Flight model abuse / grievance

[Stoney]

none of this alters the fact that closure rates in AH are way lower than IRL

And you know that how?  I've read annecdotes from German pilots that mention tail chasing bombers and having a hard time with the speeds.  Our problem is the people that have been deluded through their reading/movies, that German fighters were able to bust through Allied formations at will, with very little effort, mowing planes down at the cyclic rate.  Fact:  number one killer of 8th AF bombers in WWII was flak.

[Steve]

I think buffs should show up as larger blips on dar.   

[Ack-Ack]

Arguably the worst modeled plane is the Spit16...it's the very reason why I quit the game for months.  Kills me not to fly it as I've always had a love affair with spits, but can't cheat like that.

It is?  Why don't you provide some evidence that it is the worst modeled plane in the game?


ack-ack

[BuckP]

My grandfather was a navigator in WW2 on B17's and B24's (halfway through the tour they switched from the 17's to the 24's).  I would always ask him about those days, and he was very open to chat about it.  Anyway, he said rarely did they ever (keep in mind this was his unit, not the whole ETO) fly at low altitudes (12k), but routinely flew at 30k.  Now, I know some of the flamers will jump on me, but this was from a guy who was there, flew 4 missions on D-day alone, was shot down at one point, watched the 262's make passes on them (interesting story there in itself), and continued on for 33 years in the Air Force.  

There is no question that real-life and in-game are not mimicked exactly.  Changing one aspect offsets another however (c'mon, you guys know this), so while there are inconsistencies, there is a general balance going on.

To the original poster, as a squad, we routinely and fairly accurately, figure out what are bombers and such from the radar.  Taking the bombers to extreme altitude isnt a problem, thats just smart play.  The question I would ask is why don't most planes perform up there too, at least the ones that should be able to?  Someone in bombers at 12k in the game, flying into a hotspot, is really asking for trouble.  Thats why we run escorts  

[CAP1]

the game supports wind, but it stays turned off.  there have been numerous threads asking.. begging to turn it on.

THAT would make it much more interesting. i rarely ever bomb from any higher than 14k or so.....but i also rarely ever miss at that alt either. it has no challenge, unless there's fighters up with me....and then, it seems that when i WANT the fighters to attack me, they don't...when i want to be left alone.....they attack me. 

[Ack-Ack]

the game supports wind, but it stays turned off.  there have been numerous threads asking.. begging to turn it on.

People cried when they had tough times taking off due to the cross wings and bombing tool sheds and it was removed.


ack-ack

[Kweassa]

Fact:  number one killer of 8th AF bombers in WWII was flak.

Great. Give us the 88.

[CAP1]

People cried when they had tough times taking off due to the cross wings and bombing tool sheds and it was removed.


ack-ack

crosswind takeoff's aren't that hard in real life.....i can only imagine them being easier in ah.

i wonder how wind would affect our dogfights in here?

[Chalenge]

...  The question I would ask is why don't most planes perform up there too, at least the ones that should be able to?  Someone in bombers at 12k in the game, flying into a hotspot, is really asking for trouble.  Thats why we run escorts  

The airplanes that are supposed to perform 'up there' do its just most people online dont know how to handle their plane at that altitude. Most aircraft that I have engaged at high alt (and there are exceptions) dont make it past one-half turn before they panic and dive to the thicker air. Others wallow and flutter and snaproll and die and then pm the 'c-word' because we all know they have perfect knowledge of how to fly... 

[Anaxogoras]

The question I would ask is why don't most planes perform up there too, at least the ones that should be able to?

Like it taking 20min for the 152 to accelerate from 180mph ias to top speed at altitude?

[Badboy]

i wonder how wind would affect our dogfights in here?

Wind doesn't affect dogfights at all, in terms of the maneuvering, when both aircraft are moving in the same air flow. The only real difference it makes is that the fight will drift in the direction of the wind. As an example, suppose you put a swimming pool on the back of a lorry and it was moving at 30mph. Two swimmers can swim around each other completely oblivious of the general motion of the fluid they are moving in. To them it would make no difference if the fluid they were swimming in was moving or stationary. Same thing applies to two aircraft when the mass of air they are flying in is moving.

Badboy   

[Oldman731]

Wind doesn't affect dogfights at all, in terms of the maneuvering, when both aircraft are moving in the same air flow. The only real difference it makes is that the fight will drift in the direction of the wind. As an example, suppose you put a swimming pool on the back of a lorry and it was moving at 30mph. Two swimmers can swim around each other completely oblivious of the general motion of the fluid they are moving in. To them it would make no difference if the fluid they were swimming in was moving or stationary. Same thing applies to two aircraft when the mass of air they are flying in is moving.

Wolfgang Langewiesche likened it to a man sitting or walking in a moving train car (a more common experience than swimming in pools on the backs of lorries) (except in England, so I hear).

- oldman

[CAP1]

Wind doesn't affect dogfights at all, in terms of the maneuvering, when both aircraft are moving in the same air flow. The only real difference it makes is that the fight will drift in the direction of the wind. As an example, suppose you put a swimming pool on the back of a lorry and it was moving at 30mph. Two swimmers can swim around each other completely oblivious of the general motion of the fluid they are moving in. To them it would make no difference if the fluid they were swimming in was moving or stationary. Same thing applies to two aircraft when the mass of air they are flying in is moving.

Badboy   

see...i almost think it would. obviously i've never flown real combat, and that's why i asked that. i do know that when i'm in the pattern, i need to adjust my bank angles  according to what the wind is doing to make my turns as i want them. same if i'm doing a turn around a point. i'm constantly changing my bank to keep the target on the ground where i want it.
 that's what made me wonder if combat pilots had to do things slightly differently on windier days.......or on turbulent days too.

[CAP1]

Wolfgang Langewiesche likened it to a man sitting or walking in a moving train car (a more common experience than swimming in pools on the backs of lorries) (except in England, so I hear).

- oldman

sooooo.....then turbulence(which would be the equivalent of the train rocking and bumping) could affect their maneuvers then?

this is actually kinda cool....a decent conversation coming out of a complaining thread. it's usually the other way 'round

[Yeager]

anti aircraft artillery resulted in most 8thAF bomber aircraft losses in WW2?