Flying 2nd and 3rd tier aircraft in LWMA

[Bubbajj]

There's not much more fun than a zeke with 10 minutes of fuel left. An empty zeke will do miraculous things.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Masherbrum
You should RARELY, EVER need more than 50% fuel w/ NO DT in a Tony.    If you have to travel a couple sectors, then grab 75%.    The DT is NOT NEEDED at all.   Grabbing the DT is pointless.  

I have flown the Tony enough to know that "whatever happens" when you burn the wing tanks, is the craft becomes very stable.    I can turn tighter, roll a little bit better (not a ton better).    It isn't in my mind, because I turn with 90% of the fighters in the LWA, while in it.   Spits are easy for me to turn with.    Hogs are easy meat as well.   I've even gotten AKDogg in one, he even admitted he misjudged my E.    

What I find funny is that the majority of the "dweeb rides" I come across, while in the Tony, end up doing something "cocky".    In doing so, they not only misjudge my E retention, but they are often in the hangar very quickly.    

The Tony is the single most Underrated Plane in the Entire Game.

Why is taking a drop tank pointless? Suppose you get airborne only to run into a bunch of low enemy sneaking in. What would you rather have, 75% internal, or pitch off the drop tank and have 50% instantly? No need to answer, it's logical. Lighter is better.

Now, as to wing tanks burning off first... The Tony becomes more stable because burning off fuel makes it lighter. The few gallons in the wing makes virtually no difference. Any time you reduce weight, you reduce wing loading. Lower wing loading means lower stall speed, which feels more stable.

I've tested the the Ki-61 with 50% fuel, burning off the wing tanks and then flying it at the limits, including testing for minimal turn radius. Then, I took another Tony with 50% fuel, burned off the center and aux tanks (leaving fuel in the wing tanks only) and repeated the exercise. Four tests for minimum turn radius, two each in above fuel states. Results:

Empty wing tanks, 50% center and aux.
516.3 ft
511.6 ft

Empty center and aux tanks, 50% in wing tanks.
513.6 ft
512.9 ft

I could not feel the slightest difference in stability. You may believe there is, and that's fine if that gives you more confidence; but clinically, there's no difference.

Now lets take another look at the Ki-61's turn radius. I averaged 513.6 ft, with Mosq's data showing 519 ft. Close enough considering we use different hardware. We both average a turn rate of 18.0 feet per second, give or take a tenth of a degree.

Lets compare that to some other fighters.

SpitIX: 432.9 ft @ 20.5 DPS (Mosq)
F6F-5: 447.4 ft @ 20.7 DPS (Widewing)
SpitVIII: 445.1 ft @ 21.0 DPS (Widewing)
F4U-1D: 427.4 ft @ 19.3 DPS (Mosq)
SpitXIV: 509.3 ft @ 19.4 DPS (Mosq)

As you can see, all of the above out-turn the Tony, most with great ease. Moreover, all have a much better rate of turn, meaning that they get around the circle faster. In short, all of the above will beat the Tony like a toy drum in any kind of a turning contest.

So, when you say you can out-turn a Spitfire, what you are really doing is demonstrating that you are a much better pilot than the Spit driver. You are beating them with the inferior fighter.

You should take credit for that as a pilot, don't give credit to the Ki-61. Given equal pilots, the Ki-61 is out-classed.

(Edit; I forgot to mention that I fly the Ki-61 in the MA and quite often in the TA. I enjoy it for its great medium to high speed handling and its death laser cannon.)

My regards,

Widewing

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Widewing
Why is taking a drop tank pointless? Suppose you get airborne only to run into a bunch of low enemy sneaking in. What would you rather have, 75% internal, or pitch off the drop tank and have 50% instantly? No need to answer, it's logical. Lighter is better.

Now, as to wing tanks burning off first... The Tony becomes more stable because burning off fuel makes it lighter. The few gallons in the wing makes virtually no difference. Any time you reduce weight, you reduce wing loading. Lower wing loading means lower stall speed, which feels more stable.

