Author Topic: Spit16  (Read 4810 times)

Offline Arcades057

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 231
Spit16
« Reply #30 on: March 31, 2006, 11:07:20 AM »
Classy, Coba.  

Offline dedalos

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8052
Re: Spit16
« Reply #31 on: March 31, 2006, 01:27:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by cav58d

ps-  I love when a 16 tries to attack me in my MK1 thinking its fresh bait, only to be turned inside of and shot down with 30 seconds =)


I am sure that happens a lot, lol.  

You want a chalenge?  Take a 16 up and engage 3 lalas or a single Ki84.  You can create your own chalenges.  Nothing lame about the plane.  Its the pilits that can make it look like that.

Does it take any skill to cherry all day in a D9?
Ho and run in a lala?
Vulch in 1C?
Cherry in a Tyffi?
etc.

No, but no one said you should fly them that way.  It is up to you.

Not to mention that if they are such an easy kill why complain about them?  If a Spit 1 can take the so easy, then there must be a chalenge in flying them :D
« Last Edit: March 31, 2006, 01:29:51 PM by dedalos »
Quote from: 2bighorn on December 15, 2010 at 03:46:18 PM
Dedalos pretty much ruined DA.

Offline JimBeam

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 322
spitty 16
« Reply #32 on: March 31, 2006, 03:35:44 PM »
what is up with just about every spit 16 i fight just trying to HO me the entire fight?? Is it just me or this that the lamest move ever. i fly tiffy most of the time that spit in the right hands:) eat me for lunch in every aspect but trying to run away but 7 out 10 times spitty HOs. pathetic if u want my 2 cents
JimBeam 367th "Dynamite Gang"

"In my experience JimBeam never goes down easy" -wil3ur

Pilots...looking down on people since 1903

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Spit16
« Reply #33 on: March 31, 2006, 03:57:48 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by RTR
Pony B seems to handle the spit XVI pretty well also.

I agree that in the right hands the XVI is pretty uber. The caveat to that though, is that the majority who fly it have no idea what it can do for them.

just my $0.02

RTR


P-38 is good for killing Spitfires of all types, especially the XVI.


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline JimBeam

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 322
spit 16
« Reply #34 on: March 31, 2006, 04:56:56 PM »
the only time i truely enjoy flying the 16 is for base defence. When im out number its a brilliant plane to get up short notice to defend a field. I personally found the KI-84 one of the best toe to toe fighter to kill spits, and LALAs b/c i like its acceleration capiblities

                      Beamer:rolleyes:
JimBeam 367th "Dynamite Gang"

"In my experience JimBeam never goes down easy" -wil3ur

Pilots...looking down on people since 1903

Offline ujustdied

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
Spit16
« Reply #35 on: April 01, 2006, 02:00:54 AM »
well personally i dont care about the spit16 danger wise becuase there always going to fast and just pull up or something now a la7 that plane needs to be perked i mean all it does is run and vulch like a temp and always seems to catch me no matter what. the plane IMO is way more dangerous then a f4u4 or spit14 so im just wondering why the LA7 is not perked.



catfish6

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
Spit16
« Reply #36 on: April 01, 2006, 07:57:48 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by ujustdied
well personally i dont care about the spit16 danger wise becuase there always going to fast and just pull up or something now a la7 that plane needs to be perked i mean all it does is run and vulch like a temp and always seems to catch me no matter what. the plane IMO is way more dangerous then a f4u4 or spit14 so im just wondering why the LA7 is not perked.
 


La-7 is more dangerous than the F4U-4 or Spitfire Mk.XIV? I don't think so.

Both accelerate as fast or faster depending on weight of fuel. Both outclimb the La-7. Both out-turn the La-7. The F4U-4 has a faster rate of roll and Spitfire is about even with the Lavochkin. Both have better high-speed handling and less compressibility issues. Both can kill at ranges where the La-7 can't hope to score hits.

