Who did the input on "the Tony"? I'm curious because they obviously interjected "their opinion" and struck out as far as someone "who flies it OFTEN is concerned."
The Maneuverability section literally had me rolling I must admit.
Although, the prankster side of me says "leave it up and continue to discourage folks from learning a plane that gives the Spit Sallies, Runstang (not you Stang), folks too scared to turn an La7, and most others fits, in the Late War Arenas.
The reason why I posted? When reviewing anything or drafting a "Report", the first thing that needs to be eliminated is, "opinion". If you think quotes like the following are even remotely acceptable "as gospel":
1. "Sustained turn-fights are not terribly good." - Laughable at best.
2. "At high speeds (450mph+), the plane handles about average and really doesn't stand out." - Very wrong
3. "Top speed in a dive is about 500mph since the plane becomes quite heavy above this speed and difficult to control." - Very wrong
But number 4 is the winner: "At low speeds (200mph) it tends to become very heavy and have problems maintaining a good turn rate." - I guess, but one must "disagree to agree." I suppose if you took 100% fuel you'd have this issue. It's been 4 years since I took that much in one.
I'm not trying to be a downer here but stick to the FACTS, not opinion. The write up on the Tony gives me the indication that the person who drafted it, rarely rolls the cartoon airplane.
Murdr, the above is not directed at you personally. But rather, the Community. I'll turnfight a Hurricane while in the Tony and I promise, if you DO manage to shoot me down. It will be A.) rather difficult and B) you WILL be cussing at your monitor even when you are on my 6.
If my statement offends, sorry but that isn't "opinion", it is fact. Why? I fly it regularly and learned from the best who flew it. MY squaddies Helm and Goth who are IMO, better in it, than I am.