I've tested the the Ki-61 with 50% fuel, burning off the wing tanks and then flying it at the limits, including testing for minimal turn radius. Then, I took another Tony with 50% fuel, burned off the center and aux tanks (leaving fuel in the wing tanks only) and repeated the exercise. Four tests for minimum turn radius, two each in above fuel states. Results:

Empty wing tanks, 50% center and aux.
516.3 ft
511.6 ft

Empty center and aux tanks, 50% in wing tanks.
513.6 ft
512.9 ft

I could not feel the slightest difference in stability. You may believe there is, and that's fine if that gives you more confidence; but clinically, there's no difference.

Now lets take another look at the Ki-61's turn radius. I averaged 513.6 ft, with Mosq's data showing 519 ft. Close enough considering we use different hardware. We both average a turn rate of 18.0 feet per second, give or take a tenth of a degree.

Lets compare that to some other fighters.

SpitIX: 432.9 ft @ 20.5 DPS (Mosq)
F6F-5: 447.4 ft @ 20.7 DPS (Widewing)
SpitVIII: 445.1 ft @ 21.0 DPS (Widewing)
F4U-1D: 427.4 ft @ 19.3 DPS (Mosq)
SpitXIV: 509.3 ft @ 19.4 DPS (Mosq)

As you can see, all of the above out-turn the Tony, most with great ease. Moreover, all have a much better rate of turn, meaning that they get around the circle faster. In short, all of the above will beat the Tony like a toy drum in any kind of a turning contest.

So, when you say you can out-turn a Spitfire, what you are really doing is demonstrating that you are a much better pilot than the Spit driver. You are beating them with the inferior fighter.

You should take credit for that as a pilot, don't give credit to the Ki-61. Given equal pilots, the Ki-61 is out-classed.

(Edit; I forgot to mention that I fly the Ki-61 in the MA and quite often in the TA. I enjoy it for its great medium to high speed handling and its death laser cannon.)

My regards,

Widewing

If you need more than 33 mins of gas, then I guess take the DT.   95% of the time I take only 50%

I have no problems turning with most planes, etc.    I'll never be cocky enough to say "I'm good".    

I said I can "turn with", not "out turn" (previous to your post I said "turn with" as well).    My persona gets some people going and they tend to "Stray from what I say".

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Masherbrum
If you need more than 33 mins of gas, then I guess take the DT.   95% of the time I take only 50%

I have no problems turning with most planes, etc.    I'll never be cocky enough to say "I'm good".    

I said I can "turn with", not "out turn" (previous to your post I said "turn with" as well).    My persona gets some people going and they tend to "Stray from what I say".

Another thing I didn't mention. US Navy testing of the Ki-61 revealed that its turn radius was roughly the same as that of the FM-2. If that were the case in AH2, you certainly could out-turn Spitfires..  Maybe Pyro can revisit that when they get around to updating the graphics of the Japanese fighters.

You can read that test here.

My regards,

Widewing

[Gabriel]

What determines second or third tier?

Is there a list somehwere?

[Urchin]

Generally speaking, one can use a tiny bit of intelligence applied to knowledge of the plane-set and come up with a suitable list on their own.  

I'll get you started.

First tier planes do everything well.  Their biggest weakness is they are only "good" in one area, instead of outstanding.  

Two examples of first tier planes are the La-7 and the Spit 16.  

Second tier planes do most things well, or one thing very well.  A good way to look at a second tier plane is to compare it to a first tier plane.  For example - the 109K4 is like an La-7 that doesn't turn as well, doesn't accelerate as well, isn't as fast, and has less firepower.  Does that make the 109K a bad plane?  No, it is a pretty good plane actually.  Solid second tier.  The Hurri2C makes the second tier, because it has the best gun package in the game, combined with outstanding manueverability.  The Tiffie makes the second tier because it has the best gun package in the game, combined with outstanding speed.

Third tier planes typically are in the bottom half of the plane set in all performance areas.  They really have no redeeming qualities bar historical interest.  The P-40s are third tier (and quite far down it, I might add).

Some people will have different lists because it really is a subjective thing.  For example, to me all the 190s (bar the D) are third tier planes.  The D squeaks into the second tier, barely (mainly because it is fast).  Some people will say I'm wrong.  That is cool with me, I don't care.

[Gabriel]

I was being mostly facetious with the list question.

My only observation is that some people seem to think the date of entry into the war of the plane you are flying is tied in some way to test levels.