P-51 FM

[Art-J]

^ and if anyone used to imperial units has second thoughts about that (I admit don't know how to check the ambient pressure in quick missions for example), well, there's always quite accurate barometer installed in every US plane in the game - namely MAP gauge, which reads ambient when the airplane stands on the ground without engine cranking :).

 

There doesn't seem to be anything wrong with ambient pressure in the game I'd say (although I don't know how accurately density altitude changes are modelled)

Edited January 14, 2020 by Art-J

[19//Moach]

Well, there goes that theory then...  At least as far as pressure counts.

 

Yet there is still a noticeable difference in flight characteristics between summer and winter flying in the game. Assuming pressure remains constant, the temperature is then the only factor affecting atmospheric density.  

 

It still feels like planes were "tuned" as if a standard day was of -50ºC, and anything hotter detracts from their performance.  At least some planes feel that way, sometimes.... This is a very elusive issue. It might even be tied up with the Infamous Wobbles. 

 

My Programmer-Sense tingles a bit here... But that might be just any programmer's natural tendency to search for the "Grand Unifying Bug", that which when isolated and fixed, shall finally cause all problems in life to disappear.

 

We'll get it, one of these days.... 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 15, 2020 by 19//Moach

[Guest deleted@50488]

Game actually models low / high temperature effects on geopotential !

 

For the same QNH you get a given altitude at a lower "height"  in cold weather !

Edited January 15, 2020 by jcomm-il2

[Zirashi]

2 hours ago, 19//Moach said:

 

It still feels like planes were "tuned" as if a standard day was of -50ºC, and anything hotter detracts from their performance.  At least some planes feel that way, sometimes.... This is a very elusive issue. It might even be tied up with the Infamous Wobbles. 

 

 

 

 

Could be by design. Ambient temperature at 30,000 feet is right around -50C according to Google. Coincidentally, or perhaps incidentally, 30,000 feet is just past the P-51D’s high blower critical altitude.

 

[19//Moach]

1 hour ago, Zirashi said:

Could be by design. Ambient temperature at 30,000 feet is right around -50C according to Google. Coincidentally, or perhaps incidentally, 30,000 feet is just past the P-51D’s high blower critical altitude.

 

 

Actually, I did mean that as to imply "at sea level" - It feels like planes struggle far more than they should....

 

But that's really it, a "feeling". Just a general sensation of precariousness in flight, too subjective to quantify or measure.   

Yet it affects flying enough to detract seriously from combat performance.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 15, 2020 by 19//Moach

[357th_KW]

What you are describing is exactly what pilots are talking about with density altitude.  This can easily be seen with a density altitude calculator.  If you setup a scenario at 0 ft, 30.10 " Hg, and -5 degrees celcius you get a density altitude of -2674 ft.  The same 0 ft elevation, with altimeter setting of 29.80 and a temp of 35 C, gives you a density altitude of 2483 ft.  So going from the cold to hot day, you aircraft will produce lift and power as if it were 5000ft higher.

 

This is evident in BoX just with some simple speed or climb tests - the aircraft all perform much better on winter maps then on summer maps, at the same altitude and configuration.  In any apples to apples comparison you'll always have less available power in summer conditions, and it will take longer get the same indicated airspeed and your ground speed will be much higher.  Takeoffs, landings, climbing, manuevering etc will all be impacted by this.

[JG7_X-Man]

Thank you for this video! This points out another issue I have with regards to trying to model Gs in BoX.

 

This is a game! The major reason the P-51 in BoX and DCS cannot perform like the real things is the simple reason  - you cannot use a set of mathematical formulas (no matter how complex, and most definitely not @ 70 USD) to simulate reality correctly! So why are developers constantly trying to convince us this can be done?

 

So the obvious question is this - If the BoX developers didn't get the basic performance characteristics correct of the P-51, why would we think the G-Force model (which is far more complex) be any more accurate?

