A bunch of stuff on the 109.

[Panzerlang]

Pretty comprehensive in covering all the quirks and foibles etc.

 

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/feature/articles/109myths/

[Fifi]

Thanks, nice notes!

I liked this:

 

 

"In personally facing the RAF in the air over the Dunkirk encirclement, I found that the Bf 109 E was faster, possessed a higher rate of climb, but was somewhat less manouverable than the RAF fighters. Nevertheless, during the campaign, no Spitfire or Hurricane ever turned inside my plane."
- Herbert Kaiser, German fighter ace. 68 victories. Source:The Great Book of WW2 Airplanes, page 470.

[pilotpierre]

Very bloody comprehensive and a very informative read.

[15/JG52_Genie]

Great read! Thanks!

 

I was lucky enough , couple years ago to talk to one of the Bf 109 aces from the east front. We even showed him the IL2 (he was not impressed hahaah). Anyway, flying the plane, all the work you have to do to keep the plane flying was always primary, shooting someone down was not on his mind at all. If someone flies in front of you you may try to shoot him down.. and the the rest of the time? Damn hard work keeping you safe and flying

 

So its amusing to read virtual pilots who take shooting down a plane for granted or the thing of "balancing".

 

Shooting down a plane was hard work in any machine.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

wish they had go pros back then, instead of a grainy 7.5mm film.

Edited December 19, 2013 by 71st_Mastiff

[Sternjaeger]

Anyway, flying the plane, all the work you have to do to keep the plane flying was always primary, shooting someone down was not on his mind at all. If someone flies in front of you you may try to shoot him down.. and the the rest of the time? Damn hard work keeping you safe and flying

 

So its amusing to read virtual pilots who take shooting down a plane for granted or the thing of "balancing".

 

Shooting down a plane was hard work in any machine.

 

...and that's why I was hoping these guys would implement an aircraft management along the lines of what they're doing with DCS, because a simulation is not just about shooting down another aircraft, you got WT for that.. 

 

Let's hope they'll re-think the philosophy along the path, because it would be a shame not to fully exploit the fantastic potential behind this promising sim.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 As Stern said Flying a plane is not just a walk in a park as you have to manage it, look out for enemies, keep your place in formation, navigate and whatnot. I think the best description of aerial combats was that it started as a furious whirlwind and suddenly it was over as one pilot described it. Shall see how BoS evovles, but I think Jason and the Team has it covered

[OBT-Psycho]

...and that's why I was hoping these guys would implement an aircraft management along the lines of what they're doing with DCS, because a simulation is not just about shooting down another aircraft, you got WT for that.. 

 

Let's hope they'll re-think the philosophy along the path, because it would be a shame not to fully exploit the fantastic potential behind this promising sim.

 

This is what I like about CloD. For the first time I realized I had to learn how to manage the different systems in the plane before going all BANG BANG VROAAAMM!

 

you have to watch carefully what you are doing in flight, even in cruise, because if you don't you will end up with a cooked engine before encounter your first target. stepping in a bomber require a certain knowledge as now you have 2 engine and way more stuff to do than in an fighter.

 

Here will be quite the same, but in a different way. here you have to learn to fly, not to manage systems are they are a bit simplified to my sense, but FM is way more complex. Flying a twin engine plane won't be so complicated but once you'll be willing to land, I can see it will be an other story

[Primus_71]

I'm sure IL2 BoS will strike the perfect balance between systems complexity vs playability. IMO, having to manage mixture, RPM/prop pitch, radiator/heat (with realistic modeling of these systems underneath) is sufficient CEM for a PC simulation. I'm glad that BoS will not be a procedural sim.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

Even CoD manages the systems, the underlying flaws of the design come through unfortunately. I am sure TF will try to tackle those things, but now they just detract from the fun. For example the overheating. The instant you hit that critical number = cooked radiator and dead engine in a few moments. These systems had valves letting excess pressure out and pilots could cool down. But not in CoD. So I hope BoS has taken this to account, at least in RoF these relief valves work so why not in BoS.

[Sternjaeger]

I'm sure IL2 BoS will strike the perfect balance between systems complexity vs playability. IMO, having to manage mixture, RPM/prop pitch, radiator/heat (with realistic modeling of these systems underneath) is sufficient CEM for a PC simulation. I'm glad that BoS will not be a procedural sim.

