No worries Gort, I've wanted to revise this one for a while but never had the proper time to finish my EM spreadsheet how I wanted. I took unpaid leave this month from my airline so I've had time to finish it and it's good to go now haha You're correct regarding the jet info, so thanks for sharing it. As you can understand I wanted to just explain a diagram with a single example many people would be familiar with. The great thing about my spreadsheet is I can create diagrams for any airplane if I have the data for it now. A common problem you see with a lot of people in props and jets is they just pull and pull and pull trying to turn faster but that doesn't always work out, so hopefully this helps with for some people understanding this a little better. I'm planning on going into more depth with this stuff when I can get data comparisons between props and include some jet examples in there too, but for now this illustrates the basic concept to build off in the future.

@@RequiemsACTL ohh I can relate

@Gort I've wondered at the applicability of haptic feedback for sim pilots. Something that squeezes gently on your legs, perhaps, emulating a g-suit inflating, that gives you feedback on how many G's you are pulling? Tunable by the user for their own desired "feel"?

@@aurorastarfury That might provide better G awareness and I'd like to try it! I would also like to see someone make a seat cushion that would vibrate with varying frequency and amplitude to communicate airframe buffet. You can feel a lot of nuance in buffet that simply shaking the visual in the game is unable to communicate. Trying to make these sims too purely realistic makes them unrealistic in some ways. I want an accurate model, but you need something to replace the somatic sense your body provides if you want to fly that model like you would the real airplane. Perhaps a tone that indicates AOA or G. Purists will say the real airplane doesn't have that, but he real airplane has G forces and buffet that you use when you max perform it.

@@gort8203 That exists, called a buttshaker. But it can only deal with the haptics (or audio) from the game.

Thanks Greg, I was hoping you would like it! I've spent so much time working on my EM generator that isn't apparent to most because all you see is a picture...but it's in a great place now to illustrate this concept a little more in the future :-)

@@RequiemsACTL This video was probably dozens of hours in the making. That EM chart was a major effort.

Appreciate that LoTech, that's always the goal with my stuff :-)

You're welcome, great to know its helping!

Cheers Wingit! 👍

Glad you like them!

Glad you enjoyed it John, you be well too!

Thanks Conrexion, the whole goal of these is to make them so you can apply them to any sim as I fly more than one myself :-)

@@RequiemsACTL its great man. Ive been watching all of those... It's just keeping your eyes open and keeping your cool.

Cheers Kunta, really appreciate you like it. This took me a long time to get how I wanted it lol :-)

Appreciate that Yoda, when I get some test data from the community I can talk about making comparisons using these.

The ONLY explanation I've seen!

@@tom434911 I'll definitely be doing another video showing this sort of stuff so keep an eye out :)

That's the big question isn't it? I've already made one comparison graph between the P-51 and K-4, but that's not publicly available yet. I can create these diagrams for any airplane in any simulator....but what I'm really missing is the sustained turn test data. That task is too big for me to do alone, so I'll be asking the community for help regarding this, provided they even want this kind of data of course.

@@RequiemsACTL Yes, a massive task indeed, with the assurance after it's done there'll be rancour and arguments aplenty, you can't please all of the people any of the time, to paraphrase. It's great you're giving even the opportunity for it to be done, thanks.

Thanks Harry :)

I appreciate that Andy, thanks :) The only video I really directed my students towards was the "How to land an airplane" video. I also did some GoPro recording of my actual landings in the school's airplanes they could reference as well for a sight picture which they appreciated.

@@RequiemsACTL And here I am again. 😄 Subject matter for today: defensive spiral and scissors (recap). Always back to watch and re-watch and re-re-watch your videos. And I'm sure I'm not the only one. So, much appreciated that you decided to make them and to upload them here in the first place, for us to ✈ and not to 🪂🪂🪂 Cheers, mate!

Cheers Alex, glad you liked it :-)

LOL Promise me you won't be mad if you hear a video that doesn't include a chalk sound...

@@RequiemsACTL Mmmmm... it would be a strange thing. I'll have to experience it and see what my reaction is!

Much appreciated Anthony, thanks!

Thanks Kevin, this info is heavily condensed so after you get some more experience you can always come back to review these videos and some things can be fully understood if they weren't clear the first time

Yeah I know you do ;-)

Cheers Jeff!

Thanks Daniel!

I have to assume some things, but the topic of EM is quite difficult to grasp, so that's honestly about the simplest way it can be explained. You'll find some more in-depth examples in other comparison videos.

@@RequiemsACTL I somewhat understand the basics but trying to apply it in practice when playing all the different VVS and RAF planes makes me come back to the CEM tutorials. maybe, just maybe some day i can fly bf-109 without EM automation!

Thanks Michel, glad to hear it was understandable for you!

Funny you ask, I'm making a series on the F-18 and I'm looking to make an EM chart for it as part of it

@@RequiemsACTL oh hell yeah. Will be staying tuned! 😊

Thanks Meph, the problem is...testing takes time and it's not something I always have a lot of. I asked people to help with testing but didn't get any takers so it's either A. People don't care about this data, or B. They don't know how useful it can be. I'm working on a video that will hopefully solve problem B and maybe encourage people to get data for their prefered airplane so I can create these diagrams for more airplanes.

