Schweiks Sim vs. Real Flying Debate Thread

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Schweik said:
I'm not a 17 year old kid, I'm not a fool, and I'm not ignorant. I've been around a bit, and I dislike being talked down to on this or any other issue, by you or anyone else.

S
Click to expand...

Then maybe you better crack out your wallet, get some more flight time and speak from PHYSICAL authority rather than the comforts of your air conditioned office, comfy chair and picturesque computer screen. Some of us have been in the military, flown MANY civilian and military aircraft and sometimes don't take too kindly to armchair generals who come across as knowing better than the rest of us.
 
Last edited:
FLYBOYJ said:
Then maybe you better crack out your wallet, get some more flight time and speak from PHYSICAL authority rather than the comforts of your air conditioned office, comfy chair and picturesque computer screen. Some of us have been in the military, flown MANY civilian and military aircraft and sometimes don't take too kindly to armchair generals who come across as knowing better than the rest of us.
Click to expand...

I served in the Military myself - you seem to be making assumptions about my life that have no reflection on reality. I too, live in the physical world, friend. I'm not some overgrown kid living in my parents basement just because I played a flight Sim a little bit. Please pause for a moment and consider what you are actually saying here. And what I actually wrote in this forum and didn't write.

I was not speaking from "authority", physical or otherwise, or claiming that Sims trump real world evidence. This whole segue and all the outraged posts sprang from one comment that I'd noticed a pattern in Sims which matched what someone else described from a poll of Aces. Someone who I gather is a prominent Aviation writer. I just said his post reminded me of some things I'd seen in the Sim.

I never claimed to know better than anyone else here. All I ever claimed was my own opinion.

I never once said that a Flight Sim is the same as air combat. Not in this thread or any other. So I don't know why anyone would make the claim that I did. I said you can learn something from a Sim which is a very different argument - and one which I stand by.

But I also stipulated right out of the gate that you should take anything to do with Sims with a grain of salt and feel free to dismiss it out of hand.

So I really don't understand the anitpathy over this issue. I can only guess that there may have been previous debates about it which were a lot less nuanced than I am being here, because you seem to be reading a lot into what I wrote.


S
 
Last edited:
BiffF15 said:
Schweik,

I'm going to disagree with part of your comments. First I agree it can be learned, and second I disagree it's the same as learning to spot things at a distance on the ground. Looking at the sky in a scan allows your eyes to focus on nothing, which in turn makes it difficult for long range tally's. Eyes spot movement first or most easily, but a bug spot, glare, dust, etc., all make it difficult to get and maintain a long range tally. Over the ocean it can be more difficult due to no discernible horizon at times. Add boredom, the mind wanders and again it's easy to miss a guy at you visual limit. Trust me I used to teach this.

Cheers,
Biff
Click to expand...

Ok fair enough, I'll take your word for it - spotting a tiny dot on a computer screen is nothing like spotting an aircraft. I'll try to make a list of things I thought I did learn from flight sims in a follow up post.

S
 
Schweik said:
I served in the Military myself - you seem to be making assumptions about my life that have no reflection on reality. I too, live in the physical world, friend. I'm not some overgrown kid living in my parents basement just because I played a flight Sim a little bit. Please pause for a moment and consider what you are actually saying here. And what I actually wrote in this forum and didn't write.

I was not speaking from "authority", physical or otherwise, or claiming that Sims trump real world evidence. This whole segue and all the outraged posts sprang from one comment that I'd noticed a pattern in Sims which matched what someone else described from a poll of Aces. Someone who I gather is a prominent Aviation writer. I just said his post reminded me of some things I'd seen in the Sim.

I never claimed to know better than anyone else here. All I ever claimed was my own opinion.

I never once said that a Flight Sim is the same as air combat. Not in this thread or any other. So I don't know why anyone would make the claim that I did. I said you can learn something from a Sim which is a very different argument - and one which I stand by.

But I also stipulated right out of the gate that you should take anything to do with Sims with a grain of salt and feel free to dismiss it out of hand.

So I really don't understand the anitpathy over this issue. I can only guess that there may have been previous debates about it which were a lot less nuanced than I am being here, because you seem to be reading a lot into what I wrote.


S
Click to expand...

I've also read what you wrote. You were trying to justify some of claims while mentioning "a few hours of stick time", so please spare us explanations or justifications. Yes, there have been previous debates about this and even if a "prominent Aviation writer" (several on here I have tons of respect for) tries to counter some of claims of some of the forum's aviator (some who have saw combat) members and mods are pretty quick to throw a smackdown. This is a very hot subject here...

