Il2 bf109 k4 vs Dcs 109 k4

[fogpipe]

Im not complaining, i have spent more time and money in Il2 than i probably ever will in Dcs, but i would like to get some fellow il2 pilots thoughts on the two versions.

 

To take off as safely as possible in the DCS k4 you need to set manual prop pitch at 12:00, nose down stab almost all the way, light flaps and gradually increase speed while tapping the toe brakes to keep from going side to side. The rudder doesnt really work at all till you pretty much dont need it.  If you dont mind what youre doing you can flip and burn.

 

In general the DCS k4 seems to be modeled with a lot more prop torque, you can feel it pulling to the left at low speed, especially in left turns

 

The Il2 k4 doesnt seem to need much stab trim or flaps or anything and will take a much more sudden throttle increase and the rudder seems to respond at pretty much any speed.

 

Just wondering what thoughts you all might have about the differences and especially what your thoughts are if you have flown them both.

 

Thanks.

Edited March 16, 2022 by fogpipe

[III/JG52_Al-Azraq]

I tend to think that the DCS K-4 is quite more realistic (same as the other DCS birds) with more fine real characteristics and aerodynamic effects modelled. I find it very weird in IL-2 to have so much rudder authority at very low speeds on the ground to the point using your rudder is a must for taxiing.

 

I always felt the IL-2 planes fly like on rails and it is my understanding that the developers do this by design in order to be able to have more planes per each expansion and also to make the sim more accessible.

 

Not a critique, I understand their approach but the general consensus is that DCS has more advanced and realistic flight model.

[DD_Arthur]

51 minutes ago, III/JG52_Al-Azraq said:

it is my understanding that the developers do this by design in order to be able to have more planes per each expansion and also to make the sim more accessible.

 

Not a critique, I understand their approach but the general consensus is that DCS has more advanced and realistic flight model.

 

Total nonsense.

[Sonntagskind]

3 hours ago, fogpipe said:

Im not complaining, i have spent more time and money in Il2 than i probably ever will in Dcs, but i would like to get some fellow il2 pilots thoughts on the two versions.

 

To take off as safely as possible in the DCS k4 you need to set manual prop pitch at 12:00, nose down stab almost all the way, light flaps and gradually increase speed while tapping the toe brakes to keep from going side to side. The rudder doesnt really work at all till you pretty much dont need it.  If you dont mind what youre doing you can flip and burn.

 

In general the DCS k4 seems to be modeled with a lot more prop torque, you can feel it pulling to the left at low speed, especially in left turns

 

The Il2 k4 doesnt seem to need much stab trim or flaps or anything and will take a much more sudden throttle increase and the rudder seems to respond at pretty much any speed.

 

Just wondering what thoughts you all might have about the differences and especially what your thoughts are if you have flown them both.

 

Thanks.

There has been a comparison by I fly Central a while ago; I do not know if it still applies to the current game version.

[Art-J]

4 hours ago, fogpipe said:

To take off as safely as possible in the DCS k4 you need to set manual prop pitch at 12:00, nose down stab almost all the way, light flaps and gradually increase speed while tapping the toe brakes to keep from going side to side. The rudder doesnt really work at all till you pretty much dont need it.  If you dont mind what youre doing you can flip and burn.

 

Nah, it's not THAT bad, at least when no crosswind is present. With prop in manual mode, even at default 12:30 there's no need for flaps and toe brakes, one just needs to be more gradual with thottle and use more rudder all around.

 

I agree about the rest though, DCS Kurfy is generally somewhat more bitchy to handle during takeoffs and landings alike. That's not something 109-specific, however. All DCS warbirds have more pronounced adverse prop effects, while at the same time having ineffective rudders at low airflow speeds (mind you, I'm not getting into fanboy d*ck-waving-contest about which sim is supposedly more "realistic" here). Conversely, In all GB warbirds the situation seems to be the other way around. That's just how both these sims work, no biggie.

[QB.Shallot]

3 hours ago, DD_Arthur said:

Total nonsense.

Not really.

Perfectly understandable though. IL2's content per dollar ratio far outdoes what DCS offers. There is always a sacrifice, and in this case its the FMs fidelity at the edge of the envelope. 

 

 

[fogpipe]

I just find it weird that the dcs k4 has almost zero rudder authority on take off until you pretty much dont need it. Some of the pilot accounts i have seen mention using rudder on take off and the dcs model doesnt seem to take that into account at all.

[Trooper117]

Great Mustang comparison video that!

