[ACE-OF-ACES]

... you are right Kapteeni,

Disagree.. Well let me re-phrase that.. Most old school simmers would disagree.. As for the rest, there are two main category, One the types that just don't care they are flying a fantasy flight sim. You know the shoot-em-up Quake types that don't care if the P51 has the performance of a F15, to them all that maters is the eye candy and the points they can rack up before they hit refly. Two there are the types that don't really have much of a choice.. As in the types that look at these graphs and can not make heads or tails out of them. To them they are just lines on a page that say nothing. The analogy being someone who can not read looking at text on a page. But for old school flight simmers, like myself, realism maters. Where realistic performance is at the top of the list.

for those who want to learn about FMs there's this topic at SAS and especially for ACA-OF-ACES what Lutz (probably the one modder that has gone deepest into the game code, his job is to launch satellites ...) :

Nah, no need, in that at my last job my job was to design and build components on satellites! Even worked on a few tatical laser programs, which is how I found my current job. Currently I work at the biggest military test range in the lower 48. Where we have just about every type of weapon being tested here at one time or another. It is not a rare occasion to look up and see a F22 dancing around with another plane, heck a lot of what I do is just a mile or two from the trinity site and my office is in the same building where Von Bran use to sit and where they use to assemble V2s. That and when I pull into work it is not suprising if I have to park my dodge 2500 next to a T72 or BMP that we just installed remote control equipment. Good times! So yes, launching satellites is fun, but I prefer building stuff and than blowing it up!

"One thing are parameters and the other thing is to see how they are processed by the soft. The fact that flight dynamics equations are "universal" is not an insurance that they are used and processed with the same (and logical) manner. As I have seen since a long time, IL2 code contains approximations (smaller or greater in certain cases) to perform the modelisation and to obtain a plane behaviour which stick in some points to the real one (when data are available). Modelisation of atmosphere... is just a modelisation, modelisation of compressibility (specially M is greater than 0. is just a dream in IL2, modelisation of propellers is very strange, shape of polares, for all planes in IL2, are deducted from a single family (ie B17 and Me 109 ..) and so on...

Well any flight sim is an approximation, which is why they call it a simulation instead of reality. As I have stated several times now, no sim ever was, is or will be perfect, hence the name simulation, but IL2's game code is capable of better than 35% error! In short, the best simulation in the world still adheres to the old saying, ie garbage in garbage out.

That means, if you want to go in this way, you have to consider, not only the parameters but also the coding...

It's go that way or go fantasy, take your pick.

Infortunatly for you, in french, a link to our forum where some FAQ are discussed since a long time about IL2 flight dynamics. URL indicated in first or second post is out, but, end of november (I am not at this time in France), I will upload again a document where main parameters are explained."

the rest is here :

http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,1920.0.html

and Lutz's work (in French) here (ACE-OF-ACES I am pretty sure you're gonna like that 'cause it's stuffed with curves )

http://hist-simu.2jg51.org/Mods/manuel_mod_MDV_v2.pdf

Thanks!

But to be honest, I didn't see anything new there that haven't all ready seen.

But thanks!