I'll say two things at this point - quit while you're ahead and thank you for your service.
 
Last edited:
Sadly, the "Combat Simulators" (aka games) are only as good as the program's algorithms.

In IL-2, for example, it's been proven that some types under-perform while others tend to have an "edge".
Example: it's been seen plenty of times, where an IL-2 will overtake an Fw190A-8 in a climb. There's also plenty of instances where attacking an AI bomber in a cloudbank will see you get nailed by a gunner.

The damage models are questionable, as in many cases, a mauled aircraft will continue to perform well, especially if it's piloted by AI. Some, like IL-2 don't provide split brakes for types that were so equipped.

Sims also don't provide environmental situations, like crosswind landing (maybe Microsofts Flight Simulator series might, but not Combat sims) or varying wind conditions at altitude.

What they do provide, is a means to learn about the various types and give an opportunity for a person (or teams) to challenge one another and kill hours of time. It was also a great way to blow off steam after a crappy day at work.

I've seen the progression of Sim quality since I first started with Airwarrior (and it's Air Arena) back in the late 80's. Then came Jane's WW2 Fighters - which actually had several Aces onboard for the development and still one of the best Sims out there.
Along the way, was Microsoft's Combat Flight Simulator series, the best was CFS3.
And then the IL-2: Sturmovik franchise, my favorites are still Forgotten Battles and Pacific Fighters.

But in the end, they are still Sims and come up way short of real flying.
 
Ok here are some things I believe I learned from Flight Sims - specifically Il2 as I didn't find any of the dozen or so others I've tried over the years sufficiently realistic.

All this speaks to are my own experiences. I can say that I learned some things, a few of which I describe below, but I am not claiming this is universal. It's entirely possible that I only learned any of these things from Sims because I am stupid. Or maybe I only think I learned any of it and I really didn't. I can say that as far as I know, the simulation helped me understand the flying accounts that I read much better. Many things made sense that had not previously.

Generally speaking, I see a Sim or combat game (from Il2 to Squad Leader down to Chess) as a type of model. Just like some of us (yes I'm guilty of this too) make models partly to see what different aircraft look like in three dimensions (as opposed to a 2D photograph) and how they look compared to each other. Seeing a scale model of a P-47 and a Bf 109 was a revelation to me. Of course I do also go to museums and air shows, but you don't see every plane sadly. A game like Panzer Gruppe Guderian or "Midway!" or Squad Leader doesn't match with reality, it just shows a model of the troops, tanks, planes, ships etc. moving around over time, with some correlation of the hard facts of these things - how fast they can go, what their range is and so forth. Games have been used for training and military planning since Roman Times.

I think Sims are just another of this type of model, they are by no means perfect, but they can teach you some things. And rather than 3 dimensions, they are in 4 - you interact with them over time.



Here is what one Sim taught me.

Basic Flying
As I conceded previously I'm not a pilot and only have a few hours flying time in a Cessna. So I'm sure all of the things I learned would be obvious to any experienced pilot. However, I think these things can be helpful for non-pilots to understand some of the things you read about in pilots accounts of flying or air combat. Some of these will no doubt make me come across like an ignoramus as they are pretty basic but nobody is born knowing everything and I learned these things from Sims.

