Author Topic: Aircraft Testing Criteria - Some Test Results (Read 4658 times)

niklas · « **Reply #60 on:** June 15, 2001, 06:34:00 PM »

I want to see a film. Give me a film if you want to prove that the N1k is wrong.

It is easy to complain about an aircraft that has no lobby - i mean the spit9 performs pretty close to a N1k. Turns way too good, all spits. But if you say this the spit-lobby will cry so loud that a Manowar-concert sounds like relax-music compared to it.

The N1k is pretty slow for the HP it has, but it turns good. So where is the problem?

niklas

feed · « **Reply #61 on:** June 15, 2001, 09:58:00 PM »

niki. niki. niki. the name makes me gonna mad.
I just hate niki. niki makes my eyes to wide open and put the word "F*CK" to my head when the absolutely low E niki than my Hog zooming and closing to me at the top of zoom.

Also, when I roped to niki who zooming to my Hog, I pray "Oh God! I didn't incorrect sum up the E status of that niki! right?!" and just pray "niki. niki. niki. you got time to lose control!!" again but niki still it's head to me and shows me the tracers.

After then, I met the sounds "Perk Perk Perk Perk, BOOM!"(at this time, "Perk" means hitting sound) and I screaming "Perk niki! Perk niki! Perk! Perk! Perk F*ck!" at the same time.

To my enemy : "Don't drive the NIKI!"

To my friendly : "drive NIKI! it's GREAT!"

lazs1 · « **Reply #62 on:** June 16, 2001, 08:20:00 AM »

LOL gijeffie... now u made me look... I have little use for score but I do like to track things like K/D and K/time and such. I haven't been on for about 4 weeks so my K/D is off about 100% or a little less but even at that.... i am doing allmost twice as good as you and I admit to anyone listening that I am mediocre at best. It appears that you looked at overall rank to make your point and I have flown nothing but fighters and then only for 4 hrs. You seem to have done your best to cloud the issue and well.... be dishonest about even so simple a thing as score.

Heck, even that worthless SW is ten times the pilot you are and I really hate admiting that!

Does sitting in a tank years ago make people tough guys? I don't know.

I repeat... if you believe that the things you say are true then you are skilless and unaware of what is happening around you. At the very least they are not germain to real testing. They are simply worthless anecdotal crap.

and yes pocket protector boy... I know... "bite me". save ya the effort.
lazs

Nash · « **Reply #63 on:** June 16, 2001, 08:41:00 AM »

If ya wanna do tests to find out what makes the Niki such a deadly plane... turn rate/radius, climb etc. etc. means little imho.

You'll need some kind of test to compare control of the plane at well below stall speed.

People make the mistake of thinking the Niki is beating them at the zoom climb. It's not. It's merely able to continue pointing in the right direction (i.e. *upwards*) when the zoomer runs outta steam and falls (usually with much less control) back down onto the Niki.

So the zoomer falls through and past the Niki. The Niki kicks hard rudder and lead turns the falling opponent, ending up on opponent's 6 with decent acceleration (and usually better control).

Note: By zoom climb, mean people expecting to rope the niki. The odds aren't good. With an ordinary conservative zoom climb though (for another set-up), there's not much to worry about.

It's also this control at speeds at or below stall that make for a myriad of other "how the eff did he do that?" maneuvers.

Aint saying it's accurate, aint saying it's innaccurate... but that's something that I think would be worth measuring somehow.

This is probably the first AC FM type thread I've ever wandered into... I really don't know much about this stuff. But since they perked my Chog, I've been riding the Niki just for spite. If you want film of the stuff I've described, sure... I'll make some tomorrow. I don't think it's any mystery.

Just wanna point you in a direction that may be helpfull.

[ 06-16-2001: Message edited by: Nash ]

Beegerite · « **Reply #64 on:** June 16, 2001, 03:21:00 PM »

Gents;
Here's what I bring to this discussion; first +3000 hrs. single engine flight time as comm. pilot and CFI, second extensive time in the dreaded Nikki and finally an awareness of real life.
Here's what I think
Without the information used by HTC to program the FM of the Nikki or any other airplane and comparing that to real life data out of a flight manual, this entire arguement is useless. I don't see anyone from HTC in this thread telling us that the Nikki is programmed to have this or that climb rate which was taken from the following document captured in '45 It's all roadkill boys, this is a game, not a real flight sim. Drives me nuts to hear this schoolboy banter as though some of these aeronautical engineer wannabees expect AH to function as precisely as a multimillion dollar airline flight simulator. c'mon get real, if we could expect AH to fly like a real plane then somebody like me with real life experience would be way up there in the rankings instead of a mediocre 600ish.

Beeg

Badboy · « **Reply #65 on:** June 16, 2001, 06:56:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hangtime:
I got wolloped in the head from behind and went out like a light.

Hang

I'm guessing it was your date

Badboy

Badboy · « **Reply #66 on:** June 16, 2001, 07:08:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Beegerite:
Gents;
Here's what I bring to this discussion; first +3000 hrs. single engine flight time as comm. pilot and CFI, second extensive time in the dreaded Nikki and finally an awareness of real life.
Beeg

Please say more about your experience in the Nikki. I imagine there aren't too many folk around with time in the Nikki. How much of the aircraft was original? What impression did it make on you?

What other WWII fighters have you flown? Can you make any comparisons regarding handling or performance?

Badboy

EDIT

I originally read your message as though you had flight time in the real Nikki, reading it again I notice I may be mistaken and you may have been referring to the AH Nikki. Sorry, my mistake.

[ 06-16-2001: Message edited by: Badboy ]

Creamo · « **Reply #67 on:** June 16, 2001, 09:05:00 PM »

Yah Beeger, I agree.

If only HTC would stop trying to program AH to be a game, and go for a realistic simulation of flight.

Then, all the commercial pilots that fly online would dazzle the toejam out of the community with their impressive aerial combat maneuvers they get so much practice with hauling 7 businessmen from Moline, Iowa to Lacrosse, WI in a Jetstream 31.

air_ReCoile · « **Reply #68 on:** June 17, 2001, 06:32:00 AM »

Thx for excellent URL Vermillion.

So much to do, yet so little time,

lazs1 · « **Reply #69 on:** June 17, 2001, 08:41:00 AM »

Is it a good thing or a bad thing that creamo is taking the words right out of my mouth lately?

Imagine how good a buss driver with 10 years on the road would be in AH if the FM's were accurate!
lazs

[ 06-17-2001: Message edited by: lazs1 ]

wells · « **Reply #70 on:** June 17, 2001, 01:14:00 PM »

Quote

wells, the problem with your method is that e retention of the different airplanes will vary with altitude, according to the power they generate at the different altitudes. thats why i chose to do my testing at a constant altitude and just maintain as high a g load as possible without decelerating or gaining/losing alt. yours will give results that probably are just as meaningful given pilot error in obtaining the data, though.

zigrat,

A sustained turn test is only good if you then perform a sustained climb test at the same speed to see how much 'excess' thrust (or drag) goes into the turn. Then you can see if induced drag is accurate or not. But you still have to make assumptions about aircraft weight, power etc...and until HTC gives us that information (that any pilot of a real plane would have), then none of our little *tests* are really proving anything.