by RAFAIR100 » Sun Feb 04, 2007 2:18 pm
I do my testing either at Edinburgh (handy for home), Boscombe Down where I worked in the 50s, or Edwards AFB where I worked in the 60s. Having religiously tested some 200+ WWII aircraft, I have to wonder whether the end result is worth the effort. The basic MS flight dynamics engine is flawed in many respects, it is almost impossible to get accurate data on fuel loads and disposition, ammunition loads and disposition, and critical altitudes. Accordingly, any basic test programme starts off with an awful lot of assumed, rather than factual, values. Take a number of the data sites on the net and check the data for any given aircraft. Very seldom will there be agreement. So,unless you have access to Janes for the aircraft in question, you're starting your test programme off with a page full of uncertainties. If it's one of Kazunori Ito's aeroplanes, you can't even be sure whether it's a piston or a jet! I still fiddle about with the .air files more out of habit than anything else but, if you really want to do accurate test work, you're going to need a new flight dynamics engine AND more data than you can believe, data which it is almost impossible to accumulate today. I now do my best with the test process but, at the end of the day, Microsoft Flight Simulator is just that - a simulator! So, if testing is your thing, give it your best shot and then, even if it's performance doesn't entirely match the specifications, just go ahead and enjoy flying the thing.