America's Top Ace was a HO'er?!

[DREDIOCK]

Most claimed HO's I beleive  in this game are not HO's at all but as someone else put it here "deflection" shots.

Usually, but not always the only true HO's shots I see taken are on the initial merge. And even then its a bit iffy.

After the merge probably 9 times out of 10 it was a deflection shot unless your dealing with a boom and zoomer where you have a repeated series of merges and thus a higher rate of true HO attempts.

But if yourin a twisting turning dogfight odds are that it wont be an HO even though you both may be headed at each other.

In any event. Dont bother complaining about it. Just type in "Nice HO" and reup

[rabbidrabbit]

Originally posted by SlapShot
I simply prefer the more cowardly approach of acheiving a gunnery solution when my opponent can not.

This, of course, is not an HO. If your opponent can't get a guns solution on you at the same time you have a guns solution, then there can be no HO (as we know it in AH).

ya, that would have been my point...

[rabbidrabbit]

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Most claimed HO's I beleive  in this game are not HO's at all but as someone else put it here "deflection" shots.

Usually, but not always the only true HO's shots I see taken are on the initial merge. And even then its a bit iffy.

After the merge probably 9 times out of 10 it was a deflection shot unless your dealing with a boom and zoomer where you have a repeated series of merges and thus a higher rate of true HO attempts.

But if yourin a twisting turning dogfight odds are that it wont be an HO even though you both may be headed at each other.

In any event. Dont bother complaining about it. Just type in "Nice HO" and reup

You would be surprised (well maybe not)  how many times I was accused of HOing someone after shooting them down.  Amazingly, these kills were scored from all sorts of angles, most of which were 6.  It's just much easier for certain folks to make sure that the world knows what studs they are despite being the ones shot down.

[Stang]

Originally posted by java45
This is no more that sort of attempt then the attempt at those who constantly complain about the HO to force others into "their own" way of flying eg seeking the 6 shot as opposed to an HO.

Bottom line......we all have opinions and no opinion is more valid then another ( as long as it is stated as an opinion and not a fact ) There will be HOs, my suggestion " live with it " just as there will be vulchers and I have to live with that

LOL there's the "you want me to fly your way" crap again.  No, I don't.  I could care less how you fly.  I was commenting on situations in real life and what a "headon pass" really was.  You have to remember, in a real life dogfight it was usually two formations of planes meeting, not two planes lining up ho's on each other 3,000 yards out.  A pilot like Bong could pick any one of the Japanese planes flying toward him to try to pick off, but I seriously doubt he would pick one flying straight at him that would put him in immediate danger.  He could pick any plane he wanted that was coming at him at a high deflection angle and take them out without putting himself at any risk at all unless one of his foes tried the same on him.  See, two formations of planes colliding headon, but no one really takes a true "ho" because as slappy said, you have to have a guns solution on the other plane or else its not a true ho but a very high angle deflection shot.  

I stand by my statement that those who try to validate straight on habitual hoing are the ones who shoot ho at every merge, probably die on about half of them and look for historical justification for their "tactics."  I just don't think it's there.

[WMsharp]

Lots of stuff on Dick Bong at KMKE!!

Sharp

[java45]

Originally posted by Stang
LOL there's the "you want me to fly your way" crap again.  No, I don't.  I could care less how you fly.  I was commenting on situations in real life and what a "headon pass" really was.  You have to remember, in a real life dogfight it was usually two formations of planes meeting, not two planes lining up ho's on each other 3,000 yards out.  A pilot like Bong could pick any one of the Japanese planes flying toward him to try to pick off, but I seriously doubt he would pick one flying straight at him that would put him in immediate danger.  He could pick any plane he wanted that was coming at him at a high deflection angle and take them out without putting himself at any risk at all unless one of his foes tried the same on him.  See, two formations of planes colliding headon, but no one really takes a true "ho" because as slappy said, you have to have a guns solution on the other plane or else its not a true ho but a very high angle deflection shot.  

I stand by my statement that those who try to validate straight on habitual hoing are the ones who shoot ho at every merge, probably die on about half of them and look for historical justification for their "tactics."  I just don't think it's there.

sorry seems I missed the RL aspect in its intended scenerio, I thought you meant a RL situation that aped AH in a 1 V 1:o

[dedalos]

Originally posted by rabbidrabbit
One constant in humanity is the penchant for the insecure to prop themselves up by demeaning others.  One way is to whine about HO's especially when they lose one.

