A6M

[CAP1]

not many people know that the a6m2 turns better than the a6m5b     
but both of thier "armor" makes paper look like steel

I FOUND THAT OUT THE HARD WAY

[Ack-Ack]

not many people know that the a6m2 turns better than the a6m5b     
but both of thier "armor" makes paper look like steel

And both are quite easy to defeat and burn very nicely.


ack-ack

[dirt911]

no i think youv forgotten who really won the war

[Ack-Ack]

no i think youv forgotten who really won the war

And please explain to us, how that even matters in this thread?


ack-ack

[macerxgp]

I don't really think the ENY ratings depend on the planes themselves, rather, they depend on the average quality of their (the planes) use. But their 'fame' and supposed superiority still plays a role.

FOR EXAMPLE: The ENY rating of the 109 G2 and G6 are relatively high because most of the fighter jocks that up one can't bring it back down again (myself included, but I still think I fly them pretty well). It would make sense if there was a .2 ENY discrepancy between the two, seeing as the G2 has that ugly bellybutton head shield, but at high numbers the ENY score has a resolution of around 10.

The FM2, a relatively unused bird, has an ENY (if I recall) of either 20 or 30. It has nearly no faults (only four .50's, but they are well laid) except for it's lack of speed, and it's maneuverability more than makes up for it. But, it nearly never gets used! I have only around 66 kills so far this tour, and 12 of those are in the FM2! (14 in the G6, 4 in the G2, 5 in the C.205 and 14 more in a wirbly, plus a neat surprise; 3 kills vs fighters in the 234.) The FM2 doesn't really have a low enough ENY, but it really can't compete with faster fighters. It's more of a zeke with 4 .50's, heavy armor and great stability. (flew one for 10 mins with no tail end once!)



The Pony, however, is simply riding on it's laurels at 410 MPH with it's 8.0 ENY.

[Saxman]

I'm still trying to figure out why the F4U-1, which out-performs the FM-2 in every way, has the higher ENY. Unless that's changed recently.

[whiteman]

shhhhh quiet

[Bronk]

I'm still trying to figure out why the F4U-1, which out-performs the FM-2 in every way, has the higher ENY. Unless that's changed recently.

Hmm turn radius with/without flaps... firing time.

[macerxgp]

I will beat an average F4U-1 pilot in an FM2 any day.


It's all in knowing to hit 'Q'.

[humble]

 

I will beat an average F4U-1 pilot in an FM2 any day.


It's all in knowing to hit 'Q'.

[BnZs]

I'm still trying to figure out why the F4U-1, which out-performs the FM-2 in every way, has the higher ENY. Unless that's changed recently.

Another ENY oddity aye?

There must be considerations other than ENY, such as date of introduction.

[Karnak]

A system based on performance numbers is "totally subjective"? 

More subjectivethan going by whatever plane is in fashion this month? 


"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." 
(Image removed from quote.)


EDIT: I admitted my system has elements of subjectivity. Your system, however, dodges this objection only by passing the buck on all decisions on to the player base-the "market". There are endless examples of situations where both a good product is under-valued in relation to its efficacy and where other products are over-valued relative their actual attributes in side-by-side comparison. There is more agreement than division among ACM experts on what attributes represent greater efficacy in a dogfight. Better to hammer it out and compromise and come up with something workable and sensible than toss the whole thing out because "perfection" remains elusive.

You're method is entirely subjective.  The moment you give a weighted value to each of your derived performance numbers, even if the performance values are weighted evenly, you are being completely subjective and have obliterated any objectivity the numbers had.

[BnZs]

You're method is entirely subjective.  The moment you give a weighted value to each of your derived performance numbers, even if the performance values are weighted evenly, you are being completely subjective and have obliterated any objectivity the numbers had.

It is true that there is a certain amount of doubt about how important one attribute is relative another in a fighter aircraft under typical AHII MA conditions, although I think there certainty than you credit.

Your argument however, is fatally flawed. You are essentially arguing that because it is impossible to find complete agreement on what matters in fighter design, then *nothing* matters in fighter design. If there is no objective value to different attributes in fighter airplane design, then everything engineers have come up with from the Eindecker to F-22 is folly. This is obviously absurd.

(This reminds me of that old philosophy class claptrap, since our knowledge is imperfect and limited, then nothing can really be known. Of course, the Prof expounding on this subject somehow knows *exactly* how to get from his driveway to his parking space, *exactly* how much his paycheck is supposed to be, etc.)

And your popularity-based ENY proposal does nothing to decrease uncertainty or subjectivity. It only passes all possible subjective choices onto the individual user. ENY related to usage also introduces the purely subjective values of taste into the equation-surely you realize that many airplanes will have higher ENY under this system not because of what they can do, but because of what they are. Ignorance will also be a factor in a system based on the plane selections of the entire player base.

[Karnak]

That isn't my argument.  My argument is that you cannot create a completely objective system.  You claimed it could be done.  If Lusche's numbers are right, your system puts the Bf109K-4 as the best fighter in AH and the Ki-84 as the second best.  They are both very good, no doubt, but first and second best?  I don't think you can reasonably place those aircraft above the F4U-4 or Me262.

Then there is the highly organic nature of WWII aircraft performance.  We get huge changes in an aircraft's handling based on the speed and altitude.  Factoring that in accurately would be very hard, yet it is a major part of the equation as to which aircraft is better.  In the case of the Bf109K-4 and Ki-84 that alone drops them a number of places.  Does the A6M5 out turn the F6F-5?  Yes and no.  Depends entirely on the speed at which they are tested.

[Lusche]

That isn't my argument.  My argument is that you cannot create a completely objective system.  You claimed it could be done.  If Lusche's numbers are right, your system puts the Bf109K-4 as the best fighter in AH and the Ki-84 as the second best. 

Just a small disclaimer: That number's aren't mine. I didn't make the plane comparison matrix.