  • Prop pitch - I had read about prop pitch but never previously understood it. I learned how prop pitch affects rate of climb and speed, and the difference in aircraft with automatic pitch control and those without. The merits of each - one giving you a bit less to need think about and the other a bit more control.
  • Overheating and engine management - In Il2 you have to stay on top of your engine cooling by opening and closing radiator fins and so on. Open fins give you the ability to cool more quickly but effectively restrict your speed. Closed fins mean less drag but you don't cool as efficiently. I never even knew about this issue before playing with the Sims.
  • Basic maneuvering - I was able to (virtually) experience simple bank turns (which I'd also done in a Cessna) but also techniques like the Immelmann, Chandelle, Split S, barrel roll, low and high yo yo, rolling scissors and so on. I had read about these techniques in numerous pilot accounts ever since my dad, a military Vet and journalist, introduced me to some AVG pilots when I was a little kid. But I had been unable to visualize them until I tried them in the Sim. The Sim gave me a point of reference.
  • Stall management and Spins - Though I had experienced a basic wing-stall in a Cessna, I had never experienced a high-speed stall or a spin, let alone recovered from one. The flight Sim allowed me to experience (some vague correlation of) a spin and by trying what was recommended in the manual for the plane I was simulating - zero the joystick and apply opposite rudder, I was able to get out of the spin. Recovery is a bit counter-intuitive and while you can't die in a Sim, it works basically the same way. I also learned how to manage a stall, maybe it's nothing like managing a real stall, but it seemed similar to what I experienced flying a Cessna. Also a bit like managing a skid in a car.
  • Blackouts - This will no doubt be controversial to even bring this up, but in the game the system takes away your control and blacks out the screen temporarily if you pull too many G. For me, it was very reminiscent of getting choked out in a rear naked choke which I have some experience of from martial arts. I am under no illusions that seeing a screen go dark is anywhere near the same as really passing out from G or any other reason (let alone when you are in a moving aircraft and likely to die), but I have passed out from having blood flow cut off in a choke - more than once, and come close many times in sparring, and I could see the correlation. What the game taught me about it is how fast you can get into trouble with too many G's, and what kind of circumstances are risky (going fast / diving means you need to be very careful turning or pulling out). And this in turn made me realize that any kind of maneuvering at very high speed like trying to dogfight while perhaps not impossible, certainly poses special and extreme challenges especially in WW2 aircraft with upright chairs and no G-suits.

Flight Envelopes / Flight Models
  • Automatic Slats - I experienced (some kind of no doubt very distorted and simplistic) version of the improvement in stall characteristics you get when the automatic slats deploy on a Bf 109, this effectively lowering your stall speed. Until trying it in the Sim, I never understood how these worked. After experienced (whatever vaguely similar version of) it in the Sim, I could understand the value and importance of it.
  • Using Combat Flaps - Some aircraft historically had combat flap settings, some had the ability to set partial flap settings which were sometimes used in combat, some had automatic maneuvering flaps, and some only had takeoff and 'clean' settings for flaps. With the aircraft types that could use flaps for turns, I came to rely on them a lot in Sims. I had never really noticed this previously in pilot accounts but I subsequently learned about the ubiquity of this practice by some pilots as it was mentioned in pilot biographies I read, and that it also became a design feature of many later-war aircraft designs. Previously to using the Sim I had just skipped over this.
  • Overboosting and WEP - Though I had read accounts about water injection and so on, I never even knew about WEP until I'd seen it used in the Sims. I know the Sims have artificial restrictions on this and don't fully simulate all the effects, but the gist is you can use the boost, usually at lower altitudes, for a fixed length of time after which you risk your engine being damaged or failing altogether.
  • Carb flooding in negative G's - I had read for years how certain carburated engines stalled when pulling negative G but had a hard time imagining what that was like. Flying Spitfires, Gladiators and Hurricanes in the Sim gave me some idea of what this was like - temporary fuel starvation during nose-overs. It helped me get my head around the idea.