 

I appreciate some people are not fans of procedures and sometimes you just wanna shoot stuff down, that's why I think it should be implemented as a scalable feature. 

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Exactly. Scalable realism settings

[Primus_71]

This is what I like about CloD. For the first time I realized I had to learn how to manage the different systems in the plane before going all BANG BANG VROAAAMM!

 

you have to watch carefully what you are doing in flight, even in cruise, because if you don't you will end up with a cooked engine before encounter your first target. stepping in a bomber require a certain knowledge as now you have 2 engine and way more stuff to do than in an fighter.

 

Here will be quite the same, but in a different way. here you have to learn to fly, not to manage systems are they are a bit simplified to my sense, but FM is way more complex. Flying a twin engine plane won't be so complicated but once you'll be willing to land, I can see it will be an other story

 

Disclaimer: This is not a bash at CloD (I really enjoy it and regularly fly it).

 

In CloD BF109 and Spits, one must try hard to cook an engine. BF109 will run at full throttle all day at 1/2 water radiator. Spit Ia, will run at full throttle (6psi), 1/2 rad at 2850 rpm indefinitely. Both aircraft have auto-mixture, auto-supercharger, so there isn't much to manage really. With BF110, HE111, Ju87 and Ju88, tho, one must watch the manifold pressure to ensure it is within limits. Otherwise, CloD CEM is way overrated IMO.

[Sternjaeger]

CloD was a bad, messy alpha that was shamefully abandoned to its own fate, but surely showed us the potential that can be reached. 
They say "aviation rules are written in blood", and so are simulation ones IMHO: the "death" of CloD taught a lot of people a lot of lessons. 

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Well, it did not take them 7 years to create that buggy mess called CoD. TF has done a lot of good to it after it was abandoned and if they could get the source code, even more so. It has it's moments but I stopped flying it even it runs very well now. Maybe in a few after TF has worked on it a bit more

 

 BoS is the first sim that sparked my interest to get back into virtual piloting in a LONG time. I flew actively online since 1997 until 2009-2010 and burned out. Most active times included over 200h per MONTH of flying and had to work too so it was not that I did not fly Oh boy did I With BoS the feel I've been missing in sims and the touch of quality is helping me to once again dust off the sim gear and maybe leave the BattleTech for less playing time That is why I did shell out Premium on BoS, it has the promise and Jason has credibility to accomplish this endeavour.

[Krupi]

...and that's why I was hoping these guys would implement an aircraft management along the lines of what they're doing with DCS, because a simulation is not just about shooting down another aircraft, you got WT for that.. 

Let's hope they'll re-think the philosophy along the path, because it would be a shame not to fully exploit the fantastic potential behind this promising sim.

+1,000,000... some aircraft were just much harder to maintain at peak performance than others currently BoS is going to be just il2 with modern graphics not the game changer that the game that cannot be mentioned was potentially going to become.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

 Well I think the pilot workload is the culprit. In a procedural sim like DCS A-10C for example you really have a lot of work besides flying the plane. And it is straining. Same applied to WW2 planes, some planes had more pilot workload than others. Germans had it easier due more automated systems while others still relied on a plethora of levers and stuff. People tend to complain if they have to really manage a plane and move those levers, even mapped on buttons or sliders, because it is "not fun". It is hard to implement the workload of the pilot without totally breaking the playability, but sure can be done.

 

 BoS is on the right track. Sure refining is needed and stuff, but it all is there already. I do not mind having to manage a plane if it needs to nor do I care if another plane is easier. Just learn them and off you go

[Krupi]

Yes well said Flanker, I am actually really looking forward to the DCS P-47 because I know it is one of the harder aircraft to maintain and even though the Fw 190 is my favorite aircraft it might become boring quickly compared to the other aircraft

Edited December 19, 2013 by Krupi

[6./ZG26_Emil]

S!

 

 Well I think the pilot workload is the culprit. In a procedural sim like DCS A-10C for example you really have a lot of work besides flying the plane. And it is straining. Same applied to WW2 planes, some planes had more pilot workload than others. Germans had it easier due more automated systems while others still relied on a plethora of levers and stuff. People tend to complain if they have to really manage a plane and move those levers, even mapped on buttons or sliders, because it is "not fun". It is hard to implement the workload of the pilot without totally breaking the playability, but sure can be done.

