S3 Series

Salute!

Seems as latest "downgrades" have different FM's and more.

- The buffs can now trim to slower speeds for autopilot climb. Gotta do more testing, but on frame 5 of latest turkey/buff shoot, we could climb 20 mph or more below what we could in frame 1. Hmmm......

Would be nice to know berfore frame planning, ya think?

- The high speed damage for the buffs is now at a slower speed. Noticed that on frame 5 last night. Not good for a fast descent, and those buffs in WW2 were tuff.

Guess I have to get back in the beta test grope and get the email warnings about changes.

- lastly, p-factor is still overmodeled, but seems better than last year.

Gums comments.....

Been using 135-140mph as a climb speed for B17's for a longggg time. Nothing has changed in that flight model for a bit sir.

Salute!

Sorry, Squatch, but we could not hold 135 climb speed using autopilopt in first two frames of latest series, and stall horn was blaring.

So we climbed at 155 or so, as that was the speed the model gave us. It's better for formation and climb rate doesn't suffer much, range is better.

Ask the buffers, and note the posts on the main forum about buff tuff and torque and autopilot authority.

- THE P-FACTOR IS WAY BEYOND THE REAL PLANES. Go get a hop in Wild Bill's T-28 and see.

- TORQUE FACTOR ALSO TOO HIGH. Should not require a lot of aileron trim for takeoff of other high power settings.

I learned in tail draggers back when the Earth was still cooling, and had to use a bit of right rudder at full power for takeoff. Once up, less and less rudder for the climb as speed was increasing and rudder trim more effective.

Interesting, but latest mod can provide a well-trinmmed plane by disconnecting otto pilot and hitting the "neutral stick" button. Until then I had to manually trim or hold rudder/aileron. So something has changed within last month and a half. I discovered this last week on timing runsd for Allied buffs.

Gums sends...

P.S. I have not tried many planes for the autopilot trim doofer, but can do it this week. I may also have to run some profiles to get that power curve now that we have multiple WEP/BST capabilities.

Sorry gotta disagree with ya on Torque and P-factor. If someone made changes to the buffs it wasn't told to the entire team. Fighter side made their inputs to the update and we thought that was all as well.

Here is my Torque/P-factor post:

With respect to torque--deciding to cut out the middle man/anecdotal stories, I decided I would cut straight to the source.

So I messaged my buddy Greg Anders (http://www.heritageflight.org/about-2/greg-anders/) whom I flew F-15E's with in the USAF. The lucky bastard now gets to fly WWII fighters full time, and so I figured I'd tap into his knowledge base. Here is his reply about torque/p-factor and the use of controls to counter it on take off and when slow:

"Hey Dobs. The answer is quite a bit on takeoff. You can't put in more than about 40" of manifold pressure without limiting out your rudder authority below about 35 KIAS. T/O in the Mustang is 2300 RPM (gives you @ 30"MP), release brakes, let her roll as you as you modulate power against rudder to keep her straight. Short runway, I will bring it in sort of quickly with 1/2 right rudder as my planning limit. You'll have right rudder in throughout the takeoff to counter P-factor, and right aileron in to counter torque of the 1,400 Lbs prop spinning up. Lifting the tail at about 45 KIAS also adds in a nose right component from gyroscopic effect. Stalls tend to break left due to gyroscopics. Left turning slow stall will really break left. That phenomenon has killed several folks in air shows."

So if you watched dawgers video, I don't think we have 'overdone' it..if anything it is on the light side, but at least it is there now. Hopefully they got the code fix for autopilot and we can continue on this "happy" path of progress.

no changes to buffs

I agree that the FM's favor fun over realism. Many in WB's would protest vehemently if absolute, full realism were to be utilized. If you read the journals of many WWII pilots, you will quickly understand the difficulties of getting many of those birds into the air. If rapidly given full throttle from idle, most high horse power engine driven fighters would become very difficult--if not impossible--to control, yet we do it all the time with impunity in WB's.

Personally, I would go for strict realism, but changing to absolutely accurate FM's would risk upsetting many longtime users who are accustomed the way the planes "fly" right now.

<S>
Nick

None of us want "full realism". Press E and go has a certain appeal, and the goal is to improve the FMs while adding more realism to enhance the game.

As evident by the hubbub with auto pilot, your observation is correct. All change is resisted by those it affects. Changes being made and marching forward. Maybe it will entice those we lost back....since they IS the target audience.

We now have "changes" being perceived by the players which are not there:)

Salute!

Guess I will have to "attach" an Excel or CVS file to show what I mean.

I also have serious problems with p-factor and torque/prop wash values for the mulit-engine planes.

If the lite folks want uber accurate stuff, fine. Overall I feel we would like fairly accurate numbers and such and not get hung up on 2 or 3 miles per hour top speed when roll rates, instantaneous pitch rates and such are not accurate.

The HUDRECORD file now has some pitch/roll/yaw stuff, and I have not figured out the units. They could be control inputs or autopilot inputs or......

The fighter pilot flying a P-51 is pretty close to what I would imagine for technique. But I don't know how many hours Dobs himself has in P-51's or Cubs or C150's or..... In other words, stuff flying 60 - 70 years ago.

I learned early on about p-factor and had trouble until my IP told me to use right leg only for rudder for the takeoff roll at high power. Simple, push and relax, don't use the left rudder most of the time.

If we want a lot more realism, then have the three levers for RPM, mixture and throttle ( manifold pressure). 'course we should also move our eye position forward and up, and get rid of visible control yoke movement and such in order to make instruments easier to resd.. Oh, yeah, make the canopy bows thin to allow for human eye configuration that allows we humans to see around the bows because we have two eyes and not one like the cameras.

Gums whines....

P.S. HUDRECORD files for two buff climbs by early next week. Will annotate power settings and such.

Not much...some T-26 time, Some T-6 tiime, and about 400 hours of PA-28 and Cessna 310.

Hence the reason I called dawger with his 15,000 hours of flying time....and an assload flying prop types. He'd have to give you the breakdown...and ya I can see P-factor/torque not being huge in a Cub...but like I posted fromque or my buddy who is lucky enough to fly them every day....in big propped, high HP centerline mounted engine aircraft they are a factor. Don't think anyone is looking at torque for buffs..and if there is any in there now...its probably alot like the 38s torque (except I don't the buff will flip you over on your back!).

Dobs