Jump to content

109 FM


jackdaw

Recommended Posts

  • ED Team
This is the only place he's banned that I know of, but that's beside the point and not the reason behind my decision which is based on the feeling of the vintage prop job FMs in DCS and the fact that I don't feel we were very well listened to when trying to provide constructive feedback on them using video evidence and original documentation. Instead I felt we were attempted ridiculed & patronized in the same manner as you seem to be doing to me now pronouncing me an "expert" and singing songs etc.

 

You really havent provided anything in this thread though, not really helping the OPer at all. He was asking about the difference in the FM between 1.5 and 2.2, there is no FM difference so the issue must lie somewhere else, all this chatter really doesnt help him figure out the issue.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really havent provided anything in this thread though, not really helping the OPer at all. He was asking about the difference in the FM between 1.5 and 2.2, there is no FM difference so the issue must lie somewhere else, all this chatter really doesnt help him figure out the issue.

 

Fair enough, I shall take my concerns elsewhere then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deja vu. Here's a post of mine from the last thread on this subject, in which Hummingbird also participated (and evidently ignored my post). I think it was Ben Franklin who defined insanity as repeating the same action and expecting a different result, but—all the same—I'm going to (out of pure optimism) once more quote my post, in an endeavor to help Hummingbird understand the problem in his reasoning, which NeilWillis aptly detailed. Without further blah-blah, the post:

 

I once saw a wartime comparison of a P-40 and a captured A6M, in which the test pilots compared acceleration from a level start. The P-40 pilot's report contained both his written description of the test, and also the numbers in a later portion of the report.

 

Someone on a forum for a different, older flight sim/game linked to the first part of the test, in which the P-40 pilot said that the P-40 accelerated "very rapidly" away from the Zero. The forum-goers began clamoring, then, that the in-game P-40 and/or Zero must be wrong, because the difference in acceleration between the two virtual aircraft was barely noticeable in-game. After all, the real pilot said it should accelerate away "very rapidly!"

 

Well, someone then linked to the second part of the test, where the same P-40 pilot actually gave the numbers: the P-40 got roughly 400 feet ahead of the Zero after one minute.

 

You see the problem now? All of the simmers were like, "But 400 ft/min is very slow! That's never going to be enough to get out of gun range. How could he call it 'rapid'?" And to us flight simmers, who are trying to get out of virtual gun range, only gaining 400 feet on the bandit, in an entire minute of running, is indeed slow. But to the test pilot, making his out-of-combat comparison, the same figure felt "very rapid."

 

Moral of the story: just because a real pilot calls something "very rapid" or "very gentle," does not mean that it's the same degree of rapidity or gentleness which you imagine when you hear those words, nor which you mean when you say them. One man's X can be another man's Y, when subjective terms are concerned.

 

The pilot is not wrong to call it "fast," nor are you wrong to call the same thing "slow;" however, all must understand that these are subjective terms, and thus mean different things to different people (and/or under different circumstances). This is why you cannot use a real pilot's assertion that a stall is "very gentle" to try to prove that the simulator is wrong. Exactly how gentle is "very gentle"? We need figures (and, moreover, figures from careful & methodical tests, not casual & inconsistent ones); subjective opinions, particularly second-hand, cannot make an accurate simulation.

 

(What's more is ... you'll often get two real pilots differing on whether it was fast or slow, or gentle or harsh; it isn't only a discrepancy between real pilot and flight simmer.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm neither knowledgeable nor interested in DCS 109 enough, flying it only occasionally, but Hummingbird's comment got me curious, so I took the plane for a spin in 2.2.

 

Well, let's just say that trying to fly coordinated over Normandy, for the life of me I couldn't force the plane to do any wing drop at all, let alone jittery one, neither in level stalls, not in ham-fisted turns. Over Nevada in "free flight" mission, when not paying attention to the slip indicator, it did eventually start to slowly roll left in the deep stall "stick to the guts" turn. Different altitude and density, I guess.

 

Still, compared to Mustang, which drops the left wing just like that when I pull the stick hard, and Dora, which drops the wing even when I look at it the wrong way, 109 seems to be the most idiot-proof and mild in this aspect (yes, I double checked if I had any auto-rudder help on). Don't know and don't care how good this FM is, but differences in our conclusions are quite noteworthy :D.

 

I have the same feeling exactly. The 109 in DCS matches every account I've read about flying it, also the takeoff/ landing too. Is it perfect? No idea, never flown one. But it's far closer to what I read in so many books than in other simulators. If one gets used to those, DCS might feel strange a bit, I understand that.

 

DCS has very realistic, "unforgiving" stick input on all aircraft, as opposed to all other sims where you can yank and pull as hard as you wish. This is something I really love about DCS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deja vu. Here's a post of mine from the last thread on this subject, in which Hummingbird also participated (and evidently ignored my post). I think it was Ben Franklin who defined insanity as repeating the same action and expecting a different result, but—all the same—I'm going to (out of pure optimism) once more quote my post, in an endeavor to help Hummingbird understand the problem in his reasoning, which NeilWillis aptly detailed. Without further blah-blah, the post:

 

 

 

(What's more is ... you'll often get two real pilots differing on whether it was fast or slow, or gentle or harsh; it isn't only a discrepancy between real pilot and flight simmer.)

 

It was Einstein.And letts stop reposting things from the dark ages and do something more constructive please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was Einstein.And letts stop reposting things from the dark ages and do something more constructive please.

 

+1

9./JG27

 

"If you can't hit anything, it's because you suck. If you get shot down, it's because you suck. You and me, we know we suck, and that makes it ok." - Worst person in all of DCS

 

"In the end, which will never come, we will all be satisifed... we must fight them on forum, we will fight them on reddit..." - Dunravin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is, arguable, less of a pain when stalled than the other warbirds. It's the one I like the most.