 

Why not just come clean and remove the G-Force and all the other Physio crap and stop trying to con us. Really guys - we will still buy the game so there is no need to try and make this game any more real by manufacturing fake effects.

 

 

[Legioneod]

3 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

 

Why not just come clean and remove the G-Force and all the other Physio crap and stop trying to con us. Really guys - we will still buy the game so there is no need to try and make this game any more real by manufacturing fake effects.

 

 

The game would be far worse if they removed the effects. I have no desire to return to the time of instant high g maneuvers with no consequence.

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

3 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 

 

Why not just come clean and remove the G-Force and all the other Physio crap and stop trying to con us. Really guys - we will still buy the game so there is no need to try and make this game any more real by manufacturing fake effects.

 

 

 

 

Sorry X-Man, I'm going to disagree with this.  I haven't had too much trouble with over-G unless I've really gone and done something rather extreme - like leaving the throttle maxed while pulling a 180-degree turn in a 90-degree bank angle.  Also, the more you do maneuvers that require forces above 1.0 G vertically that's extra work the pilot has to do that does accumulate and cause the pilot to get more tired.  Flying level is bad but S-turning too strongly or rapidly while patrolling does matter if you need to suddenly pull a high-G maneuver.  

Consider trying to fly as smoothly as possible and for lack of a better term, lazily as possible too.  Only put in as much "work" as is necessary to make sure your 6 is clear and keep SA.

 

I also recommend cutting throttle before doing a split-S.  

[SCG_motoadve]

11 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

Why not just come clean and remove the G-Force and all the other Physio crap and stop trying to con us. Really guys - we will still buy the game so there is no need to try and make this game any more real by manufacturing fake effects.

There is an option to turn this off.

 

IMHO G forces modelling , pilot physiology addition was the best addition of 2019 for the IL2 series, makes it much more interesting, developers did a great job.

In case of DCS, the pilot moving in the plane when G forces are applied are totally exaggerated , like if your body was made out of rubber, it bounces all over the place, I turn that option off. 

Edited February 24, 2020 by SCG_motoadve

[Blackhawk_FR]

On 2/24/2020 at 4:18 AM, JG7_X-Man said:

Why not just come clean and remove the G-Force and all the other Physio crap

How the new physio model is crap? 

 

 

I have as much difficulties to fight a P51 in a Bf109K than fighting a Bf109K in a P51. 

But, you know, it's just my... "OPINION" (you got it? )

[gimpy117]

On 1/13/2020 at 5:51 PM, Y-29.Silky said:

 

It's back in full force. I knew people who exclusively fly German would say everything is a UFO once they face planes that are just as good. 

But the 109's stabilizer is more War Thunder than anything else. 

 

https://streamable.com/zpb12

https://streamable.com/pfb9n

https://streamable.com/f4ql2

 

 

 

Like this?

 

https://streamable.com/xx4nw

shhh! that's the good plane.

 

lets continue talking about what the bad mustang did to those poor innocent 109's 

[Zirashi]

On 2/23/2020 at 10:18 PM, JG7_X-Man said:

you cannot use a set of mathematical formulas (no matter how complex, and most definitely not @ 70 USD) to simulate reality correctly!

 

 

Actually yes, yes you absolutely can. That’s literally the purpose of mathematics: to develop the tools that allow us to explain the reality we live in. This is why it is the universal language of physicists. It’s the reason agencies like NASA can land a functioning rover on Mars despite never having been there.

 

With the correct formulas, and the correct data inserted into those formulas, you can most certainly simulate an aircraft in atmospheric flight accurately. This is why sim devs don’t give a damn about the 70 year old personal anecdotes from Hauptmann Deutschland or Captain America when adjusting aircraft FMs and instead ask for hard data based on airframe R&D documentation.

 

So if they have something wrong, find the chart, diagram, or calculation that proves it. Or don’t, and continue to argue that it’s wrong because it feels wrong in the hope that someday the devs figure out a way to patch feelings.