In my book a gunnery solution is a gunnery solution.  I simply prefer the more cowardly approach of acheiving a gunnery solution when my opponent can not.

Another constant is, humans lake to take the easy way out.  Don't fight, don't learn, don't try to beat the other guy.  Just wait until he is engaged, point the nose at him, and pull the triger.

[GreenCloud]

Jousting is Honorable

[Grizzly]

A head on merge takes a decision of two players. If one chooses not to pull the trigger (because of some idea of sportsmanship) his death will be on his own hands. When you have the enemy in your sights, you pull the trigger. The error is not in shooting another player in the face. The error is getting your plane in that position. The person who complains of a HO is criticizing himself.

The HO merge is not a good idea in most cases because it is a low pecentage move. In the PAC American iron had an advatage in a frontal merge because the Japanese fighters had no armor, no self sealing fuel tanks, and inferior guns. They were at a great disadvantage gainst the concentrated fire from the P38 cannon. I don't think this is accurately modeled in most games.

IMO, the greatest mistake of trying for a HO kill is at the moment you are shooting at the enemy you should be making your initial merge maneuver. If you do so while your opponent tries to HO you, he will most likely miss and you should have the advantage..

[gofaster]

Originally posted by StarOfAfrica2
IMO yall who keep harping on how we should "embrace" the HO ... ".  

That would be me, but only if I'm in a plane that has a good chance of winning the HO instead of a real dogfight, compared to what I'm up against.

Maybe I'm sick, but I like driving my P-38's guns right through a guy's windshield while his bullets pass uselessly on either side of me.

[2stony]

Originally posted by ATA:

Mustangs that mistakenly attacked his La-7

     The P-51s did not attack Kozhedub first, he attacked them. Only after shooting down the second one did he realize they were U.S. planes. He was never given credit for them.

[Howitzer]

I don't know... I thought the qualification for being an "ace" was 5 kills...  Seems like a lot of guys weren't around long enough to even get 5 let alone 40... I think he has earned the right to be up there with the top german aces.

I just don't think he would knowingly put himself downrange of those 20mms on the zeroes.  Heck, even a bullet from the cowl gun can do quite a bit of damage when it comes flying through your canopy.  He'd have to be a maniac to fly through a stream of bullets because that was his best way to win.  Just my thoughts.

[StarOfAfrica2]

Ok, I've played both sides of the argument.  As devil's advocate to put down people who say there is no historical precedent for HO attacks, and as a player and a person who believes that others who see the HO as a tactic they can rely on are delusional.

Here's a historical precedent for you.  Not an angles shot, not deflection shooting of any kind, just pure, unadulterated, flat out HOing.  And the reason why its a noob tactic that most pilots (and sim pilots) who get some ACM knowledge and experience under their belts will avoid like the plague.  (The guy also just happens to be from my hometown).

Lt. Col. Herschel "Herky" Green
Unit(s):
317th FS
325th FG
"Checkertail Clan"
15th USAAF

MTO

Top Ace of the 325th FG. At the time Green left combat flying for HQ XV, he was the leading "Ace" in the MTO. Green started out with the number "13" assigned to his P-40F - In his first "scrap" with enemy fighters on May 19, 1943, Green scored his first victory in a head-on pass versus a Bf 109 that put nearly as many holes in his own aircraft. Green's unlucky "#13" was ultimately declared unrepairable and hauled away as junk and he switched to lucky "#11". 3 Air Victories in P-40's, 10 Air in P-47's, 5 Air in P-51's.

Anecdotal references I have read elsewhere but cant bring up right now indicate that this first "victory" of his forever after marked the way he flew, instilling an element of caution into what was otherwise a very headstrong and "damn the odds" type of man.

[2stony]

3 Air Victories in P-40's, 10 Air in P-47's, 5 Air in P-51's.

I believe 6 of Herky Green's victories in the P-47 were Ju-52s. Not exactly the type of plane that's going to put up any fight. I've also seen a lot of aces get credit for unarmed aircraft like Storchs, training aircraft, etc.

[SuperDud]

Originally posted by 2stony
I believe 6 of Herky Green's victories in the P-47 were Ju-52s. Not exactly the type of plane that's going to put up any fight. I've also seen a lot of aces get credit for unarmed aircraft like Storchs, training aircraft, etc.

Yeah but is that any worse than the credit some received for aircraft on the ground?