[ACE-OF-ACES]

OK Ace of Aces ,
I think you just want to have the most possible perfect F-86 in the game , and I understand this cause I about this totally agree with you ...

Yes and good!

If I ve the time , I will explain in a good english why I dont believe in the curves , I have some friends who speak a better english than me and they will translate ...

You dont belive in the IL2C curves?

Or real world data curves?

But few words ...
You have the right to not agree with me , but I think you don t understand my goal ...
Perhaps a short sentence could make you understand : I want the most possible realistic plane when I take it IN GAME ! Not just reading some numbers ...

Everyone I know wants the most realistic flight simulation, thus everyone I know all want the same goal.

I ve flown on this simulator 10 years ago ( from the beginning ) , it a fantastic simulator

Me too and agree

but now I d like to solve some things I don t like , anemic engines ...etc ...

anemic engines?

When you give the simulator to some real fighter pilots , they say all the same thing ...

Really? What do they say?

So It s necessary to improve the simulator ...

As I allready noted, no sim was, is or ever will be perfect, so there is allways room for improvement

I d like to be in the situation of a real pilot when I take this game and it s my goal ....

I think that is everyones goal

Sure I m constantly looking at the books , the curves , the numbers , but I m trying to make them ALIVE in the game ...

And the best way to make them alive is to make the percent error between the flight simulation and the real world data (what you call curves and numbers) as small as you can make it.

Cause if you just take the historical numbers and put them in the FM , you have not a good result , you have to make an optimization ...

I don't care what numbers you put in the FM, as long at the numbers that come out match the real world data, curves, numbers, etc.

Il2 compare is a very good test to see the difference between two planes in the game , but not very accurate if you try to put the test on a real curve ...

You should get your translating friends to translate my earlier posts to you, in that I allready said IL2C is not 100% accurate and that a formal test is required. By formal I mean flying the plane and collecting the data using DeviceLink.

It don t take all the FM ( java class ) , and forget a lot of things from the planes ... In my update , I ve put more G effects , put a realistic landing ( no more than - 10 feets per second at touch down ) , problems with the bombs under the wings ...etc ...etc ...
Gradualy I will improve all I can ... Try to make your FM only from the curves if you believe that it s the best ...

Again, I don't care what numbers you put in the FM, as long at the numbers that come out match the real world data, curves, numbers, etc.

For example, I dont care what you put into the FM (ie Cy, Cx, CriticalCy, CxCurvature, etc) As long as what comes out is correct (ie TSPA, ROC, Turn Rates, etc)

That is to say if you found a real world value for the Drag coeficent, and you had to tweak it from that value to make the top speed come out right. That is fine by me! Because I dont expect the 6DOF math flight model to be perfect! I would say it is even expected that you would have to play with those numbers to make what comes out right!

I think it s a good thing to have different points of view ...
But when all will be finished , try an honnest fly with the Corea mod , not just a track from IL2 compare , and you ll see whish mod is the most realistic when you take it in game ...

Again, You should get your translating friends to translate my earlier posts to you, in that I allready said IL2C is not 100% accurate and that a formal test is required. By formal I mean flying the plane and collecting the data using DeviceLink.

S!