Author Topic: F6F Re-modeling (Read 726 times)

RATTFINK · « **on:** February 06, 2008, 11:35:03 PM »

The LA-5 and LA7 get a remake?? Hope they perk the shyte out of it.

F6F is lonnnnnnnng overdue.

oakranger · « **Reply #1 on:** February 07, 2008, 12:04:05 AM »

yea, especally La7. No skills to fly them at all.

Motherland · « **Reply #2 on:** February 07, 2008, 12:51:07 AM »

The Lavochkins,up until now, were by FAR the worst looking planes in the game. Thats what kept me out of them early on (lol)

Karnak · « **Reply #3 on:** February 07, 2008, 12:57:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Motherland
The Lavochkins,up until now, were by FAR the worst looking planes in the game. Thats what kept me out of them early on (lol)

Second worst looking. N1K2-J is the worst looking, still 100% original AH1 v1.00 polygons.

I think the B-26 and C-47 are also 100% original AH1 v1.00 polygons.

bozon · « **Reply #4 on:** February 07, 2008, 02:17:54 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Motherland
The Lavochkins,up until now, were by FAR the worst looking planes in the game.

It is not HTC's fault that Lavochkins were ugly. Take it up with the Russians.

EagleEyes · « **Reply #5 on:** February 07, 2008, 02:43:18 AM »

F4Us and Seafire was remodeled. Why hasnt the Hellcat or the Wild/Wilder Cat been done "F4F/FM2"??

Greebo · « **Reply #6 on:** February 07, 2008, 04:23:00 AM »

Not sure what criteria HTC use to decide which shapes get remodelled next. Maybe they just pick them from a hat.

All the ETO USAAF and LW shapes for Combat Tour got redone a while ago. Since then we've had the Spits, F4Us and Las. It seems they are basing it on the popularity of the planes in the MA. This makes sense, since the game will look better for a greater number of players.

I'd guess if some big event is on the horizon, then planes might get redone for that as well.

Rich46yo · « **Reply #7 on:** February 07, 2008, 05:47:20 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by oakranger
yea, especally La7. No skills to fly them at all.

So what is it about this airplane that takes no skill? What exactly about it?

BaDkaRmA158Th · « **Reply #8 on:** February 07, 2008, 07:12:45 AM »

So if we fly a plane type more in the MA, it has a greater chance of being redone.

....groovy.

VansCrew1 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 07, 2008, 07:14:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rich46yo
So what is it about this airplane that takes no skill? What exactly about it?

it's not that it dose not take any skills. It's that it's to easy to fly. Good speed in the deck. Good fire power. Great climb rate. It is a decent turner. It's not really the plane it's the way people fly it. Any plane in the right hands could become great.

Tilt · « **Reply #10 on:** February 07, 2008, 07:43:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rich46yo
So what is it about this airplane that takes no skill? What exactly about it?

its acceleration and top speed allows you to do dumb things and get away with it by running away.

Interestingly the AH model reproduces the top speed, climb rates, turn rates and even roll rates well.

Even it's manouverability at high speeds reproduce reports gained at Rechlin on the La5FN.

It acceleration however is a derived figure.......... its derived from backward modelling the speed and climb data. (commonly done on most ac here)

Certainly I have never seen acceleration data on Lavochkins...except.

A trial against a 109 G4 in 1945 showed that in dive the G4 would accelerate away from the La7 once the initial period of acceleration was "passed".

In AH there are very few (or even only the P51D) that can do this. Which suggests that the AH Lavochins high speed drag model is over egged to provide it with a bit more acceleration at higher speeds than it has a right to.

I am no aero engineer but another characturistic of the La7 is that for a high speed ac its optimum climb rate is actually at a comparatively low IAS compared to other high speed ac. this seems to sorta tie in with the above to me.

The ramifications of this are

Its ability to swoop down and catch escaping ac from a considerable range is reduced.
Its ability to escape pursuit via a sustained high speed dive is reduced.
Its ability to scrub e from a sustained high speed dive is increased.

and yet it would still hold true to the original data.

RATTFINK · « **Reply #11 on:** February 07, 2008, 06:28:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tilt
its acceleration and top speed allows you to do dumb things and get away with it by running away.

Interestingly the AH model reproduces the top speed, climb rates, turn rates and even roll rates well.

Even it's manouverability at high speeds reproduce reports gained at Rechlin on the La5FN.

It acceleration however is a derived figure.......... its derived from backward modelling the speed and climb data. (commonly done on most ac here)

Certainly I have never seen acceleration data on Lavochkins...except.

A trial against a 109 G4 in 1945 showed that in dive the G4 would accelerate away from the La7 once the initial period of acceleration was "passed".

In AH there are very few (or even only the P51D) that can do this. Which suggests that the AH Lavochins high speed drag model is over egged to provide it with a bit more acceleration at higher speeds than it has a right to.

I am no aero engineer but another characturistic of the La7 is that for a high speed ac its optimum climb rate is actually at a comparatively low IAS compared to other high speed ac. this seems to sorta tie in with the above to me.

The ramifications of this are

Its ability to swoop down and catch escaping ac from a considerable range is reduced.
Its ability to escape pursuit via a sustained high speed dive is reduced.
Its ability to scrub e from a sustained high speed dive is increased.

and yet it would still hold true to the original data.

Tell us what you really think about the LA

Actually I would like to get peoples thoughts on the Hellcat and when we think we can get this bird remodeled.

I'm thinking Greebo has hit the nail on the head...

"Not sure what criteria HTC use to decide which shapes get remodelled next. Maybe they just pick them from a hat."

Probably

AirFlyer · « **Reply #12 on:** February 07, 2008, 07:39:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by RATTFINK
[B"Not sure what criteria HTC use to decide which shapes get remodelled next. Maybe they just pick them from a hat."[/B]

If thats the case I hope they pick the A6M next, it could use it.

Tilt · « **Reply #13 on:** February 08, 2008, 04:20:08 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by RATTFINK
Tell us what you really think about the LA

It was finally developed into a superb fighter made from the most base material available to its engineers at the time.

The fuselage and wings were constructed from pine and birch glued together initially from resin extracted from processed tree gum. Latterly they had a metal main spar.

Its engine was a robust unrefined brute screwed to get every last drop of horse power available.

And yet it devloped into the superior fighter of the Eastern front interms of combined speed and manouverability at those altitudes where there was combat to be had.

It's range was poor, its cockpit conditions were hot or cold or smoke ridden.

Each Lavochkin had a life expectancy of five months.

well you asked

RE HTC policy on re vamping ac. The TOD set had to be done first. Then the logical progression is to re do those that are most popular because that caters to the market best.

moneyguy · « **Reply #14 on:** February 08, 2008, 03:15:24 PM »

compared to the new F4U's, the F6F isnt pretty. but its flight model is sweet. i'm happy with it. usually when i see the outside of one i'm killing it anyways.