Reality Check

[Rambler 1-1 9]

ok, I know some of you guys out there have actually flown some of the planes that are avaliable for the SF series, and after doing a whole lot of flying over my last 3 days of christmas break, I began to wonder if flying these planes with the flight model on "hard" is actually like flying the real thing. I know the sims don't come close to real life, where you have all the real forces working on your plane and you, but will the planes all stall that easily if you haul back on the stick and all that stuff?

 

I'm not saying I have no idea, but the closest to combat I've ever come was aerobatics in the back seat of my uncle's Citabria.

[+Dave 2,322]

ok, I know some of you guys out there have actually flown some of the planes that are avaliable for the SF series, and after doing a whole lot of flying over my last 3 days of christmas break, I began to wonder if flying these planes with the flight model on "hard" is actually like flying the real thing. I know the sims don't come close to real life, where you have all the real forces working on your plane and you, but will the planes all stall that easily if you haul back on the stick and all that stuff?

 

I'm not saying I have no idea, but the closest to combat I've ever come was aerobatics in the back seat of my uncle's Citabria.

 

I never fly them on hard. I fly them on normal. I got stick time in a few fighters through some incentive rides. And I think it seems like on hard it is too easy to stall and impossible to turn. But its all subjective because I can count on my fingers the people who have flown and who hasn't on this site. Some of the people who chime in about FM's have never even seen the plane in question (at the time) in person. Your mileage will vary.

[sparkomatic 7]

I eschew "hard" settings in most games because the industry standard has been to tweak files, not make them more realistic (it is in the name, after all). For example, hit points will increase for your opponents or yours will decrease or both.

 

I really do not think "hard" mode in any SFP1 franchise is more "realistic".

 

Regarding flying real airplanes...it depends...on too many factors to list here, but in a word, the sims are much harder than the real thing (the fews types that I have flown) for a lot of reasons, mostly the artificiality and the lack of perception. Staring into a screen is not the same as sitting inside an airframe, smelling 30 year old sweat stains and only God knows what else.

 

Kind of like Doom 3 would not be a real approximation of fighting hell demons (reference ex-wife) but is an amusing diversion. So take any "sim" for that, and dont try to impress any one in any bar with your number of kills or time in front of a monitor.

 

By the by, read another post by me of what "realism" would entail, then decide how much of that you really want...the paperwork starts now...

[Longestpants 1]

By the by, read another post by me of what "realism" would entail, then decide how much of that you really want...the paperwork starts now...

 

I believe C5's sig says something about achieving full realism by burning to death when you get shot down.

[sparkomatic 7]

that is part of it, but have you ever had your mission cancel due to maintenance? No? And I am not referring to MSFS planned malfunction, but that is a start. At least in iL-2 some dudes crash or fail to take off, and that adds a bit as well.

 

Plus I like F4AF in that your mission doest win the war in a single stroke, in fact, you really have no idea if it had any effect.

 

But as far as flight sims, even a 360, full motion ride has its disadvantages, though the really high end ones can now be logged by the FAA.

[MigBuster 2,884]

Yeah Falcon doesnt even involve the pre flight walk around to inspect the plane, salute of the crew chief, and then taxi along to the arming pit - call that realistic sheesh

 

 

perhaps the next version of F4 can include writing a full post mission report each time also

Edited January 6, 2008 by CoolHand29

[SHOOT54 0]

ok, I know some of you guys out there have actually flown some of the planes that are avaliable for the SF series, and after doing a whole lot of flying over my last 3 days of christmas break, I began to wonder if flying these planes with the flight model on "hard" is actually like flying the real thing. I know the sims don't come close to real life, where you have all the real forces working on your plane and you, but will the planes all stall that easily if you haul back on the stick and all that stuff?

 

I'm not saying I have no idea, but the closest to combat I've ever come was aerobatics in the back seat of my uncle's Citabria.