 

 BoS is on the right track. Sure refining is needed and stuff, but it all is there already. I do not mind having to manage a plane if it needs to nor do I care if another plane is easier. Just learn them and off you go

 

Personally I feel that the only way to replicate the workload in that situation would be to have the controls mapped to various leavers and buttons, it's a lot more intuitive to move a leaver than to look down to a keyboard in order to activate a control. The cockpits were generally designed so that most of the controls were in easy reach, leavers had different shapes etc and could be seen with peripheral vision although there are exceptions to this rule. I wouldn't want to have all the extra controls that DCS has without them being mapped because I don't feel it's more realistic. If I had the cash and could build a simpit with all the switches and levers I would probably like the idea more.

[Sternjaeger]

..once again, the keyword here is "scalable settings" 

[OBT-Psycho]

Disclaimer: This is not a bash at CloD (I really enjoy it and regularly fly it).

 

In CloD BF109 and Spits, one must try hard to cook an engine. BF109 will run at full throttle all day at 1/2 water radiator. Spit Ia, will run at full throttle (6psi), 1/2 rad at 2850 rpm indefinitely. Both aircraft have auto-mixture, auto-supercharger, so there isn't much to manage really. With BF110, HE111, Ju87 and Ju88, tho, one must watch the manifold pressure to ensure it is within limits. Otherwise, CloD CEM is way overrated IMO.

 

Ok with you, i might have been overrated, that's right. But it was in my opinion a huge step further from what we had at this point. In "old-IL-2" you could do whatever you wanted regarding CEM. You would not get the best out of the engine, but it would remain unarmed. Pitch was not that important, it was jsut a feature to get a few kph max speed, but that was all. Then we stepped in CloD where you actually had to watch engine parameters in order to fly it properly and avoid engine damages. Maybe it is not properly rendered, and there are a few quirks left even after TF patches, but still it is a step further. I am not talking about all the other stuff that were wrong/unfinished/bugged and so on. We all know it was a disaster once it was released. We all have been disappointed to see this project stop because we thought it was the beggining of a new age in flight sim. But everybody learned something through this episode and it paid. 

 

And I hoped they will hear us, as we would like more complex engine management. I hope it can be done and that it will be done. but even if this doesn't happen anytime soon (or at all) there will be plenty of other stuff to do

[Bando]

Well Psy, I had exactly the same feeling. Was thrilled with the increased workload in ClOD just to get the thing off the ground and keep it flying.

Was busy for days just to make sure I could handle the plane at different altitudes, speeds and configs. Starting to fight came later, much later. And I did enjoy it!!

 

I started a thread on the ROF forum about it and it quickly was burried into people's claim that a procedural sim gets boring. I went ahead and got DCS A10, so I could try it out for myself.

I have to agree it can be boring at days, as it is not my work (or job), but it started to look like it.

 

I am aware that finding a balance in the fun factor and the sim factor (in which the workload of the pilot is as real as it can possibly get in a sim, like DCS) is the challenge for the devs. Everyone has his/her own preferences and striking gold for all is not possible.

 

For me: the more workload the better. Priming the engine, the electrics of it and so on. I'd love it.

[OBT-Psycho]

I always thought workload on warbirds was kind of bearable. manage your engine to stay in manufacturer's specs, and you are good to go. Even if it took some time in CloD, it is easy to learn and mainly straightforward.

 

Modern stuff kind of become too much once you have everything modeled. I tried DCS blackshark, and boy is it complicated. When there is more than 50 different actions in your startup sequence, you understand that getting yourself up won't be a piece of cake. Not mentioning weapon management, radar management, ABRIS, and everything. I get that people like it, but it becomes too much to me. Especially if you don't have that much time per week to fly.

 

So yes, all my votes on more systems in BOS. It is still under the line of "too much stuff to learn". But I am quite happy so far, understanding how to fly a warbird correctly without putting yourself into dangerous situations every 2 minutes will occupy my mind for a couple of month.

[BraveSirRobin]

CloD was a bad, messy alpha that was shamefully abandoned to its own fate, but surely showed us the potential that can be reached. 

They say "aviation rules are written in blood", and so are simulation ones IMHO: the "death" of CloD taught a lot of people a lot of lessons. 