Combat Tactics
  • Rolling Scissors - I experienced numerous times German fighters in particular, in the game, and saw how this technique could be use to allow a fast rolling but not particularly tight turning aircraft - when patiently controlled - to get on the tail of a better turning one.
  • Thach Weave - Similarly I saw people using Thach Weave techniques in the Sim and how it turned the tables on an otherwise losing battle (in the game). Until then I had never been able to even visualize properly how this really worked.
  • Split S- This became a common evasion technique in the game for me. At the very least I now understand visually the combination of a half roll, pull through and dive which initiates this technique. And after simulating it in the game I noticed how often pilots mentioned it in their personal accounts and interviews as one of their 'go-to' evasion ./ disengagement techniques.
  • Finger Four / Rotte - the formation tactics of two pairs, using them together, and why you need a wingman. You can really tell the difference in the Sim from people using wingmen and coordinating together and those who don't. Which leads me to...
  • The Radio - one thing which is striking in the Sims, is that people working together on Coms are vastly more effective than people who are not. Four guys flying Bf 109s and on Coms can annihilate 12 guys flying I-16s and not on Coms (in the game). It may not make the same difference with other types of planes, and it may be a poor correlation with reality of using radios, but it did impress upon me what an advantage having radios actually was.
  • Low Yo Yo - I read an account by Robert DeHaven saying that this is how he was able to out-turn Zeros and Ki-43s at high speed. I looked up the technique, read detailed descriptions, looked at visual representations and then tried it in the Sim, and eventually was able to pull it off.
  • The Skid - I never understood the oft-mentioned skid until I realized in the game that I couldn't always evade being shot by turning or diving, even in a more maneuverable or faster diving aircraft. Sometimes the opponent is just too close and you will never turn sharp enough or dive fast enough to evade. That is when the use of the rudder and skidding helps enormously in making it tricky to aim at you. I came to rely on this in the game, and noticed how often numerous WW2 pilots mentioned this as a 'go-to' evasion technique.
  • Deflection shooting - I think the Sim, if nothing else, gives you a reasonably accurate depiction of deflection shooting. It's very much like shooting skeet except it's a lot harder to aim your 'gun'.
  • Speed is life - in movies in combat the hero often makes the enemy overshoot. Real pilots did this too but I learned from the Sim how risky it is to get too slow. Staying fast makes it take longer for enemies to come up behind you, and allows you to approach enemies before they can react. Playing the Sim taught me that you can't loiter at low speed when enemy aircraft are around.
  • Altitude and E - The Sim taught me better than any book I read the value of altitude and how height can be turned into speed and vice versa, and how an altitude advantage is also a tactical advantage because it gives you more options.
  • Bombers and Defensive gunners- the Sim taught me how dangerous the defensive gunners on bombers were. Many pilots mention this in their personal accounts of air combat, but it never made sense in light of the known vulnerability of bombers to fighters. The Sim gives you some idea how this works - if you approach slowly from behind in the typical way you would go after a fighter (if they let you), even the 'light' defensive guns on a lowly Stuka can shoot you down very quickly. Once again I read primary source material for answers to this dilemma and learned to use different tactics - attacking from below or from the front, coming in very fast in slashing attacks changing the angles. I learned some vague idea of the discipline required, it can be much more tricky and it's a very different challenge to shoot down bombers, but if you do stick to the tactics you can wreak a lot of havoc. You are still likely to get hit. Playing the Sim allowed me to get my head around these two seemingly contradictory notions that attacking bombers was unusually dangerous on the one hand, but that bombers were very vulnerable to your attacks (in a fighter) on the other.
  • Getting Blindsided - I learned what that was like, especially when flying slow (per the thread that this one was born out of). This pushed me back toward the 'Speed is Life' mantra and also the need to look around constantly and rely on Wingmen.
  • Attacking from the Sun - of course I had read about this basic fighter tactic from the famous Dicta Boelcke but didn't really understand the impact of it until i was 'bounced' this way in the Sim, and I also learned how tricky it is to get 'up-sun' of a target (at least in the limited way the game portrays it). All in all I thought it helped me get my head around this famous tactic a bit more.
Anyway maybe all that gives some idea of what I mean. It's my attempt to sincerely address the questions, both stated overtly and implicit.

I want to be clear - I am NOT SAYING that any of this trumps the experience of a real pilot in any way. I agree 100% a Sim is no substitute for real flying let alone real combat flying. I'm not going to experience real flying of a world war II fighter sadly and I'm a little happier to say I'll probably never be in real combat at this point - I have the utmost respect for those who have, and do - including some of my buddies who are overseas as I type this.

I am only saying that this game was also a tool that helped me understand some (probably very basic) things - probably in an extremely limited, fuzzy and simple way- that I hadn't thought of prior to playing around with it. In many ways, it's like looking at a picture. It's just a moving picture over time that you can interact with a bit.

S
 
Last edited:
GrauGeist said:
Sadly, the "Combat Simulators" (aka games) are only as good as the program's algorithms.

In IL-2, for example, it's been proven that some types under-perform while others tend to have an "edge".
Example: it's been seen plenty of times, where an IL-2 will overtake an Fw190A-8 in a climb. There's also plenty of instances where attacking an AI bomber in a cloudbank will see you get nailed by a gunner.

The damage models are questionable, as in many cases, a mauled aircraft will continue to perform well, especially if it's piloted by AI. Some, like IL-2 don't provide split brakes for types that were so equipped.

Sims also don't provide environmental situations, like crosswind landing (maybe Microsofts Flight Simulator series might, but not Combat sims) or varying wind conditions at altitude.

What they do provide, is a means to learn about the various types and give an opportunity for a person (or teams) to challenge one another and kill hours of time. It was also a great way to blow off steam after a crappy day at work.