 

Dear Flyer,

Having been a combat pilot and civil pilot it's pretty safe to say that it won't be like the actual aircrafts characteristics, especially if it is a fly-by-wire aircraft. However what some of the developers have done is incorporate as much realism to the flight models. Are they difficult, yes, for me the most realistic models are from Vietnam back and they indeed are bears to handle. So you get one scarey ride, one bcause noones flight controls for computers will match the actual and two, because of the afore mentioned issues of flight model building. But overall they are as real as you will get. The only other flight models I have found which give the most realistic handling are from Oleg's Il-2 series. So enjoy the sims at whatever reality setting you like knowing that the people who engineered the models did their best to give a realistic feel for what those aircraft would act like. Good flying............

[+Dave 2,322]

. The only other flight models I have found which give the most realistic handling are from Oleg's Il-2 series.

 

What? You mean the Uber Russian planes are good? I am going to have to disagree with you there. That sim has the most unbalanced FM's in any series. The Russian planes are all powerful and anything is made vastly inferior. As much as the Luftwhiners complain there is some validity to their arguments.

[Viggen 644]

What? You mean the Uber Russian planes are good? I am going to have to disagree with you there. That sim has the most unbalanced FM's in any series. The Russian planes are all powerful and anything is made vastly inferior. As much as the Luftwhiners complain there is some validity to their arguments.

 

 

Perhaps Oleg was being a nationalist?

[+Brain32 265]

Well I fly on Hard FM setting and I can't say planes are easy to stall for me, I just don't get AI's sustained 10G turns

 

 

Oh and as for il2, I don't see Russian planes overmodelled as much as before, actually nowhere near that, they are modelled on the better side tho, but much more sensible than in previous game versions...

[Silverbolt 104]

the FM of IL-2 series are very reallistic in my opinion!

La-7 is a good fighter but have a poor combat radius, P-15 is a Uber fighter, but still heavy, AM-6 is good and light , but have a poor armour, P-47, Fw-109 and F-4U are good for Boom and Zoom as in the real life.

for me is very ballanced.....

but okay, Yak-9 is a bit overpowered in IL-2 hehehe

[+pcpilot 181]

Well I fly on Hard FM setting and I can't say planes are easy to stall for me, I just don't get AI's sustained 10G turns

Oh and as for il2, I don't see Russian planes overmodelled as much as before, actually nowhere near that, they are modelled on the better side tho, but much more sensible than in previous game versions...

 

Ah, You noticed the AI's 10G turns in SF too...I love the "circle jerks" I get into with the ai; not much challenge there. Even when I yoyo hi or lo, they still manage to stay just ahead of me. I agree the Russian planes in IL2 are more balanced with the last patch, but a Yak9 and LA7 are still probably the best prop fighters in the sim.

[Silverbolt 104]

Ah, You noticed the AI's 10G turns in SF too...I love the "circle jerks" I get into with the ai; not much challenge there. Even when I yoyo hi or lo, they still manage to stay just ahead of me. I agree the Russian planes in IL2 are more balanced with the last patch, but a Yak9 and LA7 are still probably the best prop fighters in the sim.

Yak-9 was really a good plane.

La-7 have limitations....

[+Jarhead1 27]

I cant comment on validity of flight models on any a/c because i am not a pilot, i am a ground pounder, but in my opinion, Normal is the most realistic because anything less is too easy and anything more is no fun at all when u stall on a 2 G turn, thats NO FUN WHATSOEVER in my opinion

[Rambler 1-1 9]

Normal is the most realistic because anything less is too easy and anything more is no fun at all when u stall on a 2 G turn, thats NO FUN WHATSOEVER in my opinion

 

yep, that just about sums it up.

 

I found that normal FM with my joystick sensitivity knocked down is fun AND challenging (spell check), but the only problem I have is the useless rudder.

From my limited experience (cessnas, a bonanza, a Citabria and a PT-17 stearman), I have found that in level flight if you put in a bunch of rudder, the plane yaws as expected and then you get a bit of opposite bank (left yaw=right wing down), and then the plane flies on in the direction it was pointed post-turn, give or take a degree. However, In SF when you're in level flight and you apply rudder, the plane yaws very quickly and when you release the rudder the plane bounces back to it's original heading (I call this effect "overcrab"). Even if you add bank, this still happens. The only way to turn as I found is to only use bank, which would lead to sideslipping in real life. This becomes really annoying, especially when trying to bomb heavily defended targets at low altitude and high speed.

