Brief Room Episode 8: Old Friend

[LukeFF]

In this episode, Daniel Tuseev discusses the F-51 with our lead historical researcher Viktor Sechnoy, plus they answer your questions. 

 

In our next Dev Brief, we will discuss the physical aircraft modeling in our Korea project. If you have any questions about this topic, please submit them here: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf2q5OEiKgkKJZtsX2Kb-Y8z9yUaPBLsu1zpTpf2E75t2qQKg/viewform

 

 

[[CPT]Crunch]

I speed these guys up a quarter and they start sounding native. 

[Avimimus]

36 minutes ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

I speed these guys up a quarter and they start sounding native. 

 

Yes, it is an interesting effect. It is a bit easier to follow easily without effort if it is sped up slightly.

[Aapje]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

In our next Dev Brief, we will discuss the physical aircraft modeling in our Korea project.

 

Does this mean the modelling of the aircraft itself, or (also) the modelling of the physics of flight?

[Avimimus]

The developers expressed interested in information on whether the following were used in Korea:

- 150 octane fuel
- 0.50 cal API-T M49
- 0.50 cal Incendiary M23/M48

 

They also expressed interest in references for the Skyraider AD-4

[Dagwoodyt]

Though briefly mentioned, they are aware of and seem willing to support ffb bases coming to market. Hopefully that will include ffb rudder effects👍

[BlitzPig_EL]

Glad to hear about the inclusion of API and APIT ammunition.

[Rudini]

hei guys, any updates for odessa? only korea news the whole summer?!

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Aapje said:

Does this mean the modelling of the aircraft itself, or (also) the modelling of the physics of flight?

 

Both 

39 minutes ago, Rudini said:

hei guys, any updates for odessa? only korea news the whole summer?!

 

Nothing new to report. When we have more to share you'll know. 🙂

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

I like that design philosophy (like with the 150 octane) of when in doubt just add it as an optional mod and let the player decide.

[LuftManu]

Hey! Not sure if somebody got this but the team wants to move away from engine timers to a more complex system. This is great news!

Also, two types of controll types. Like now and 1:1 for extensions and FFB sticks

[Gambit21]

44 minutes ago, LuftManu said:

 …team wants to move away from engine timers to a more complex system.

That’s the news everyone wanted 5 years ago - better (very very) late than never I guess. Engine timers have been a blight for sure. 

[LukeFF]

12 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

That’s the news everyone wanted 5 years ago - better (very very) late than never I guess. Engine timers have been a blight for sure. 

 

If it was easy enough to change 5 years ago we would have. 

[Gambit21]

7 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

If it was easy enough to change 5 years ago we would have. 

I know they would have.

 

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

Move away from engine timers?

 

[spreckair]

4 hours ago, LuftManu said:

Hey! Not sure if somebody got this but the team wants to move away from engine timers to a more complex system.

So, who is going to get that bum engine that was sabotaged at the factory and is ready to explode at the right moment?  Are they going to be happy that the system is now more realistic?  Hard to say.

[LuftManu]

7 hours ago, spreckair said:

So, who is going to get that bum engine that was sabotaged at the factory and is ready to explode at the right moment?  Are they going to be happy that the system is now more realistic?  Hard to say.

Hey! No clue about how and what they will do. But if we are offer a system where there is degradation in career and we can "assign some kind of % of degradation into spawns in MP" could do it for me.

Imagine a system where more % of degradation causes more randonmness in failures or differences in HP. Not a big amount, but some very slight variations.

Want to have a coop campaign? Increase the degradation of the players as they fly missions them until they are shot down to start anew in a new airframe. Starting from 0% to 15% to have some random values.

Want to have a quick combat flight or a quick action server? all planes to 0% degradation.

 

Cool server with some realistic stats? 20 to 40% degradation on random.

I would love someting like that. Give the players the choice to use this in MP and have some kind of tracking in career mode.
Of course, the ice on the cake would be a system in MP to track it too for your planes in a server, but this is a lot of "ideas" in the air

 

[LF_Mark_Krieger]

21 hours ago, spreckair said:

So, who is going to get that bum engine that was sabotaged at the factory and is ready to explode at the right moment?  Are they going to be happy that the system is now more realistic?  Hard to say.

I would enjoy it a lot, but I admit I'm a fanatic of realism. I think the best solution is adding the option to use as much as it is possible realistic system of random engine/system failures (hydraulics, electric, weapons...) but with the option to deactivate it.

Edited August 30, 2024 by LF_Mark_Krieger

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, LuftManu said:

Cool server with some realistic stats? 20 to 40% degradation on random.

 

Hmm... or, if you damage your engine in one sortie, the next aircraft you get has a bit of engine degredation.

 

  

12 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

That’s the news everyone wanted 5 years ago - better (very very) late than never I guess. Engine timers have been a blight for sure. 

 

The thing which strikes me (from the interview) is just how much research it takes to move away from engine timers... as the points of failure could be very different depending on the exact make and model of an engine. So, the limiting factor has probably been partly in research.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Another consideration in this would be supply and logistics, especially in a WW2 European theatre late war scenario.  If you are USAAF and have an engine problem you would pretty much open a crate and stuff in a new engine.  Our industrial capacity gave us the luxury of having large amounts of spare everything, and our supply lines were not constantly under pressure from air attack.  Even to this day, for example, when the "Memphis Belle" was under restoration at the NMUSAF, they went into storage and pulled out 4, brand new in the crate Wright R1820s for her, rather than fix up the severely deteriorated ones from the aircraft itself.