There's only one area where the La-7 has an edge, low level speed. Moreover, it's only a very tiny edge over the F4U-4. Go above 8k and the La-7 loses even that advantage.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline ujustdied

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 385
Spit16
« Reply #37 on: April 01, 2006, 11:29:27 AM »
umm i think the la7 accelerates alittle faster then the f4u4 plus the f4u only has 50cals thats its down fall. and i think its rate of clime is better too like when you press alt X the la7s gets there much faster

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
Spit16
« Reply #38 on: April 01, 2006, 12:19:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by ujustdied
umm i think the la7 accelerates alittle faster then the f4u4 plus the f4u only has 50cals thats its down fall. and i think its rate of clime is better too like when you press alt X the la7s gets there much faster


Measured acceleration from 200 mph to 300 mph, 25% fuel, at an altitude of 100 feet:

F4U-4: 28.57 seconds
SpitfireXIV: 28.72 seconds
La-7: 28.78 seconds

In terms of climb, measured from 50 feet to 10,000 feet, starting at 300 mph with 25% fuel, using autoclimb:

SpitfireXIV: 1:47.13
F4U-4: 1:55.67
La-7: 2:06.91

I use 300 mph as the baseline speed because I want to factor in zoom-climb as this is an important factor in combat. Since the F4U-4 will zoom climb from sea level to 3,400 feet, the La-7's better steady climb rate below 3k is completely negated.

The La-7 has an excellent climb rate to 3,000 feet, where it begins degrading rapidly.

On the other hand, the F4U-4, if not flying with full tanks, climbs at a high and steady rate from 3,000 feet up through 15,000 feet. As you likely know, the Spitfire XIV climbs significantly faster than the La-7 at all altitudes.

At sea level, the La-7 is 4-5 mph faster than the Corsair. At 5,000 feet, the La-7 is about 15 mph faster than the F4U-4. AT 8k, they're even. At 10k, the F4U-4 is 6 mph faster. At 10k, the F4U-4 accelerates and climbs considerably better than the La-7.

Also, don't underestimate the six .50 cal gun package. The BMG has superior ballistics to the Soviet 20mm, which means you are more likely to hit your target at 600-800 yards.

Accuracy is the key. A lot of guys fly cannon birds to compensate for lousy gunnery, where a few hits may be fatal. However, a good shot will kill quite effectively with the 6 machine guns. Putting them where they do the most harm is the most important factor.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline toon

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 377
Spit16
« Reply #39 on: April 01, 2006, 12:35:04 PM »
great info wide.S~

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Spit16
« Reply #40 on: April 01, 2006, 12:40:00 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Widewing
Measured acceleration from 200 mph to 300 mph, 25% fuel, at an altitude of 100 feet:

F4U-4: 28.57 seconds
SpitfireXIV: 28.72 seconds
La-7: 28.78 seconds

In terms of climb, measured from 50 feet to 10,000 feet, starting at 300 mph with 25% fuel, using autoclimb:

SpitfireXIV: 1:47.13
F4U-4: 1:55.67
La-7: 2:06.91

I use 300 mph as the baseline speed because I want to factor in zoom-climb as this is an important factor in combat. Since the F4U-4 will zoom climb from sea level to 3,400 feet, the La-7's better steady climb rate below 3k is completely negated.

The La-7 has an excellent climb rate to 3,000 feet, where it begins degrading rapidly.

On the other hand, the F4U-4, if not flying with full tanks, climbs at a high and steady rate from 3,000 feet up through 15,000 feet. As you likely know, the Spitfire XIV climbs significantly faster than the La-7 at all altitudes.

At sea level, the La-7 is 4-5 mph faster than the Corsair. At 5,000 feet, the La-7 is about 15 mph faster than the F4U-4. AT 8k, they're even. At 10k, the F4U-4 is 6 mph faster. At 10k, the F4U-4 accelerates and climbs considerably better than the La-7.

Also, don't underestimate the six .50 cal gun package. The BMG has superior ballistics to the Soviet 20mm, which means you are more likely to hit your target at 600-800 yards.

Accuracy is the key. A lot of guys fly cannon birds to compensate for lousy gunnery, where a few hits may be fatal. However, a good shot will kill quite effectively with the 6 machine guns. Putting them where they do the most harm is the most important factor.

My regards,

Widewing


Whats the margin of error on the acceleration times?  I'd say at the very least it'd be to close to call.

I'll be in the game again shortly (as soon as my new stick arrives in the mail next week).. I'd happily fight you a few times La-7 vs XXX... me and Leviathn did that in the DA a while back (La-7 vs tempest) because nobody believed me when I said the La-7 was better... the La-7 won every fight (no matter who was flying it).