 

does overcrab actually exist in real life, or is it a problem in the sim? is there a way to correct it?

-note- I'm using the direction keys on the keyboard as the rudder controlls.

 

also, ai can pull off 10g turns? that explains a whole lot...

[sparkomatic 7]

I noticed that WOE 11G thing yesterday...I was in a the F-16E and a MiG23 kept turning inside my circle, even though I was clean, and ready...just laughed, jinked opposite with a slip and of course the weak AI then gave up and leveled out...which did not end well for him.

 

No way an MiG23 was able to stay inside an F-16 at 10k...

[+Brain32 265]

I tested it AI highG thing few months ago, modifed the "Cant-remember-now-which.ini" so I can endure extreme G and went flying with debug console, I was in lag pursuit on a F-18 with Su27 in a sustained spiral dive, basically I was pulling slightly over 10G's and he was pulling away... Not much of a problem in gun to gun scenario, but with rockets...

This also might explain why people feel planes bleed speed easily on Hard setting in WOV/WOE...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As for il2, are you guys sure it's not Yak-3 instead of Yak-9? I don't find Yak9 to be much of a problem at all. Worst are imo, La5FN,La7 and slightly less than theese two Yak-3...

[Silverbolt 104]

how is possible to measure "G"s in WOE?

[+Brain32 265]

Extract the HUDDATA.INI from FlightData.CAT...on top of the ini you should find:

[Debug]

DisplayDebug=FALSE <--------change this to TRUE

 

However keep in mind that this will add a whole bunch of info over the screen and it's not combat friendly

[+Dave 2,322]

I got that latest Il2 patch and I stil think they FM's are still uber on most of the Soviet planes. I should be owning Russian planes in my 190's and they always pull 41 G's to get behind me.

[Sixgun 0]

I guess I'll weigh in on this one.

 

I am a civilian pilot with a little bit of dogfighting, formation work, and aerobatics in my logbook.

 

My opinion is that the flight models on "Hard" settings are probably as realistic as they need to be. What I mean is that with these sims, you are simulating being a real pilot in a real plane, not just the plane itself. In other words, the edges of the envelope are not perfectly realistic, but are more representative of where a trained pilot, combined with a fairly realistic flight model could or would put himself.

 

In other words, the "virtual" you isn't going to overstress your "virtual" airframe to the point of breaking something by pulling too hard on the stick, or get into a departure situation by pulling through the buffet in an accelerated stall, because your virtual you limits the real you...hopefully.

 

In a real fighter turn in a real fighter, you have many more cues to what your airframe is doing than in a sim. The accelerated stall, for instance, starts out with a nibble (slight buffet and no noise) and rapidly progresses (as you continue to apply back stick) though a pronounced rumble and shake to a point of heavy buffet where it sounds and feels like there are twenty guys out on the wings beating them with their fists. Continued pull results in a nice excursion from controlled flight, often including un-commanded rolls, sometimes somersaults, and many times ending with a nice (hopefully upright and conventional) spin. Obviously these symptoms and behaviors vary aircraft to aircraft.

 

IL-2 captures this fairly well in hard mode, and it's a pain in the butt with the lack of real life feedback.

 

Trust me when I say you don't want this too well modeled on the sim, because you get no seat of the pants feel to keep you from going too far. Sure there's some rumble and some screen shake, but it's not enough. Heck, its not always enough in real life, either. A very experienced U.S. Navy A-4 pilot did an unscripted snap roll trying to regain some angles on me after I laid a big lead turn on him. It's fun to watch on video.

 

Actually the hard settings with all the Heads up info turned off is maybe harder that the real thing because of the lack of S.O.P. feel, and unless you use a headtracker, you can't reference the airspeed too well. Believe me when I say it is hard work just pulling 5-6g and looking up through the top of the canopy at the other guy across from you in that one circle fight with the sweat rolling down into your eyes. Better have your helmet on good.