 

 

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

I think a major source of the frustration with the timers is how they are communicated to the player. If I could see the timer health in one of the gauges instead of tracking it all mentally I wouldn't have minded the timer system as much as I did. That may or may not be realistic, but I think at least having the option of a toggleble timer health indicator in some way would alleviate alot of the salt. Ideally there could be an immersive option where the engine health is hidden in one of the gauges.

Edited August 29, 2024 by =MERCS=JenkemJunkie

[[CPT]Crunch]

Come on man, it was Korea, there was zero factory sabotage.  These were stocks coming in from massive modern Air Forces that weren't considered fully engaged, they called it a Policing Action under the UN, and the Soviets weren't officially engaged.  They weren't sending in their junk, nor was it coming in fresh off any war stressed factory floor, it was equipment in use and in as peak operating condition as it's ever going to get if your a realist.

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said:

I think a major source of the frustration with the timers is how they are communicated to the player. If I could see the timer health in one of the gauges instead of tracking it all mentally I wouldn't have minded the timer system as much as I did. That may or may not be realistic, but I think at least having the option of a toggleble timer health indicator in some way would alleviate alot of the salt. Ideally there could be an immersive option where the engine health is hidden in one of the gauges.

I do hear what you’re saying, however putting  the fake, gamey timer on an even more silly “timer gauge” that didn’t exist wouldn’t have solved anything. Timers are already way over the game/sim line towards the “game” end of the spectrum. Making a fictional gauge in the cockpit would just exacerbate that. 

The problem is taking an R2800 that will run at WEP for 7 hours plus (if you provide it with enough water) and giving it a ridiculous glass jaw.

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

Yeah, my ideals has flaws, but what do you think is a better option for those wanting more realistic engines in a better setting?

[Gambit21]

13 minutes ago, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said:

 but what do you think is a better option for those wanting more realistic engines in a better setting?

Well I know what should have been done (well within they’re capabilities all this time) but it sounds like they’re finally looking at fixing it, so winding down that path is (always has been) pointless at this juncture.   

[[CPT]Crunch]

They're already giving us more realistic engines, as stated, what more do you wish to demand of them.  Wait and see, these guys hearts are in the right place, most of them also want what we want, but we have to be realistic also, it's a complex program and all sims are smoke and mirrors.  Let em exercise artistic expression, they'll enjoy that and so will we.

[Gambit21]

7 hours ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

They're already giving us more realistic engines, as stated, what more do you wish to demand of them.  Wait and see, these guys hearts are in the right place, most of them also want what we want, but we have to be realistic also, it's a complex program and all sims are smoke and mirrors.  Let em exercise artistic expression, they'll enjoy that and so will we.

 

I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with that MiG-15bis, engine management, characteristics etc. 

I think that aircraft is going to be the star of the show...from where I sit at least. 

[LF_Mark_Krieger]

Excuse for the reference to other flight sim, but this video of a real P-51 pilot analising the flight model can be very useful to make F-51 flight model a bit more accurate. Anyway I thing that in combat maneuvers, Great Battles flight model is the best, but in taxiing, take-off and landing can be improved. Specially in the excessive need of elevator trim when landing.

Thank you!

[Trooper117]

That video has been seen so many times before, I'm sure the developers are well aware of it...

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, LF_Mark_Krieger said:

Excuse for the reference to other flight sim, but this video of a real P-51 pilot analising the flight model can be very useful to make F-51 flight model a bit more accurate. Anyway I thing that in combat maneuvers, Great Battles flight model is the best, but in taxiing, take-off and landing can be improved. Specially in the excessive need of elevator trim when landing.

Thank you!

 

This is not a topic for discussion about comparisons with DCS. Our engineers are competent and know what they are doing when building a flight model. 

[LF_Mark_Krieger]

17 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

This is not a topic for discussion about comparisons with DCS. Our engineers are competent and know what they are doing when building a flight model. 

Sure. I wasn't trying to compare with other sims, we can ignore the reference to other sim. I even haven't mentioned the name, although it is obvious in the video. But I think the video is indeed a very useful information to compare the real plane behaviour with IL-2 Great Battles flight model. That's my intention. Only to help the absolutelly competent engineers of my favourite WWII combat plane simulator to build the new flight model. In fact, in IL-2 Great Battles, the flight model of the P-51 on combat maneuvers is much better in my opinion than flight model of p-51 of other sim. But if we find info that can help to improve it, why not?

Edited September 5, 2024 by LF_Mark_Krieger

[Gambit21]

37 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

This is not a topic for discussion about comparisons with DCS. Our engineers are competent and know what they are doing when building a flight model. 

Their engineers have done a stellar job

 

[Avimimus]

All of these people have done stellar jobs... the dedication of flight sim engineers, and the aeronautical sciences behind them, are real testaments to human accomplishment - and go far beyond what most of us could do. This is one reason I don't really make comparisons between sims - they're all magnificent.