The La-7 is I think the most under-rated plane in the game, for a fighter.  Most people are scared of fighting, so they use it because it is ideal for cherrypicking in X on 1's... but it is a fantastic fighter.

Offline Widewing

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8804
Spit16
« Reply #41 on: April 01, 2006, 02:00:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Urchin
Whats the margin of error on the acceleration times?  I'd say at the very least it'd be to close to call.

I'll be in the game again shortly (as soon as my new stick arrives in the mail next week).. I'd happily fight you a few times La-7 vs XXX... me and Leviathn did that in the DA a while back (La-7 vs tempest) because nobody believed me when I said the La-7 was better... the La-7 won every fight (no matter who was flying it).

The La-7 is I think the most under-rated plane in the game, for a fighter.  Most people are scared of fighting, so they use it because it is ideal for cherrypicking in X on 1's... but it is a fantastic fighter.


Always up for a scrum.. Be glad to duel with you.

Acceleration tests were an average of three runs, and none of those 3 runs varied by more than a second.

However, the issue we will invariable run into is that most duels occur a minimal altitude, which is right in the La-7's best envelope. Be that as it may, the F4U-4 is superior to the Tempest as a dogfighter, largely due to its instantaneous turn rate and the ability to dump E quickly. Not to mention those flaps which give you almost hovercraft-like ability.

La-7s are tremendous fighters.... As long as you stay below 5k. I rarely fly it these days, but have always maintained a rediculous K/D in them. These days the Spitfire XVI gives the La-7 all it can handle down low, and the La-5FN is completely outclassed against the "Super Spit" given equal pilots.

My regards,

Widewing
My regards,

Widewing

YGBSM. Retired Member of Aces High Trainer Corps, Past President of the DFC, retired from flying as Tredlite.

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Spit16
« Reply #42 on: April 01, 2006, 02:51:19 PM »
This is probably a side-issue, but....

Quote
Not to mention those flaps which give you almost hovercraft-like ability.


 How sure are you about this one?

 The reason I'm asking that is because after the recent patch I seem to be noticing a small but very firm change in how the flaps changes the attitude of the planes. Ironically, the first instance where I seem to have felt the change was with the F4U Corsair. Like you've mentioned, the F4Us from version 1.04 to the previous one, were indeed like 'hovercrafts' as you've mentioned, with full flaps out.

 I am pretty sure I know what the USAAF/USN planes can do with their flaps - because my largest gripes, as you would know, were about how 109s with smaller turning radius just couldn't mix-up against US fighters at low speed fights, because the 109s were so seriously unstable and thoroughly incapable of matching the ultra-low speed 'hovering' the US fighters could do with full flaps out. I'm not really adept in flying US planes, but flying against them I've have quite a lot of experience.

 However, the I first incident I witnessed was that the F4Us with full flaps out, weren't what they used to be when I was in a test flight in the MA when the new version arrived. I was busy with life, so it was the first time in months that I grabbed a stick. My skill just wasn't up to prime, and I was making sloppy mistakes a lot when I saw an enemy F4U that upped from a CV, clearly intent for a dogfight and not jaboing. He had the higher alt, I was low by about 3,000ft.

 The first surprise came when I evaded a few BnZ passes, and the fight changed into a rolling scissors fight. After a failed BnZ pass with insufficient speed to completely get out of my reach, the F4U rolled over and kicked hard rudder into a very tight wing-over style move. Normally, at this point, the 109s couldn't follow it because the loss of control stability prevented it from doing so. And yet, I was able to succeed in it pretty easily, despite my lacking state. This was when I first experienced how improved the 109s were.

 Then the typical 'double-helix' type of maneuvering started, where myself and the F4U pilot started a series of matched barrel rolls, each one trying to fly slowest as possible without stalling. Again, this was an inherently dangerous situation for average 109 pilots like me. Instability prevented the 109s from trying this kind of stunt against US fighters with flaps out. The distance was close enough for me, the chasing plane, to visually confirm the F4U was gradually increasing flaps as the fight progressed longer and longer.