 

Something that is definitely easier in real life is formation flight, once again, because of the lack of feel in the sim. On the balance, though, your situational awareness is always better with the sim because of padlock view. It's all about tradeoffs.

 

The real issue with flight sim realism is getting the relative performances of these virtual airframes in the right order.

 

Just my two cents. FastCargo can relate much better than I.

 

A flight sim buddy of mine who is a corporate pilot said one day: "If these sims get any better, I will never want to fly a real plane ever again."

 

I'm not sure I agree, but the sims are getting really good.

Edited January 7, 2008 by Sixgun

[Guest Bounder]

I guess I'll weigh in on this one.

 

I am a civilian pilot with a little bit of dogfighting, formation work, and aerobatics in my logbook.

 

My opinion is that the flight models on "Hard" settings are probably as realistic as they need to be. What I mean is that with these sims, you are simulating being a real pilot in a real plane, not just the plane itself. In other words, the edges of the envelope are not perfectly realistic, but are more representative of where a trained pilot, combined with a fairly realistic flight model could or would put himself.

 

In other words, the "virtual" you isn't going to overstress your "virtual" airframe to the point of breaking something by pulling too hard on the stick, or get into a departure situation by pulling through the buffet in an accelerated stall, because your virtual you limits the real you...hopefully.

 

In a real fighter turn in a real fighter, you have many more cues to what your airframe is doing than in a sim. The accelerated stall, for instance, starts out with a nibble (slight buffet and no noise) and rapidly progresses (as you continue to apply back stick) though a pronounced rumble and shake to a point of heavy buffet where it sounds and feels like there are twenty guys out on the wings beating them with their fists. Continued pull results in a nice excursion from controlled flight, often including un-commanded rolls, sometimes somersaults, and many times ending with a nice (hopefully upright and conventional) spin. Obviously these symptoms and behaviors vary aircraft to aircraft.

 

IL-2 captures this fairly well in hard mode, and it's a pain in the butt with the lack of real life feedback.

 

Trust me when I say you don't want this too well modeled on the sim, because you get no seat of the pants feel to keep you from going too far. Sure there's some rumble and some screen shake, but it's not enough. Heck, its not always enough in real life, either. A very experienced U.S. Navy A-4 pilot did an unscripted snap roll trying to regain some angles on me after I laid a big lead turn on him. it's fun to watch on video.

 

Actually the hard settings with all the Heads up info turned off is maybe harder that the real thing because of the lack of S.O.P. feel, and unless you use a headtracker, you can't reference the airspeed too well. Believe me when I say it is hard work just pulling 5-6g and looking up through the top of the canopy at the other guy across from you in that one circle fight with the sweat rolling down into your eyes. Better have your helmet on good.

 

Something that is definitely easier in real life is formation flight, once again, because of the lack of feel in the sim. On the balance, though, your situational awareness is always better with the sim because of padlock view. It's all about tradeoffs.

 

The real issue with flight sim realism is getting the relative performances of these virtual airframes in the right order.

 

Just my two cents. FastCargo can relate much better than I.

 

A flight sim buddy of mine who is a corporate pilot said one day: "If these sims get any better, I will never want to fly a real plane ever again."

 

I'm not sure I agree, but the sims are getting really good.

[Guest Bounder]

there are several sims that u can over stress the plane IL2, MSCS (microsoft combat sim) just 2 name two.

[Sixgun 0]

there are several sims that u can over stress the plane IL2, MSCS (microsoft combat sim) just 2 name two.

 

 

I guess my point is that I'm not so sure that's desirable. At least to me, it isn't, not without better systems to transmit feel.

[sparkomatic 7]

- As much as I enjoy iL-2, I relent that it has also endured weird patch cycles and AI bounces...but for me I usually use it for ground strafing and "strike fighter" missions as I enjoy the depth of the ground war in it...as opposed to "attack enemy fuel tank...attack enemy comm building...attack enemy runway...attack enemy fuel tank".