I've seen the progression of Sim quality since I first started with Airwarrior (and it's Air Arena) back in the late 80's. Then came Jane's WW2 Fighters - which actually had several Aces onboard for the development and still one of the best Sims out there.
Along the way, was Microsoft's Combat Flight Simulator series, the best was CFS3.
And then the IL-2: Sturmovik franchise, my favorites are still Forgotten Battles and Pacific Fighters.

But in the end, they are still Sims and come up way short of real flying.
Click to expand...

I agree with all that, they are very flawed, and I have watched evolution of the flight models from absurd to what I would call vaguely realistic. Like you , my favorite are also still Il2 FB and Pacific Fighters - though I think the best and most accurate flight models are for the aicraft in the Russian Front which the developers probably have more data for.

All of the errors you describe are real and without a doubt, will appear even more egregious to us in the future. But like you I have seen the progression of these things in the last 30 years and I think the best of them are starting to get near the ballpark of useful in some limited ways.

And I think you can still learn something from them.

I think the more modern / current version of Il2 is still going through a teething process right now in tuning up the flight models, but if it goes like the last cycle did it will be very interesting in another two or three years.

S
 
XBe02Drvr said:
Just stumbled on this thread, and my blood pressure is up!
Click to expand...
From what I remember in the thread that 80% of the people shot down never saw their attacker, he brought up the flight sim thing to simply raise the possibilities that he'd observed.

From there it kind of turned into a back and forth thing and he just kind locked into arguing his point, and here we are beating a long dead horse
 
Zipper730 said:
From what I remember in the thread that 80% of the people shot down never saw their attacker, he brought up the flight sim thing to simply raise the possibilities that he'd observed.
Click to expand...

You missed a step. The thread was on about the 80% of aircraft shot down never saw it coming Trope, somebody here pointed out that they had done a poll of numerous combat veterans and came up with a much lower number, and I agreed with this and as an aside, mentioned that it was analogous to something I'd seen in a Sim. Which I stipulated - take with a grain of salt and feel free to ignore.

From there it kind of turned into a back and forth thing and he just kind locked into arguing his point, and here we are beating a long dead horse
Click to expand...

I think I'm being the target of some other arguments of the distant past. I don't think what I was saying (or just posted) is the same as what others said before.
 
In several of the Combat Sims (Jane's, CFS3, IL-2), the ID Tags can be switched off (and icons switched off in the map), which allows for a great deal of realism with the fact that distant aircraft appear as spots - assuming they are above the horizon. To prevent a bounce, keep your head on a swivel.

And during those types missions, I used to take advantage of camo and conditions to wreak havoc on my adversaries.

Bf110_ost-winter.jpg
 
GrauGeist said:
In several of the Combat Sims (Jane's, CFS3, IL-2), the ID Tags can be switched off (and icons switched off in the map), which allows for a great deal of realism with the fact that distant aircraft appear as spots - assuming they are above the horizon. To prevent a bounce, keep your head on a swivel.

And during those types missions, I used to take advantage of camo and conditions to wreak havoc on my adversaries.
Click to expand...

That is what I was trying to explain.

S
 
pbehn said:
Adler (and other pilots) I read in a book that pilots in WW2 RAF at altitude consistently misjudged altitude of other aircraft at long distance. Aircraft at the same altitude always being thought to be lower by 1 to 2,000ft. is this correct?
Click to expand...

Biff would probably be the better person to answer this. He is the resident Fighter Pilot of the forum. All my combat flight time as an aircrew member was usually below 100 ft. AGL.

Having said that, there are all sorts of visual illusions that can occur that would make this difficult. Also the further off an object is, makes it more difficult to determine it's altitude.
 
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
Biff would probably be the better person to answer this. He is the resident Fighter Pilot of the forum. All my combat flight time as an aircrew member was usually below 100 ft. AGL.

Having said that, there are all sorts of visual illusions that can occur that would make this difficult. Also the further off an object is, makes it more difficult to determine it's altitude.
Click to expand...
I will, but I would think a modern fighter has a "gizmo" to tell you how high everything is even before you can see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

S
Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
spicmart
S
Aeroweanie
Vickers Wellington vs. Warwick
Replies
6
Views
520
SaparotRob
SaparotRob
_PabloSniper_
WWI Aces Flying WWII Planes
Replies
17
Views
1K
Admiral Beez
A
N
The Great P-47 Range Debate on you tube now.
4 5 6
Replies
105
Views
8K
Holtzauge
Holtzauge
CHen10
Sakai Saburo Vs Sugita Sho-ichi
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
4K
GrauGeist
GrauGeist
Back