 Then the second surprise came. Now the distance was very close, inside 200 yards, probably 100 or so, since the distance marker was showing "0". It was one of those situations where I only had to get my pitch up a tiny bit mroe to get a shot in, but trying so would stall my plane. I could very clearly see the very uniquely shaped Corsair flaps spread out to the full. This was the moment of truth - it is usually at this time when the Corsair "floats" with full flaps out, ultra slow flying, hanging by 1 mph or 2 from the stall speed, and still maneuvering in rolls. This is where most planes are forced the overshoot. And yet, it didn't work for the Corsair. It attempted to do so, but all of a sudden, when the flaps were maxed out, the Corsair seemed to drop pitch rapidly, roll to one side, and then crashed to the ground. My guess is that the Corsair stalled at level flight, dropped nose pitch, the pilot increased throttle and pulled the stick back to hold pitch, and it fell under a sudden spin and crashed.


 Quite surprised by this, I upped a F4U of my own and started some test maneuvers. What I experienced was that now, the first notch or two of flaps, immediately after being deployed, gives up a much higher nose-up movement than before. But as my turn tightened, trying for the tightest turn possible, I went to full flaps... and then realized full flaps made the plane feel really heavy. It felt like there was something that's holding the plane back - and my guess was that the amount of drag force due to the flaps, have become much higher.

 I was able to manage a full-flap, very tight turn with full throttle and ADI(wep), but when I tried a full-flap turn with half throttle, like the F4Us could do before(which almost feels like you're in a helicopter, changing heading while hovering...), it stalled out. It felt like the lack of thrust wasn't enough to overcome the amount of drag the fully spread flaps were giving out.. the plane got really heavy and unresponsive in control.. and then wanted to crash itself.

 A bit intrigued by thus, I came to the BBS and found out that P-38 pilots were complaining that their Lightnings became pigs. So I tested the P-38s out and indeed, they just couldn't hold a well-enough turn when it reached full flap status. I quickly tested it out with the P-47s and P-51s too, and it seems this supposed "effect" was also in works with these planes.

 Then just today, I met a pretty good P-51 pilot in combat. I won't name him, but he's a good vet around from AH1 days. The P-51 went into a tight loop, I tried to follow in a Bf109G-14. And at the top of the loop, I saw the P-51 wasn't moving anymore. Normally, in the previous versions, this was the moment where the 109 would be decisively outmaneuverd. A low-speed tight loop, the P-51 goes full flaps and finished the loop quickly, the 109 destabilizes and can't follow, and the tables are turned. I was expecting the same thing to happen, cursing my incompetent judgement, when I saw the P-51 "pigged out" on me. At the top of the loop it seemed to just stop moving, as my plane nosed up, the distance closing now to within 100 yards, I saw the P-51 with full flaps out - unable to make any kind of movement in that state.


 Now, I am very, very convinced, that the US planes lost a lot of the "stability" they boasted over planes like the 109 - the very issue I complained so often about. Although the effect is probably global, since Pyro said it was so, I'm guessing that it effected two groups of the planes mostly. The ones that were unbelievably unstable, and the ones that were unbelievably stable.


 So, I'm not sure if the F4U now has such an easy advantage in low-speed maneuvering over the La-7. It still can dump E way faster than most planes, so the instantaneous turn would be superior... but once the speeds deteriorate to under 300mph, it just won't be able to do the "low-speed hover" trick with those flaps anymore - at least, definately not as easily as they used to.

Offline Schwein

  • Parolee
  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 66
Spit16
« Reply #43 on: April 01, 2006, 03:59:17 PM »
The La-7 out-turns the F4U4, Spit14 and Spit16. Of course most La-7 pilots just fly with open throttle, and the La-7's speed acts against it in a turn fight.

Most fighters outperform the La-7 at medium-high altitude, no argument there.

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Spit16
« Reply #44 on: April 01, 2006, 05:36:14 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Kweassa


 A bit intrigued by thus, I came to the BBS and found out that P-38 pilots were complaining that their Lightnings became pigs. So I tested the P-38s out and indeed, they just couldn't hold a well-enough turn when it reached full flap status. I quickly tested it out with the P-47s and P-51s too, and it seems this supposed "effect" was also in works with these planes.




Don't know what thread that was.  The P-38 is still as deadly now as it was before the patch.  I don't recall any of the veteran P-38 drivers in here complaining how the P-38 becoming a "pig".   Kappa and I had a discussion about this the day the patch came out and we were testing our planes out.  We came to the conclusion that the P-38 wasn't neutered and more care had to be taken when to use full flaps.  For those of that know how to properly use the flaps in the P-38, nothing has changed.



ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song