20.07.2009, 12:55
There have been many of debates about this subject and how a lot of you want to have historical only while a lot of you also want to have an alternative historical (expimental and 'what if') aircraft in IL-2 1946. Let me tell you the reason why I believe in, not only flying historical aircraft, but having an experiences flying an alternative historical aircraft included. You see, I have this philosophy... In order to learn about history in an expanded way, especially having greater fun with it, is to have an alternative history included where we would learn about history and experience these virtually in multi-dimension ways instead of single 'linear' way.
We, military aviator fan, always have many questions about 'what if', and how would have it happened if that 'what if' ever happened in realistic way? We often have been not so satisfied with the questions, due to lack of answers to them. Besides, experiencing an alternative history within history virtually, is what allow us to experience an unique things, along having a great 'unique' fun like never before.
Being a simmer for over 14 years, I have find it very frustrating when each next generation of simulators only have included historical aircraft included, without any of an alternative historical aircraft included. Because of that, I often have many of an empty answers to many of my 'what if' questions. Before any of you ask me, 'how can we find flight model for 'what if aircraft' if there is no data for it?"
That is where I come in. I have written the theories on how to find best 'predicted' flight model for any an alternative historical aircraft where it can determine how would have aircraft flown? Of course, there is no such thing as 100 percent accurate flight model, but there is no perfect flight model for any aircraft either. But its better than nothing, besides, as long they are modeled realistically as if they would have been likely to 'behave', that is something this community would seek for right?
We are living in a era where there is several powerful software out there that can determine how would have aircraft fly, based on their shapes... similar to air-tunnel testing (airflow) virtually unlike in the old simulator day when the software were primitive compared to modern software. Because of that, its CAN be done, if we are willing to find the ways! For more information on these specific softwares can be found at this thread:
Theories of finding 'predicted' flight model for 1946 planes.
viewtopic.php?t=7634
Even if it may be sometime disappointing for 'what if' aircraft, its better having one with best flight model (non biased) available, even if its not nearly perfect than not having one at all. Besides, there are many of us that always have so much of desires of being able to fly 'what if' aircraft that have never had any chance to be flown when they were stuck on drawing papers, in order, to satisfy our unanswered questions. Even if the flight model for 'what if' may be flawed or not, with the methods of using several powerful tools available that will calculate the flight model, these 'what if' aircraft will be able to have best predicted and yet, non-biased flight modeling. I would rather to have these kind of flight model than not having one at all. And that is why I always believe that it is worth to have an alternative histories with many 'what if' aircraft being made where it would enable many of us to enjoy and have an unique experiences like never before!
Finally, not only these tools can be used for predicting experimental and 'what if' aircraft, these tools also can be used for fixing flight model for every aircraft that is included in IL-2 1946 and add-on aircraft that is currently available in new slot, along with add-on aircraft that is being WIP for this simulator.
Now lets use Go-229 as an example. Go-229 may have been death-trap if flown at violent turning where it is easy to get into yaw issues where the rudder and spoiler can't handle. The pilot would be forced to do what is known as 'tap dancing' with the rudder to keep Go-229 pointing forward as an example. But keep in mind, we still would want to experience the struggling of piloting that aircraft, knowing that we have experienced flying these virtually. That is what simulator is also all about, not just for having fun time flying them, but experiencing and see what it is like flying many different experimental aircraft and see if it would of been a successful aircraft or not.
But you also MUST remember that there was many of operated aircraft that was also death traps but it doesn't prevent pilots from constantly flying these aircraft. B-26 is good example, these aircraft was known as 'widow maker' because they bought deaths to pilots and yet, the military kept her flying and have these aircraft being improved.
However, having non-restricted way to experience many thing virtually in different alternative way is what would allow us to learn something alto more about different aircraft designs. For example say, I am a pilot of Go229 and want to test the flight in that. If I realize that I would crash sometime due to issues with aircraft design, I would be happy knowing I have virtually experienced flying and struggle with that aircraft. Same thing would apply for other aircraft with many design that have either successful or failure design.
Like I said, its better to have aircraft of any design and fly it than not having one at all which would left us unsatisfying, empty answers to our unanswered questions of 'what if' alternative histories. This is WHY history of WWII military aviator can go along very well with an alternative historical air crafts. WE should NOT be afraid to explore all areas and discuss what we experience flying any historical and alternative historical aircraft from what we have learned from it. This is where we would the idea of improving the understanding how each both historical and alternative historical aircraft (experimental and 'what if') aircraft would have flown.
Finally, there must be BALANCE on how much historical and alternative historical aircraft being made over time for IL-2 1946 where we should manage to keep balance where there are larger or equal numbers of historical aircraft add-on aircraft being made compared to alternative historical aircraft being made for a start. And at the same time, there also must be balance on how much historical and alternative aircraft being made for each nations over time before adding more add-on of both type of add-on aircraft. For example, we dont want to have too many of experimental and 'what if' Luftwaffe aircraft with tiny numbers of US, UK, and USSR We want to have balanced numbers of both historical and experimental and 'what if' aircraft of what each nations have in IL-2 1946s have before adding a lot more numbers of add-on aircraft.