 

The death of CoD taught them not to try to model every single switch in the cockpit.  What you see in the BoS alpha for CEM is what you're going to get in the final product.  

[Sternjaeger]

The death of CoD taught them not to try to model every single switch in the cockpit.  What you see in the BoS alpha for CEM is what you're going to get in the final product.  

 

I'm pretty sure that it wasn't that that killed CloD, if anything because there is evidence of fully clickable cockpit sims that are alive and well..

[BraveSirRobin]

I'm pretty sure that it wasn't that that killed CloD, if anything because there is evidence of fully clickable cockpit sims that are alive and well..

 

The game took far too long to develop, and making every button clickable was a huge factor in that problem.  There are clickable cockpits in "study" sims where you fly a single aircraft, but there is nothing like that for a project that resembles BoS (DCS WW2 is still vaporware).

In any case, it's not going to happen in BoS.  

[Sternjaeger]

The game took far too long to develop, and making every button clickable was a huge factor in that problem.  There are clickable cockpits in "study" sims where you fly a single aircraft, but there is nothing like that for a project that resembles BoS (DCS WW2 is still vaporware).

In any case, it's not going to happen in BoS.  

 

that's your ill-informed assumption, the reality is a much more complex one, but this is not the place to discuss that. DCS technology has already proven successful with very complex cockpits, so I doubt a much simple WW2 cockpit would prove an insurmountable challenge for a skilled team like 777. 

 

Whether it's happening or not is a decision that will be taken by the team, there's no definitive word on the matter as far as I know, and as market and customer demand varies, so the development work does.

 

SInce your "in any case, it's not going to happen in BoS" statement is not based on a solid, definitive statement made by the devs, it sounds more like a provocation than anything else really..

Edited December 19, 2013 by Sternjaeger

[DD_fruitbat]

umm, there has been such a statement from the devs regarding clickable cockpits.

 

Its not going to happen in BoS.

Edited December 19, 2013 by fruitbat

[BraveSirRobin]

that's your ill-informed assumption

 

I have 26 years of professional programming experience.  My assumptions on this matter are very well informed.

umm, there has been such a statement from the devs regarding clickable cockpits.

 

Its not going to happen in BoS.

 

Adding that sort of functionality would add many months to the project's deadline, and Jason has made it very clear that that is not going to happen.

[Sokol1]

The death of CoD taught them not to try to model every single switch in the cockpit.  What you see in the BoS alpha for CEM is what you're going to get in the final product.  

 

I think this statement explain why Cl+D "dead" in Alpha stage, because they are not able to make half of the cockpit switchs clicables... 

 

Further than engine/heat management - similar to BoS - the only thing need to do more in CloD, relative to il-2'46, to start engine is open fuel cock, even the "magic I" is te same. The "complexity" of CLoD is too much overrated.

 

Sokol1

Edited December 19, 2013 by Sokol1

[OBT-Psycho]

I think they were just too ambitious, wanting to make a huge revolution in flightsim. they promised way too much compared to what they were able to achieve, and they realised it way too late. Then the lack of communication has sealed the case. Just look at the command list of CloD. you see plenty functions thath ave not their place in the theatre they were focusing on. 

if you promised to do a lot and end up making barely half of it, customers are disappointed. but if you start small and make more than expected, the customers will be surprised and then enthousiastic.

 

look at the way 777 develop the game. Would you rather have 2 planes for a month, with increasing number of functionality along the developpement, or everything at the beginning but almost unusable because not actually finished? I would go for the first solution, as I can watch every step made and can interact along the development rather than complaining about lack of functionnality for month.

 

I was not that much happy when they told us about the way they planned the next month before the official release. I was a lot worried about limited time access. then I thought this true and saw it was either genius or insane. every week since a year ago now they prove me they know their stuff. 

 

this is the way game are develop nowaday. Just take a look at all these "pre-release acces" independent game you can find here and there, they all follow the same pattern. they give u access to a beta version and continue t develop it while havig a huge unofficial QA team.

[Fifi]

I'm pretty sure that it wasn't that that killed CloD, if anything because there is evidence of fully clickable cockpit sims that are alive and well..

 

I completely agree with you.

But as you, even though i also want full fonctional cockpits, Jason "officially"  stated it's not going to happen in BOS 

BOS will remain more an "action" sim rather than a "study" sim unfortunately.

