Originally posted by storch
It's not anecdotal, it's a fact the highest # of kills attributed to any fighter is 41 to a brewster 239 flown by the finns. also the brewster still holds the highest kill ratio of any fighter.
And its a fact the F2A was butchered by the Zeke at Midway and earlier in the Dutch East Indies. The LW planes the Finns were fighting were better than the Zeke in every respect save for turn rate. Why did the Finns have good success with the Buffalo while the Dutch and USMC did not, when the Finns were fighting better aircraft? Could there be another variable here?
The Hispanos were at best the equal of the MGFF and inferior to the MG151.[/b]
Now your just being silly. Some facts to clear your dilusions:
ROF [rounds per minute]
MG-FF:520, MG-FF/M:520, MG151/20:740, HispMkII:600, HispMkV:750, ShVAK:800, Type97(Ho-3):400, Type 1(Ho-5):850, Type99/1:490, Type99/2:490.
MG-FF's and Type 99's are clearly inferior to all but the Type99's in ROF, while the MG151/20 is in between the two Hispano types, though it is much better than the MkII, and essentially equal to the MkV.
Muzzle velocity [meters/second]
MG-FF:570, MG-FF/M:690, MG151/20(92g/115g):800/710, MkII:880, MkV:840, ShVAK:800, Type97:820, Type1:750, Type99/1:555, Type99/2:750.
MG-FF's and the Type99/1 are again clearly at the bottom, MG151/20 depending on the projectile size is OK or very good, and both Hispanos clearly better than any LW gun.
Projectile size [grams]
MG-FF:115, MG-FF/M:92, MG151/20:92 or 115, MkII and V:130, ShVAK:96, Type97:164(!), Type1:94, Type99 1/2:142.
This time the Hispanos are in the middle, but are better than any of the LW guns.
So you are saying that the MG-FF with a
MUCH[/i]lower ROF,
MUCH[/i] lower velocity, and a
smaller[/i] projectile is equal to a Hispano, and the MG151/20 that is only better in ROF against one version of the Hispano is clearly superior? surely you jest? How do you justify that claim in the face of real evidence, more anecdotes? I've got an anecdote that says the moon is made of cheese, doesnt make to true.
I'm not sure about all fighters, but i can shred the wings off of a laden pony which i should not be able to do.
Take an axis craft. dive and pull G look at the G meter note when you black out. do the same thing in a spit count the seconds you are out while in both then come back and call me on it.[/b]
I will try that. I have not noticed in the course of flying any less ability to pull G's in any particular plane, but I admit I have not tested any of them either, you could be correct.
Test data, sure. you mean like when we captured an A6M2 near dutch harbor, reconstructed it and test flew it. came up with data stating the Zero would stall the engine from fuel starvation in Neg G as the early merlins? Only to be shown that the carb was improperly tuned. when tuned by Japanese POWs the problem went away. The data used by the allies were in many instances flawed. For instance the aileron adjustment on the 190 was critical to get it right as it affected it's turn fighting ability. captured 190's had the aileron adjustment slightly off.[/b]
And anecdotes are better? I happen to agree with you in respect to the 190's aileron's, but what do you do, use some guys off the cuff "opinions" of an aircrafts performance instead just because he flew it in combat? Using that standard every plane in the game would be undermodeled or overmodeled depending on which quote you take. I have already pointed out the differences in the anecdotal evidence on the Buffalo and P39 as examples of why not to use them. Anecdotes are like the Bible, somewhere you can find a quote that will say anything you want, you just have to find it.
