You have see the real plane more carefully and compare.
Thank you for the compliments on my repaint. During the process of making my repaint of 410077, I used straight-on side photos, shot from a distance, of the real aircraft, lined up with the model (within 3DS Max) to serve as a painting guide. Seeing how easily the model and the photos lined-up with each other really made me appreciate, even more, the accuracy achieved by FlyingIron.
3 Likes
As a German I completely reject the ideology that this aircraft with that livery represents, BUT: it’s also important to have at least some historically accurate liveries, so thank you for creating that one. Looks great!
7 Likes
Am I the only one having a really tough time using a game pad on Xbox for this, especially for approaches and landing?
Have you adjusted your sensitivity curves?
Twitchier planes like this, especially in those flight phases need some finer control, you don’t want to be overamping so they start ping ponging over the runway which is easier to do on a small throw device like a gamepad.
You want the curve to be a little exponential so you can have smaller movements in a larger range, but not so much that you hit the bit where the curve starts to go up in those phases, as it’s easy to overamp there, if that makes sense.
You do know it’s a G-6 model, right?
Where and what is your photo from? I cribbed all mine from G-6 shots, references provided.
Your reference photo could well be a rebuild that’s not 100% accurate either.
4 Likes
My references are here:
My opinion as well.
The way this whole thing started (inflammatory statement that is bound to get noticed with little to back it up, no questions asked, no taking notice of any other comments) I don’t see a basis for a sensible discussion.
For me it’s a pretty classic case of trying to push through an opinion in the rudest way possible without getting flagged for it.
There’s a word for it … starts with a ‘t’ …
6 Likes
Like the saying says if you want a better job doing, do it yourself
1 Like
Unless you have the exact same plane they used as a reference, you can’t reasonably make these kinds of judgments. There are so many different variations of this plane. Even among the G6s, there were different mission-specific modifications made.
3 Likes
I’ll stack my completely objective 4 x G-6 reference photos against your 1 G-6 video and 1 Me 109 G-4 Red 7 in 2014 Video any time.
Picking two random videos, including one not even of that model (which is variable even within G-6’s as @CaptHawkeye50 points out), and then claiming the model is “(very bad modeling and flight model in my opinion, very arcade/beginner work)” is more than a bit disingenuous.
Not sure what your point is.
You could just say you don’t like it, you don’t need to manufacture evidence that’s easily refuted objectively to do that.
As for the flight model I wouldn’t have a clue. They’re models, abstractions. You’re also playing a consumer flight simulator, nothing is real if you really want to be pedantic.
Seems on a par with IL2 109G-6’s to me, so not sure what your problem is there either.
I mean, I know I’m sitting at my desk “flying” a BF109 G-6 model plane with a $60 flight stick and no other physical feedback (apart from great spatial sound - which adds a huge amount to the experience), so - you know - there’s a certain amount of projection and extrapolation I have to do to pretend I’m actually flying a real BF 109 G-6. But I do know I’m not actually flying anything like the real thing anyway. Pretty much the same for every plane. But it’s great fun when they’ve been produced well, and I can’t see anything that says this isn’t produced well, based on my limited experience.
As long as it replicates some of the key performance characteristics and looks well modeled and supported and seems a good value experience for the money I’m ok.
Can you be more specific why “(very bad modeling and flight model in my opinion, very arcade/beginner work)” ?
7 Likes
My point is: if you can’t see the differences on the gear legs, the air intake and many other things, comparing the FI Bf109 with the real one in the video, then there is no space for a good discussion, because a real aviation enthusiast is not fan boys like some of you guys. In my opinion this Flying Iron BF 109 G6 is an arcadish bad modeled simulated payware airplane.
Regarding the flight model here is a good video, where you can see a real BF109 G4 flying, taking off and landing like a charm, but you can compare it with any IL2 version. Not to speak about the engine sounds, please listen to the real BF 109 “sings”!
Your point isn’t valid though. The photos I posted are very close to the model, so who’s to say your reference videos (one of which isn’t even a G-6, it’s a rebuilt from accident G-4 btw) are anywhere near the mark?
Just because you claim to be “realer” than the rest us doesn’t make you “realer” than the rest of us - which I note you denigrate with the adhominem of " fan boys", which apart from being very unclassy is also an assumption on your part. A bad one, I might add!
So what? That’s your “opinion”. Where’s the factual evidence? You haven’t provided any. Your video claims don’t wash as explained above. Need to try harder there.
That’s nice you posted a video, but it’s that G-4 again though. If you’re going to be pedantic about accuracy, then at least use a G-6 video of the same plane the model is based on to state your claims.
That’s arguing objectively, not with “opinion”.
However, even then, it’s just a video and open to interpretation. For example, video sound recorded on go-pros is not the same as hi quality sound recording (though I have no insight into the process or sourcing of FI’s WWIse sound set).
The video is also an airshow, with a highly experienced REAL LIFE licensed demo pilot so OF COURSE it’s going to fly like a charm because he know’s exactly what he’s doing. How hard is that to understand? It’s also well known that flying simulation aircraft is actually slightly “harder” than flying many real aircraft, for a bunch of different reasons.
So, to be blunt, the video doesn’t show what you think it does. Great video though!
8 Likes
Good point, but I posted 2 YT videos where you can see real Me109s, and those real gear legs are very different from the modeled ones, not to speak the turbo air intake, the oil radiator and many other things, engine sounds included. Please observe and compare.
1 Like
And I posted 4 images of 2 different G-6’s and one G-6 illustration that are close to the model.
And for the umpteenth time, since you are obsessesed about accuracy, one of your videos is a G-4 not a G-6 so no cigar there I’m afraid!.
All we can say, as @CaptHawkeye50 mentions, is there is variance in many of these aircraft.
Who is to say the G-6 video (not the G-4, because, you know, G-4 is not a G-6) you posted is the definitive version, or the images I did are?
You can’t, you can only say there are versions within versions, and they modelled it off one version (or maybe they used multiple references) which doesn’t invalidate it just because you don’t like that version.
That’s being factually objective, not opinionated.
Personally I have all the IL2 BF109’s and I think this one complements that line up well.
IL2 can shoot, this one has clickable cockpit. Kind of balance each other out I guess.
FM wise, who’s to say? They both demonstrate well known characteristics of the BF109.
I really think you’re clutching at straws here, but hey, it’s the internet, clutch away!
ps: I listened to the video and the engine sounds are “close enough” to me. IL2 is different as well. 
pps: I’m not a "fan boy"
3 Likes
Oh, look: one of these two pictures must not be a real Mazda 3, because the nose, the silhouette and pretty much everything is not identical:
Except they are … just different models.
2 Likes
The grass is not realistic in the first picture, it is too long, this would never happen in my garden. (Except I don’t have a garden).
1 Like
it’s unbelievable that a discussion between aviation enthusiast where I had some observation on the real bad modeling and the flight model on this Flying Iron BF 109, not to speak on the engine sounds, is resulting in absurd personal attacks.
1 Like
You forgot to mention arcade like.
Don’t forget your own insults. Bad form dont you know.
But great work on the 109 guys. Love it. Great addition to any hanger.
7 Likes