Reality Check

[+Zurawski 33]

Many-a-year ago I wrote an article for Combatsim.com regarding the fidelity of flight models of up coming combat sims. Long story short, what I ultimately determined was that a flight sim needn't be 100% accurate, so long as it "felt right".

 

IMHO there is way too much time spent pontificating over whether or not this sim is more accurate or that sim is. Reality is since we are not taxed with the physical demands of flight and we have no real fear of the repercussion of flying beyond our airframes limits (read: dying in a fiery death)... what good is a simulation that is dead nuts-on in the flight fidelity if we don't honor it?

 

Yes...yes... I know there are some dyed in the wool gronards who have the discipline to fly like this... but really, for most of us, what fun is this? By in large most of us just fly by the seat of our pants, focus on nothing more that getting a viable weapons solution, toggling the pickle on some hard target and keeping the bad guys off our ass...

 

From a fun stand point, isn't this all we really want to do?

[Sixgun 0]

Well said, sir...I mean Zur...sir.

[tank03 1]

I agree with both Sixgun and Zur.

 

Do I want a sim that reproduces every nuance of flying a fighter? Of course not, I'm not a pilot so I wouldn't be able to fly the thing. Do I want a sim that allows me to fly as if I were a competent pilot? Yes!

 

I'd like to think that if I were a real fighter pilot I wouldn't be putting myself into situations where I over stress the wings or otherwise engage in manuvers that were sure to damage my aircraft or lead to my early demise. Therefore, I don't really need that level of "realism" modeled in game since in reality I wouldn't be experiencing those phenomena because, as a decent pilot, I'd avoid those kinds of conditions (I hope). As Sixgun said; it's not just about the virtual a/c, but also the virtual pilot.

[+DoctorQuest 125]

Many-a-year ago I wrote an article for Combatsim.com regarding the fidelity of flight models of up coming combat sims. Long story short, what I ultimately determined was that a flight sim needn't be 100% accurate, so long as it "felt right".

 

IMHO there is way too much time spent pontificating over whether or not this sim is more accurate or that sim is. Reality is since we are not taxed with the physical demands of flight and we have no real fear of the repercussion of flying beyond our airframes limits (read: dying in a fiery death)... what good is a simulation that is dead nuts-on in the flight fidelity if we don't honor it?

 

Yes...yes... I know there are some dyed in the wool gronards who have the discipline to fly like this... but really, for most of us, what fun is this? By in large most of us just fly by the seat of our pants, focus on nothing more that getting a viable weapons solution, toggling the pickle on some hard target and keeping the bad guys off our ass...

 

From a fun stand point, isn't this all we really want to do?

 

Hear, hear!!

 

I tend to agree that the "full real" folks are like virgins. They have wild fantasies about sex but don't understand the real thing is a LOT different than what they imagined.

 

I have settled on the TW sims mainly because, like EAW before them, they find a proper mix of flight and combat immersion (which is different but IMHO, more important, then pure realism.) FWIW, I've been flying sims since right around 1984 so I've seen my share.

 

I also proudly make use of cheats such as boxes and cones. Having done some flying it becomes very obvious that the computer screen (even with TIR) cannot match the ability to instantly swivel your head and the ability to use peripheral vision to fly and fight at the same time. To achieve THAT level of reality almost requires that you use a cheat to overcome the limitations of the flat computer screen.

 

Good topic. Fun stuff.

[Rambler 1-1 9]

I totally agree with sixgun and zura and all them, there can be no simulation for actually flying. I definetly got the awnser I was looking for. Thanks all!

 

that rudder thing still messes me up, though.

[+Brain32 265]

I tend to agree that the "full real" folks are like virgins. They have wild fantasies about sex but don't understand the real thing is a LOT different than what they imagined.

Well it depends what do you mean under "full real". If we're going for extreme then "full real" is only actually flying...

But I will not bother you with nitpicking, it's obvious you meant highest difficulty

I fully agree with you that visuals are a huge and IMO even biggest problem of flight simulations, especially combat flight simulations.

However I tend to prefer to have flight dynamics of a simulated plane I'm "flying" to be as realistically modelled as possible. I mean if I choose to fly a FW190 in il2 for example, and I disable stalls,spins,torque,complex engine management, overheat etc. WTF am I actually doing playing flight sims, I could just go play first FPS that features "jet pack" I can find...

Also I think real pilots are at disadvantage when flying PC simulators, they are used to take certain signals from a plane in a certain way("seat of the pants" being the most noteworthy example) and Pc sims don't give them in the way they are used to. I saw quite a few such problems and misunderstandings with il2.

 

I always play "my" sims with flight dynamics set to the most realistic level a game can offer, and adjust the rest(mostly visual stuff like limited icons(IL2) or red squares(SFP1/WoV/WoE). I can't help it I'm one of the guys that like his F-104 to fly more like a rocket with small wings than like a Spitfire