevator axis

2) Bf-109 stabilizer movement should reflect the time it takes to turn the wheel in the cockpit;  Should not be instantaneous

 

For those that say that 1) is not an "exploit", because it's stupid, that may be true.  2) seems like it is more of a concern.

 

In the end though, I think it maybe doesn't matter if people think these two things are exploits are not,  the movement of the stabilizer seems like more of a realism/simulation issue that should be fixed up if for no other reason than to more accurately simulate the operation of the real aircraft. 

Edited June 15, 2017 by Iceworm

[9./JG27DefaultFace]

AFAIK it doesn't move as quickly as the axis does. I have it on the throttle axis on the sidewinder and it does take a bit of time to react. Can't comment on if its a realistic time or not but it isn't instantaneous. I don't really think it's a useful exploit but I see no reason not to stop it being double mapped in game.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

I tested it thoroughly. I'm using force feedback joystick and don't know how it works with no force.

It helped me to get out  faster of dives and make correction better at greater speeds, low on deck i was able to pull faster - turn tighter.

[9./JG27DefaultFace]

IRL it was used by 109 pilots on a few occasions to pull out of steep dives. IDK maybe in the G2 it's more useful but TBH it just sounds like a way to waste energy to me.

[Aap]

2) Bf-109 stabilizer movement should reflect the time it takes to turn the wheel in the cockpit;  Should not be instantaneous

 

It is not instant. There is only marginal difference in time, going from 0 to 100% in Bf109 compared to when keeping the trim button pressed for Yak. 

Edited June 15, 2017 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Guest deleted@83466]

It is not instant. There is only marginal difference in time, going from 0 to 100% in Bf109 compared to when keeping the trim button pressed for Yak. 

 

 

AFAIK it doesn't move as quickly as the axis does. I have it on the throttle axis on the sidewinder and it does take a bit of time to react. Can't comment on if its a realistic time or not but it isn't instantaneous. I don't really think it's a useful exploit but I see no reason not to stop it being double mapped in game.

 

 

Ok, I'll trust you guys on this one....like I said, I have one of those Saitek Trim wheels so I actually have to spin the wheel several times, and never mapped it to something like a throttle lever.   I thought that in addition to the double-mapping, that some people were complaining about this, but if it's not an issue, than it's not an issue.

Edited June 15, 2017 by Iceworm

[Venturi]

Those who argue AGAINST a realistic rate of change... are gamers

 

Those who argue FOR a realistic rate of change... are simmers

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Well, realistically speaking the Game would have to do Slow, Precise Quarter to Third Turns on the Wheel or very quick Sixth to Eighth Turns in Rapid Succession depending on Pilots intent. 

 

There should be no delay to you Keyboard input since the Time it takes the Pilot to reach the wheel is the same as it takes the Simmer to get to his Buttons, unless you are at Negative G of Course. 

 

So how about the Player has to manically Hammer his Trim Button for fast Trimming and Depress it for 1-3 Seconds in Intervalls for Fine Trim in Quarter Turns? Same for Flaps maybe as well?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Ok, I'll trust you guys on this one....like I said, I have one of those Saitek Trim wheels so I actually have to spin the wheel several times, and never mapped it to something like a throttle lever. I thought that in addition to the double-mapping, that some people were complaining about this, but if it's not an issue, than it's not an issue.

I tested it thoroughly (one month on WOL) - stabilizer and pitch on the same axie. I'm using force feedback joystick and don't know how it works with no force.

It helped me to get out faster of dives and make correction better at greater speeds, low on deck i was able to pull faster - getting angle quicker.

Edited June 16, 2017 by 307_Tomcat

[Blutaar]

I tested it thoroughly (one month on WOL) - stabilizer and pitch on the same axie. I'm using force feedback joystick and don't know how it works with no force.

It helped me to get out faster of dives and make correction better at greater speeds, low on deck i was able to pull faster - turn tighter.

So what? Just beause one Guy says its kind of adventageous and many other tells us its crap, who is right?

I tested this 5 mins and think its just crap, cant imagine why someone uses this for a whole month. :o

How is formation flying without trim, how is aiming with the whobble 109 with this kind of setup?

To be honest, i dont care. If you think you need that to be competetive in a 109 so be it but dont tell storys bro.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

So what? Just beause one Guy says its kind of adventageous and many other tells us its crap, who is right?