The lift limit is simply the maneuvering airspeed.

Thanks! You understand it correctly, so we can just call it 3G and 70°... that's close enough for government work right! :-)

​@@RequiemsACTL I also found it highly interesting what you say from 06.50 that WW2-planes can´t sustain corner speed in level flight because of limitations in thrust. Didn´t know that. Also see that the Level Turn Data at the beginning is purely theoretical and not specific for the 109 F4. Especially the last rows for 270 (exceeds the F4:s lift limit) and 450 (too little engine power). Got a bit confused there at first :-). The good thing about your videos is they lend themeselves to be watched several times.

My limit is FL410

BFM is just 1 v 1 while ACM is when things get more a bit complicated with 1 v 2, 2 v 2, etc...

I've already got charts for basically all the airplanes done already (with comparisons), but I don't have sustained turn data for them. I asked in the Il-2 forum for help testing the airplanes for it but basically had no takers. I've even created another one for DCS airplanes to test those too.

The Air Combat Tutorial Library I’ll help you out with a few if you want. I’m kinda new but I can fly ok. Let me know. Even for like P-51, spit, FW.

The Air Combat Tutorial Library I’m in your discord. Jolly68.

The blue line (sustained turn) is related to thrust because at any point along that line thrust = drag and there is no more acceleration in the turn at a particular G force. Since the power is at maximum it can't go any higher, but these lines vary between airplanes so that's why engine power plays a part as one of many factors in aircraft performance

No reason really. Just for consistency to demonstrate the principles. Could have used different airplanes every time from props to jets but that would have been confusing to people trying to learn this material for the first time.

Just think of it in relation to how both your wings line up with each other. If they're aligned (parallel) with each other you're maneuvering in the same plane of motion. If your wings are not aligned (towards being perpendicular) with each other then you'll end maneuvering in different planes of motion.

@@RequiemsACTL gotcha... tkss

No, I have some but not all of them. It's too much effort to do the manual testing for every airplane

@@RequiemsACTL thanks for answer) Maybe you have 109F4 and Yak-7b ?)

www.tacview.net/product/about/en/

@@RequiemsACTL Thank you!

I tested it myself in-game and put the data into a custom spreadsheet I made.

Just don't go cross eyed! I feel like that when I stare at them too long :)

No, it's not a stupid question at all. Corner airspeed is not just considering airspeed by itself, but is the airspeed you can apply maximum G force at to achieve your maximum turn rate (The 270 km/hr is completely separate because it's the best sustained turn rate for the 109 in this case). If you're loosening the pressure on the stick, you're relaxing how much G force you're applying so this means although you may be as fast as the corner airspeed is you're not actually applying enough G to maximise your turn rate. However, because you are at corner airspeed this means you have the potential to maximise your turn rate (however long that may be for). Think of corner airspeed as a sign of where your airplane can max perform basically. WWII airplanes don't have the thrust needed to maintain corner airspeed when they are maximising turn rate in a level turn unless they are sacrificing energy (in the form of altitude) to stay there, so that's why you end up bleeding energy in a level turn (in the form of airspeed) and should aim to slow around the best sustained turn airspeed if you're in a prolonged turn rate fight.

@@RequiemsACTL You understood my point and answered very well Thank You very much!

@@RequiemsACTL Somebody claimed that 270 km/h is also the "ideal climbing speed" for Bf 109. Are they confusing these numbers or is there a relationship between those two factors that makes them both land at 270 km/h?

@@LosBerkos No I don't think they're confusing the numbers. I believe that 270 km/hr is the best rate of climb for a Bf 109 as well. It may be that your simply producing the optimal amount of lift for the drag produced at the AoA required in the two different scenarios

www.tacview.net/product/about/en/

@@RequiemsACTL Awesome. Thanks. Did you have to record a flight or is there a way to plop down plane models and move them around?

@@KhanGirey I had to record a flight. There could well be a way to create a scenario but I don't know.

Multiple timed turns at various constant airspeeds

@@RequiemsACTL I've always been tempted to make EM charts for a bunch of aircraft. Do you happen to know if anyone has done this already? My one constraint (with covid) is that I'm stuck on my work laptop and it runs the sim at less than realtime, so tacview is a necessity. Makes it awkward though as I'd rather just review footage and time off that.

I don't think anyone has. Now that my spreadsheet is complete I can start pumping them out relatively easy, but I need test data for sustained turn stuff, so I'm making a post on the forums about it at the moment.

@@RequiemsACTL Could you please drop a link to the aforementioned forum post where you intend to post these graphs?

@@McDewgout I will. I did make an earlier post but didn't get anyone to help me with them. I've made a video discussing EM theory that seemed to have good interest so maybe I'll get some takers next time around

Thanks, I've used WWII planes to demo BFM principles as their speed is a good compromise to keep the airplanes within a decent visual range of each other without slowing down the progression of a fight/maneuvering too much

It just takes time and practice, but one day things will "click"

Il-2 great battles