Jump to content

Collection of flight model issues

Recommended Posts

Dear developers, I'd like to discuss a series of flight model issues with you (see attached video).

I am a real-life glider pilot with 25 years of flight simulator experience. I am a PhD in biotech research and develop test methods for a living. I have no red or blue agenda.

My squadmates and I have performed dozens of test flights (game vesion 3.009) and I have compiled a video which demonstrates following issues (not in order of appearance):


1) Global issue: Ailerons are too effective at high AoA and at extremely slow speeds, especially at and beyond
critical AoA.  This was not an issue in IL-2 1946.


2) Global issue: There is too little adverse yaw (aileron drag) at high AoA. A NACA publication showed that e.g.
the Spitfire V yawed 18 degrees when full ailerons were applied at 1.1 x stall speed. This was not
an issue in IL-2 1946.


3) Global issue: Sideslip makes the planes stall-proof. This was not an issue in IL-2 1946.


4) Global issue: Planes can be recovered from upright spins with ailerons only, even if full positive elevator
and full in-spin rudder are applied. This was not an issue in IL-2 1946.


5) Global issue: The structural g limit is not reduced under asymmetric g loads. In reality, a 25-33% reduction
is standard. A plane with a structural limit of 9 g will have a limit of e.g. 6 g when rolling while pulling gs. A
plane applying full elevator, rudder and aileron control inputs at the same time should have even stricter limits.


6) Global issue: Heavy planes have no advantage in dives and zooms, even if they have high power-to-weight
as well as weight-to-drag ratios. This was demonstrated by comparing the Spitfire IX with Fw190 A-5 & A8
and P-47D-28. This goes completely against published wartime reports and was not an issue in IL-2 1946.


7) Global issue: Planes with high gyroscopic forces can do gyroscopic vertical reversals without departing from
controlled flight. This was demonstrated for the P-47 and Fw190.


8 ) Spitfire: Flaps and gear seem to have too little drag penalty. The plane can go vertical from 180 kph TAS in
landing configuration. This was not an issue in IL-2 1946.


9) Spitfire: There is too little propwash and/or p-factor. Contrary to the pilot manual, changes in
rudder trim are not required. The plane can be easily controlled at speeds as low as 30 kph TAS while on
full power and max AoA.


10) Spitfire: There is no pitch-up while firing the guns.


11) Spitfire: Deploying flaps leads to a pitch-up instead of a pitch-down. This decreases the drag penalty while


12) Spitfire: Even without sideslipping, the plane cannot stall while turning at around 200 kph TAS. In reality,
five degrees of positive elevator input were enough to stall the plane at around 128 kph in level flight.


13) Spitfire: The prop gyroscopic force is not modeled or is too small. This was not an issue in IL-2 1946.


14) Spitfire: Directional stability does not degrade at high AoA.

15) Spitfire: Engine cooling is too efficient in all flight conditions. Flaps and gear do not decrease
cooling performance. There is no sign of the high cooling drag penalty that was published for this plane.
This was not an issue in IL-2 1946.


16) Spitfire: Sideslip leads to a drastic reduction in elevator effectiveness. Full elevator can be applied without
stalling at moderate and high sideslip angles. Some elevator authority reduction was documented for the Spit
in a wartime NACA report, but the magnitude of the effect in-game is much too big and more typical for planes
with T-type tail configurations (gliders and F-104 Starfighter). As a glider pilot I have ample experience with
sideslip angles > 45°. This was not an issue in IL-2 1946.




Some issues are clearly global, affecting all planes. Others seem to affect primarily the Spitfire series. This does not mean that other planes are not affected. Simply put: a huge amount of information is available on the Spits, which facilitates comparisons. The good thing is most issues shown herein were not present in IL-2 1946. So I hope you won't have to reinvent the wheel in order to fix them. It took us a while to discover many of them, mainly because you have to try stuff a pilot would never do (e.g. recover from spins with out-of spin ailerons only) in order to notice. In my opinion, this whole set of issues makes the game highly arcade-like. Many issues are exploited in online dogfights, which is a deal-breaker in my eyes. It's sad to see that real-life tactics don't work (e.g. FW or P-47 vs. Spit IX dive and zoom), and that,  on the other hand, stuff that would never happen in reality (e.g. gyroscopic reversals and planes becoming unstallable) becomes the norm.

Edited by JG27_PapaFly
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 15
  • Upvote 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your input, but others bad mouthing us developers mean it will be locked now. Our lead engineer is a real pilot and competitive hang-glider pilot, so he knows his stuff as well. Our physics and FMs are his life's work. He takes it seriously and it takes a long time to make such a simulation. Wish I had three of him, but I don't so..... we just do what we can.  And we don't have the luxury of unlimited time to tweak and research each plane indefinitely.


Until we can fly all of these real warplanes with max power, doing all kinds of acrobatics, we're never going to reach complete realism. I will show Petrovich this post so he can read your comments, but there is really no need for others to pile on which they have already done.  



  • Like 9
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 2
  • Upvote 9

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...