The render devs put into BOS actually should deserve more than just an action sim IMO.

But hit one key, puch the throttle and go kill some ennemies, get more fans than learning for days or weeks how to manage and fly properly your plane...

Study sims are a niche market already in the niche flight simulation market.

[SKG51_robtek]

Yes, it is really sad that most people want success without working for it.

As long as the workload of the pilot is dumbed down it is more of a game than a simulation.

Also it gives the advantage to the planes which kept the pilot busy just flying it (P47, La5,...)

But the masses (money) decide and the masses are satisfied with a inferior product.

imo, of course.

[BraveSirRobin]

Yes, it is really sad that most people want success without working for it.

 

It must be tough to live among mere mortals.

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

I found this to be interesting.  It's in Part III.

 

 

Can you hear other sounds from the plane?

Kyösti Karhila being attacked by Soviet La-5:
"Do you hear the sound of passing enemy projectiles?
No, it is masked by the sound of your engine and the airflow, but I heard the tac-tac-tac of the enemy guns."
- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

"-Can you hear the engine of another plane if you are flying next to it?
No, since your own engine is closer and its noise drowns that of the other one. But you can feel taking a hit, it is like "clack, clack". The holes then were the holes of the splinters of a heavy AAA shell."
- Kyösti Karhila, Finnish fighter ace. 32 victories. Source: Interview by Finnish Virtual Pilots Association.

[Sternjaeger]

It must be tough to live among mere mortals.

 

seriously, stop trolling mate 

[HansHansen]

nice, now we are back to the clickable cockpit topic. well done

[BraveSirRobin]

seriously, stop trolling mate 

 

LOL  He insults everyone who is looking forward to this game, but I'm the one who is trolling?  That's pretty funny...

[Sternjaeger]

I have 26 years of professional programming experience.  My assumptions on this matter are very well informed.

 

Adding that sort of functionality would add many months to the project's deadline, and Jason has made it very clear that that is not going to happen.

 

You probably didn't follow what's been going on with CloD. 

The functionality doesn't necessarily take months to implement, again it sounds like you're making statements based on the fact that you like a simplified game.

 

Yes, it is really sad that most people want success without working for it.

As long as the workload of the pilot is dumbed down it is more of a game than a simulation.

Also it gives the advantage to the planes which kept the pilot busy just flying it (P47, La5,...)

But the masses (money) decide and the masses are satisfied with a inferior product.

imo, of course.

 

Yes, I totally agree.

 

Mind you, I don't think we need a simulation to extreme levels, but implementing some useful features like fuel shut-off/selectors or gunsight switch/dimming for instance, would add a lot to the realism of the game. 

 

To be honest if we don't add distinctive features to this sim, I don't see how the end product would be any different from WT.

 

What we've seen so far with IL-2 1946 is a development that is still going now, which has added new excellent features that make it truly engaging and enhance its longevity.

 

I understand the wise step-by-step approach that the devs have taken, and in a way the work that was done with ROF was different because there really is no competition out there for WW1 sims, but WW2 is a different niche, and in the end it's gonna be a matter of what you can and cannot do with your sim that will make a difference.

LOL  He insults everyone who is looking forward to this game, but I'm the one who is trolling?  That's pretty funny...

 

What? How am I insulting everybody? It's clear you are trolling here. You haven't given a valid argument, you're just giving sweeping, condescending statements.

[Marcomies]

I kinda like the slightly simplified plane management of BoS. With most of these planes full procedures would only change one button start-up to three button start-up or so. As long as they properly model the stuff that is in (prop pitch, mixture, etc) we won't be losing more than an occasional flip of a switch.

 

While I have nothing against the scalable procedures (and would probably use the full modeling myself if it were available), the current model might be really saving the developers resources. As it is, the start-up is probably pretty much checking if mixture is rich enough and wroom wroom the engine goes. If they added every step of the procedure as manual then they'd have to model every single way one can mess things up and what it leads to. I'd imagine this could easily double the amount of work it takes to make the engine/system management stuff functional. It's awfully lot of work just for a few button presses more.

 

Plus, this would really make the clickable cockpit a must (another thing that would probably involve quite a bit of work). If there were no clickpit I'd probably just map the start-up procedure to 1-9 and slide my finger over it...