[III/JG52_Al-Azraq]

2 hours ago, fogpipe said:

I just find it weird that the dcs k4 has almost zero rudder authority on take off until you pretty much dont need it. Some of the pilot accounts i have seen mention using rudder on take off and the dcs model doesnt seem to take that into account at all.

 

Rudder has no effect at low speeds because there is no air circulating over it so at the beginning of the take-off you apply brakes to keep the plane on the runway. Then as you gain rudder authority with speed, start applying rudder and don't apply brakes. This is the realistic behaviour, using rudder for even taxiing it is not at all but IL-2 works like that.

 

Again, I'm not complaining because the bang for the buck you get in IL-2 is unparalleled and I'm very happy with the product, but credit where credit is due. Compromises have to be made to offer a map, career and 10 planes many of them don't even have flyable real life counterparts for 80 €.

 

DCS has just the superior FM and modelling, but it lacks the cohesion and stability IL-2 has.

Edited March 17, 2022 by III/JG52_Al-Azraq

[DragonDaddy]

4 hours ago, III/JG52_Al-Azraq said:

Again, I'm not complaining because the bang for the buck you get in IL-2 is unparalleled and I'm very happy with the product, but credit where credit is due. Compromises have to be made to offer a map, career and 10 planes many of them don't even have flyable real life counterparts for 80 €.

I’m genuinely curious: is this your opinion or are there facts to verify this?

[QB.Shallot]

@DragonDaddy, the video is by a pilot with time in the Mustang, and he directly compares DCS and IL2 to his real world experience in a quantifiable manner. He find the DCS Mustang behaves much more like the real thing than the IL2 one. Now I'm not shaming one game or the other, they both have their strengths and weaknesses. On a study level DCS is the unparalleled winner, but for an actual WWII theatre of operations experience, IL2 takes the cake just for having period correct stuff in it, even if the FM and DM has some funk to it. 

Edited March 18, 2022 by QB.Shallot

[DragonDaddy]

3 hours ago, QB.Shallot said:

@DragonDaddy, the video is by a pilot with time in the Mustang, and he directly compares DCS and IL2 to his real world experience in a quantifiable manner. He find the DCS Mustang behaves much more like the real thing than the IL2 one. Now I'm not shaming one game or the other, they both have their strengths and weaknesses. On a study level DCS is the unparalleled winner, but for an actual WWII theatre of operations experience, IL2 takes the cake just for having period correct stuff in it, even if the FM and DM has some funk to it. 

Thanks. That satisfies my curiosity. 

[Robli]

On 3/16/2022 at 5:20 PM, III/JG52_Al-Azraq said:

I always felt the IL-2 planes fly like on rails and it is my understanding that the developers do this by design in order to be able to have more planes per each expansion ... Not a critique, I understand their approach but the general consensus is that DCS has more advanced and realistic flight model.

 

I don't have the real life experience to say which sim has better flight models, but I have to agree with DD_Arthur that these statements are total nonsense.

1. IL-2 is definitely not "on rails". In fact there have been complaints by some people how IL-2 has had too floaty or wobbly flight model. Like I said, I can't say myself how correct the flight model is, but it is definitely not "on rails".

2. The idea that developers do bad flight models "by design" in order to be able to to have more planes just does not make sense. Maybe the flight models are not perfect or are worse than some competitor (or not), but I would think that "by design" the devs try to create as good flight model as they reasonable can. 

3. It is not a "general consensus" that DCS has more advanced and realistic flight model. Various simmers have various opinions and there are also people with real life warbird experience that have various opinions. Some examples:

 

Spoiler

On 7/28/2019 at 3:19 PM, SCG_motoadve said:

Real pilot here, also own a warbird, fly it often.

Hated CLOD flight model, totally unrealistic, planes just do not fly like that.

To me IL2 BOS might not be perfect but gives the feeling of flight better than any other sim, Civilian or not (have them all).

Yes there is room for improvement, but is the best out there at the moment IMHO followed by DCS.

 

 

Spoiler

 

On 10/16/2019 at 9:40 PM, SCG_motoadve said:

P51 IMHO has the best FM of all the planes in IL2.

 

Have a friend with over 2,000 hrs in P51s and he is a Reno air races winner, who also tried it in Il2, he loved it.

Stalls and spins are very realistic, they were nasty IRL, altitude loss and recovery technique also works as pilots describe it.

Even Bob Hoover said that about the P51.

