Temporary REMOVAL of N1K1 justified?

[Fatty]

All the example shows Tac is that if you pull hard enough when you undershoot a bounce, it's possible for the plane if it's max level speed to catch you.  Even if you're well over 400, if you pull so hard that you're 90 degrees (considering you dove under, about a 120 degree total variation being extremely conservative) where the other plane in that case would have to casually pull at most about 60 degrees, you're going to be sitting as a target.

If you are suprised at the outcome under those circumstances or see it as illogical, then I think that explains a lot of those zoom infinately complaints.

[ 08-10-2001: Message edited by: Fatty ]

[Tac]

take a n1k and pull all the way on the stick until its 90 degrees up. See how much E you lose.

Thats the point.

[Hooligan]

Tac:

1g pullup or 5g pullup?  There are a lot of gray areas here.  If you know a little about E-management it is pretty easy to beat 90% of the pilots in the MA in a Co-E fight with identical E-fighters.  The guy who pulls less g's pretty quickly ends up with an advantage.

Prediction:  When the N1K FM gets modified, its usage will be little affected.  It will still be easy to fly and because it is a light aircraft with a lot of horsepower, its outstanding acceleration and climb will still lead to a lot of "suprises".

Hooligan

[Fatty]

As Hooligan said, that's compeltely ambiguous.  I can stall in a 90 pullup in any plane here, or I can have a gentle rise with no E lost in any plane here.

It has nothing to do with the experiment either.  I don't quite see what is wrong with a 109G10 trying to pull twice the degrees a N1k is in a tighter radius at a higher speed, but loses more energy.  In what universe is this incorrect modelling again?

[Tac]

again, pull as hard as you can on the stick on a n1k. see how much E it loses. I dont mind its acceleration, its cannons or that it eats unholy amount of lead to bring down. But when something pulls extreme G's with little loss of E, there's something quite odd in there. And that's aside from the almost nonexistent torque effect on a 1900hp light plane.

Fatty: When the G10 is 90 degrees it is going up at a faster speed than the n1k is on the horizontal. N1k pulls up real hard without losing any significant E (what? 5mph?)and follows. the g10 has more E on the vertical plane to begin with. Yet the g10 will stall and the n1k, who had less E still has its nose pointed upwards... hanging by the prop at 100 mph or less..with negligible torque.

[Fatty]

Which is why it's not wise to climb out pure vertical.  If the n1k was losing energy at a slower rate, it would actually catch up to the 109.  Even if the n1k losing energy at a faster rate and the g10 starts out faster, it's going to close the distance as both planes decelerate at a rapid rate.  Throw in the ability to shoot 900 rounds, and you have a dead front plane.

If you can't hold that much slower than 100 mph in any plane here (bombers aside (well, you can throw in TBM and IL2 also)) you need to look at your joystick spiking.

[ 08-11-2001: Message edited by: Fatty ]