 

What usually ends up with me punching up ctrl-r for a retry on a prop' is either a snap stall on take-off caused by an early lift - or too much alpha - or a stall on landing caused by not enough speed, or too much alpha again on the flare.

 

Where everything else is inverting and striking the wing and cartwheeling and flaming, the 109 has enough authority to drop the opposing wing and level the nose.

 

It also seems to float far better than the other planes. Those slats really make a nice, big float.

 

It's the second easiest to get off the ground, the easiest warbird to land and the only thing that keeps it from being the easiest to outright fly is the lack of roll and rudder trim, but even then in level flight at 400-450kph it settles in with only the torque from the engine to give a slight roll.

 

That is, of course, the subjective FM.

 

The only place it's ever a pain is on the initial lift-off, when under power. Or if you're not too careful on the landing with the thing.

 

Also amusing to compare with that Other Mouse Guided 'sim', where the engine melts itself under WEP - while I'm just blasting up at full MW50 at 20-30m/sec. It just wants to go up.

 

Models in 2.2 feel 'snatchier'. But that might just be an FPS thing. Especially when there's a lot going on.

 

Also, bind the MW50 button to something you won't accidentally hit at full throttle - it cuts off the water, but not the boost. It's a great way to get some gliding experience.


Edited by DartzIRL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And letts stop reposting things from the dark ages and do something more constructive please.

 

If you think the post I quoted wasn't constructive, then that's your problem. An explanation of the subjective nature of pilot quotes, with relevant example, is about as constructive as it gets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that in DCS the P-51 comes very close to the 109 in turns at low speeds also to me screams that something is off, which again is also based on pilot comparisons (Holm, Hanna etc.)

 

Are we playing different sims? To my experience, in-game 109 has significant advantage over P-51 in turning at low speeds. Especially with MW50.

 

DCS has very realistic, "unforgiving" stick input on all aircraft.

 

Unforgiving? :( When I flew Bf.109 it was forgiving me simply everything. Offline and online. I couldn't force it into a spin even when i tried to do this on purpose (didn't play around with stab though). In online I've never seen a 109 spinning as well (unless tail is damaged). Or maybe the FM changed during last several months?..

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

DCS has very realistic, "unforgiving" stick input on all aircraft, as opposed to all other sims where you can yank and pull as hard as you wish. This is something I really love about DCS.

 

This. A million times this. Hummingbird mentioned that something felt off about ALL prop modules in DCS. Perhaps the fact that they do not have any artificial FCS and simulate flight control inputs

AS IF THEY WERE MADE BY REAL LIFE-SIZE CONTROLS instead of small plastic inadequate joysticks is the cause of his issues.

 

I've got a MSFFB2 joystick. I think I would feel the same way if I had to use a spring stick again when flying these WWII birds. That doesn't mean the problem lies with the FM, but rather in our

interpretation of what we THINK we should see and feel.

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. A million times this. Hummingbird mentioned that something felt off about ALL prop modules in DCS. Perhaps the fact that they do not have any artificial FCS and simulate flight control inputs

AS IF THEY WERE MADE BY REAL LIFE-SIZE CONTROLS instead of small plastic inadequate joysticks is the cause of his issues.

 

I've got a MSFFB2 joystick. I think I would feel the same way if I had to use a spring stick again when flying these WWII birds. That doesn't mean the problem lies with the FM, but rather in our

interpretation of what we THINK we should see and feel.

 

Incidentally, I also use a MS FFB2. I can't imagine flying these planes with a spring centered stick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally, I also use a MS FFB2. I can't imagine flying these planes with a spring centered stick.

Can't imagine flying with a FFB joystick as neither the stick size nor stick force required/buildup is realistic IMO.

 

Tried it a few times but never got used to it.

i7-7700K 4.2GHz, 16GB, GTX 1070 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a MSFFB2 joystick. I think I would feel the same way if I had to use a spring stick again when flying these WWII birds. That doesn't mean the problem lies with the FM, but rather in our

interpretation of what we THINK we should see and feel.

 

Love that stick, and DCS supports ffb better than any other sim on the market.

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Love that stick, and DCS supports ffb better than any other sim on the market.

 

Just hope someone considers building an affordable MSFFBv2-like stick in the near future.

 

Buying a 2nd / 3rd... hand MSFFB where I live is tricky and risky, and I wouldn't spend my money in it, unless it came from someone I knew and could thrust.

 

Unfortunately controller makers have apparently abandoned this type of sticks, and we're left with the remainings from when MS cared about their own flightsim market :-/

Flight Simulation is the Virtual Materialization of a Dream...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strangely enough, the racing wheel makers still use ffb. The tech is still in use, just not by joystick makers.

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When do the Immersion Co. patent rights for FFB controllers expire anyway? Still two or three years if I recall correctly? When that happens I suspect designing the FFB sticks might become profitable again.

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 2020, hopefully..

Specs:

Asus Z97 PRO Gamer, i7 4790K@4.6GHz, 4x8GB Kingston @2400MHz 11-13-14-32, Titan X, Creative X-Fi, 128+2x250GB SSDs, VPC T50 Throttle + G940, MFG Crosswinds, TrackIR 5 w/ pro clip, JetSeat, Win10 Pro 64-bit, Oculus Rift, 27"@1920x1080

 

Settings:

2.1.x - Textures:High Terrain:High Civ.Traffic:Off Water:High VisRan:Low Heatblur:High Shadows:High Res:1920x1080 RoC:1024 MSAA:4x AF:16x HDR:OFF DefS: ON GCI: ON DoF:Off Lens: OFF C/G:390m Trees:1500m R:max Gamma: 1.5

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...