Chaoic out...
We, military aviator fan, always have many questions about 'what if', and how would have it happened if that 'what if' ever happened in realistic way? We often have been not so satisfied with the questions, due to lack of answers to them. Besides, experiencing an alternative history within history virtually, is what allow us to experience an unique things, along having a great 'unique' fun like never before.
Being a simmer for over 14 years, I have find it very frustrating when each next generation of simulators only have included historical aircraft included, without any of an alternative historical aircraft included. Because of that, I often have many of an empty answers to many of my 'what if' questions. Before any of you ask me, 'how can we find flight model for 'what if aircraft' if there is no data for it?"
That is where I come in. I have written the theories on how to find best 'predicted' flight model for any an alternative historical aircraft where it can determine how would have aircraft flown? Of course, there is no such thing as 100 percent accurate flight model, but there is no perfect flight model for any aircraft either. But its better than nothing, besides, as long they are modeled realistically as if they would have been likely to 'behave', that is something this community would seek for right?
We are living in a era where there is several powerful software out there that can determine how would have aircraft fly, based on their shapes... similar to air-tunnel testing (airflow) virtually unlike in the old simulator day when the software were primitive compared to modern software. Because of that, its CAN be done, if we are willing to find the ways! For more information on these specific softwares can be found at this thread:
Theories of finding 'predicted' flight model for 1946 planes.
viewtopic.php?t=7634
Even if it may be sometime disappointing for 'what if' aircraft, its better having one with best flight model (non biased) available, even if its not nearly perfect than not having one at all. Besides, there are many of us that always have so much of desires of being able to fly 'what if' aircraft that have never had any chance to be flown when they were stuck on drawing papers, in order, to satisfy our unanswered questions. Even if the flight model for 'what if' may be flawed or not, with the methods of using several powerful tools available that will calculate the flight model, these 'what if' aircraft will be able to have best predicted and yet, non-biased flight modeling. I would rather to have these kind of flight model than not having one at all. And that is why I always believe that it is worth to have an alternative histories with many 'what if' aircraft being made where it would enable many of us to enjoy and have an unique experiences like never before!
Finally, not only these tools can be used for predicting experimental and 'what if' aircraft, these tools also can be used for fixing flight model for every aircraft that is included in IL-2 1946 and add-on aircraft that is currently available in new slot, along with add-on aircraft that is being WIP for this simulator.
Now lets use Go-229 as an example. Go-229 may have been death-trap if flown at violent turning where it is easy to get into yaw issues where the rudder and spoiler can't handle. The pilot would be forced to do what is known as 'tap dancing' with the rudder to keep Go-229 pointing forward as an example. But keep in mind, we still would want to experience the struggling of piloting that aircraft, knowing that we have experienced flying these virtually. That is what simulator is also all about, not just for having fun time flying them, but experiencing and see what it is like flying many different experimental aircraft and see if it would of been a successful aircraft or not.
But you also MUST remember that there was many of operated aircraft that was also death traps but it doesn't prevent pilots from constantly flying these aircraft. B-26 is good example, these aircraft was known as 'widow maker' because they bought deaths to pilots and yet, the military kept her flying and have these aircraft being improved.
However, having non-restricted way to experience many thing virtually in different alternative way is what would allow us to learn something alto more about different aircraft designs. For example say, I am a pilot of Go229 and want to test the flight in that. If I realize that I would crash sometime due to issues with aircraft design, I would be happy knowing I have virtually experienced flying and struggle with that aircraft. Same thing would apply for other aircraft with many design that have either successful or failure design.
Like I said, its better to have aircraft of any design and fly it than not having one at all which would left us unsatisfying, empty answers to our unanswered questions of 'what if' alternative histories. This is WHY history of WWII military aviator can go along very well with an alternative historical air crafts. WE should NOT be afraid to explore all areas and discuss what we experience flying any historical and alternative historical aircraft from what we have learned from it. This is where we would the idea of improving the understanding how each both historical and alternative historical aircraft (experimental and 'what if') aircraft would have flown.
Finally, there must be BALANCE on how much historical and alternative historical aircraft being made over time for IL-2 1946 where we should manage to keep balance where there are larger or equal numbers of historical aircraft add-on aircraft being made compared to alternative historical aircraft being made for a start. And at the same time, there also must be balance on how much historical and alternative aircraft being made for each nations over time before adding more add-on of both type of add-on aircraft. For example, we dont want to have too many of experimental and 'what if' Luftwaffe aircraft with tiny numbers of US, UK, and USSR We want to have balanced numbers of both historical and experimental and 'what if' aircraft of what each nations have in IL-2 1946s have before adding a lot more numbers of add-on aircraft.
Chaoic out...
![[Image: 29p95pf.gif]](http://i47.tinypic.com/29p95pf.gif)