Dont know why that manual says the stalls are mild, because pilots say it has a reputation for nasty , stall/spin, many P51s were lost in stalls/spins.

 

Keep it fast  to avoid this surprise stall.

 

Spoiler

On 8/3/2019 at 11:27 PM, SCG_motoadve said:

This is not a WWII pilot although seen combat in A26s, and the Broncos.

Owned a P47, P40, P51s, Corsair, Zero, Hellcat, among other warbirds, Reno racer winner and 18 years participant in the unlimited class in P51s.

He still flies, and owns a few planes.

 

This was his first time ever flying a Sim,  we used VR .

First flight , Quick mission, one hr straight non stop in VR , he was blown away by the realism in VR!  he said many times, its like being in the Thunderbolt ,then he got a headache and stopped.

During the flight, he flew the P47, took off, did rolls,  steep turns, climbs, landings without crashing it (I was impressed , other pilots friends crash quick or are dizzy after a few minutes).

His impressions, P47 performance is spot on, P47 was a dog at low altitude, rate of climb spot on, feel of flight fantastic and feels realistic up to the ballooning when deploying flaps for landing.

He thought landings were very easy and forgiving though, I agreed and explained this might be done like this for playability reasons.

 

I offered all other planes, but he just wanted to fly the P 47 again, he flew for hrs , I could not get him off the simulator.

He commented controls does not give feedback to the pilot , yep I said I wish there were affordable force feedback sticks with extensions, like the Virpyl or others of this quality, also rudder pedals with force feedback.

He loved the Buttkicker  though, I have one attached to the stick another to the seat.

He is hooked, and I am going to help him build and setup a powerful PC for Il2  in VR.

Was fun to see how impressed he was with IL2.

 

 

 

 

[III/JG52_Al-Azraq]

4 hours ago, Robli said:

 

I don't have the real life experience to say which sim has better flight models, but I have to agree with DD_Arthur that these statements are total nonsense.

1. IL-2 is definitely not "on rails". In fact there have been complaints by some people how IL-2 has had too floaty or wobbly flight model. Like I said, I can't say myself how correct the flight model is, but it is definitely not "on rails".

2. The idea that developers do bad flight models "by design" in order to be able to to have more planes just does not make sense. Maybe the flight models are not perfect or are worse than some competitor (or not), but I would think that "by design" the devs try to create as good flight model as they reasonable can. 

3. It is not a "general consensus" that DCS has more advanced and realistic flight model. Various simmers have various opinions and there are also people with real life warbird experience that have various opinions. Some examples:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

  Hide contents

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

With all due respect, I don't trust a random user in forums that says "I have a friend that..." or "I have flown...".

 

Above you have a very good P-51 video, use it for reference.

[Robli]

40 minutes ago, III/JG52_Al-Azraq said:

With all due respect, I don't trust a random user in forums that says "I have a friend that..." or "I have flown...".

This "random user" has loaded lots of flying videos on this forum and even offered other simmers a chance to join him, as someone did, so even if you choose not to trust him, it does not add any credibility to your own statements.

 

"Random user" simulating air combat in real life:

Spoiler

On 9/20/2019 at 4:28 PM, SCG_motoadve said:

 

I have done some simulated air combat in real  warbirds, their power to weight ratio is close to some  WWII early fighters.

It is an adrenaline rush and Il2 absolutely helped.

Made me think how much of an adrenaline/scary rush would have been in WWII and real combat.

 

Same tactics work , for air combat maneuvers IL2 was amazing help, I bet for gunnery , specially if you fly in VR the sim would have helped too in real life.

G forces ( lacking right now in IL2, but when the new pilot physiology is released , we wont feel G forces either, but will make you think and fly more like a real pilot).

Situational awareness IL2 also a big help.

Seat of the pants feel (that cannot be simulated)

If you fly in VR , formation in IL2  is super realistic.

 

Made a video of it, was low level so no crazy maneuvers here, but fun( sorry no explosions).?

 

 

 

 

Edited March 18, 2022 by Robli

[fogpipe]

52 minutes ago, Robli said:

This "random user" has loaded lots of flying videos on this forum and even offered other simmers a chance to join him, as someone did, so even if you choose not to trust him, it does not add any credibility to your own statements.

 

"Random user" simulating air combat in real life:

 

What are those planes they are flying?

[Art-J]

Chinese CJ-6s. They're probably the most affordable option nowadays for anyone who wants to own something full-size and remotely similar to warbird, without selling his organs ;).