I tested this 5 mins and think its just crap, cant imagine why someone uses this for a whole month. :o

How is formation flying without trim, how is aiming with the whobble 109 with this kind of setup?

To be honest, i dont care. If you think you need that to be competetive in a 109 so be it but dont tell storys bro.

Who said that, i just tested it, i tell my obserwation, i don't need that to be competitive - LOL go to doctor and check your head because you imagine a lot ;-)

btw do you have FF joystick, ?

 

that was that month test - but it prove nothing just that is doable and work as i described earley

http://il2stat.aviaskins.com:8008/en/pilot/2482/307_Tomcat/?tour=21

Edited June 16, 2017 by 307_Tomcat

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

As said in DD new 109 FM will significantly reduce its pitch control and high speeds - mapping both on same axis might help to overcome that restriction.

[Guest deleted@83466]

As said in DD new 109 FM will significantly reduce its pitch control and high speeds - mapping both on same axis might help to overcome that restriction.

 

Well, the DD also says that they increased the transit time of the Stabilizer from 5 seconds nose up to nose down, to 15 seconds, according to new reference material.  This increased lag time I would think might further diminish the usefulness of using any technique to use the Stabilizer as an "all flying tail" via double mapping.   I would think that a player that dials in "combat trim" at the beginning of a fight, somewhere close to neutral, and doesn't change it much, would have much greater flexibility in maneuver than some player that has his stabilizer constantly moving around, lagging behind the movement of his elevators so much.  I easily foresee where the bandit can just push the stick forward for negative G's and the Bf-109 with double-mapped stab/elevator won't be able to match!  He'll be constantly fighting the stabilizer simply because it doesn't move nearly as fast as it used to.  In other words, hopefully this is all a moot subject now, or at least after the 2.012 update. 

Edited June 16, 2017 by Iceworm

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Well, the DD also says that they increased the transit time of the Stabilizer from 5 seconds nose up to nose down, to 15 seconds, according to new reference material.  This increased lag time I would think might further diminish the usefulness of using any technique to use the Stabilizer as an "all flying tail" via double mapping.   I would think that a player that dials in "combat trim" at the beginning of a fight, somewhere close to neutral, and doesn't change it much, would have much greater flexibility in maneuver than some player that has his stabilizer constantly moving around, lagging behind the movement of his elevators so much.  I easily foresee where the bandit can just push the stick forward for negative G's and the Bf-109 with double-mapped stab/elevator won't be able to match!  He'll be constantly fighting the stabilizer simply because it doesn't move nearly as fast as it used to.  In other words, hopefully this is all a moot subject now, or at least after the 2.012 update. 

I didn't testes it in new FMs - i was thinking the same and practice will tell, anyway because it's not that fast now i'm able to use it together with pitch not opposite. 

Edited June 16, 2017 by 307_Tomcat

[Blutaar]

 

Who said that, i just tested it, i tell my obserwation, i don't need that to be competitive - LOL go to doctor and check your head because you imagine a lot ;-)

btw do you have FF joystick, ?

 

that was that month test - but it prove nothing just that is doable and work as i described earley

http://il2stat.aviaskins.com:8008/en/pilot/2482/307_Tomcat/?tour=21

 

Wasnt you one of the guys in the beginning of this thread who constantly argued how unfair and adventageous it is? If not im sry but you sounded excited in your last post before mine.

 

No i dont use FFB because in my opinion its crap. I cant speak for the Sidewinder but the G940 is just crap with its non FFB deadzone so why should i use it?

Do you think there is an adventage using your gimpsetup (two axes on one control) while using an FFB? I have a G940 in its box, i could test it like you but i dont think it would make any difference.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Wasnt you one of the guys in the beginning of this thread who constantly argued how unfair and adventageous it is? If not im sry but you sounded excited in your last post before mine.

 

No i dont use FFB because in my opinion its crap. I cant speak for the Sidewinder but the G940 is just crap with its non FFB deadzone so why should i use it?

Do you think there is an adventage using your gimpsetup (two axes on one control) while using an FFB? I have a G940 in its box, i could test it like you but i dont think it would make any difference.

Those double maps could not work so well in none FF joy, that's why i asked You. Any way that was my test in response of some guy video about stabilizer "exploit".

[Dave]

Very happy to read this has been addressed in the upcoming .012 release. 

It doesn't render the criticism moot, but valid and worth investigating.

Good to see. I am looking forward to testing the result.