Fragile George?

[Dingy]

Rip,

Once you get the Nik above 20K, it loses its vitality.

[Kieren]

So does the A8.  

[Ripsnort]

Kieren, that's an under-statement!  Here's a theory of mine, fly the FW190 for , say 20 hours or so, then fly any other A/C, you'll be an ace in less than 5 minutes with the other A/C.  FW190 is by far  the most difficult plane to handle in AH, at any alt!

------------------
Brian "Ripsnort" Nelson
++JG2++ ~Richthofen~
(Formerly VF-101 Grim Reapers~Defected~)
"There is no reason anyone would
want a computer in their home."
   Ken Olson, president, chairman and
founder of Digital Equipment Corp.,1977

[juzz]

So does the La-5FN  

Now, about that chart...

Look at that poor, sad La-5FN. Can't outclimb or outspeed the N1K2-J. Even though it has 1850hp and about 1500lbs less weight... And the Bf109K-4; can't outclimb or outspeed the N1K2-J too, even the Fw190A-8 is faster than it! Hell, the Fw190A-8 is even as fast as a Mustang at high alt!

You see where this is going...?  

[Kieren]

cc, Ripsnort.

The thing about the 190 (as it is currently modeled) is that it is demanding of attention at all times. Once you lose the advantage it is very hard to get it back. The only 2 things it has going for it are roll and guns, and if you can't point your guns at the bad guy...   Roll is only going to take you so far, and frankly, you won't outrun much in one at any alt. Hit hard and keep going is pretty much the best advice- and ignore the occasional "HO Dweeb" comment.  

[Ripsnort]

Kieren, Yup, you got that right!  So far this tour I'm doing alittle better with it, 49 kills and 8 deaths.

(I might add that only 6 of those kills were off of vulching, the rest were "earned")

------------------
Brian "Ripsnort" Nelson
++JG2++ ~Richthofen~
(Formerly VF-101 Grim Reapers~Defected~)
"There is no reason anyone would
want a computer in their home."
   Ken Olson, president, chairman and
founder of Digital Equipment Corp.,1977

[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 02-10-2000).]

[Vermillion]

Juzz it all goes back to which data you want to use for your modeling. Now, I'm not trying to defend the AW data. The other stuff is there for comparison purposes, not definitive proof of the N1K2 data.

But you can't say because the La5 data seems wrong to you the N1K2 must be wrong too.

For instance in WB's, its a well known fact that the F4U-4 is no where close to matching the published numbers. Does this mean therefore, that EVERY plane in WB's is extremely porked and wrong, because the -4 Is? Of course not.

Anyway, it don't matter. Pyro confirmed that the data I have on that graph is comparable to actual data from an Army Technical Intelligence Unit report on the George.

Its just that he has other information that he believes if more correct, and contradicts it.

Just like information that we see for Fw190's, how many different sets of data have we seen here for it over time? And how much of it is contradictory? Much of it.

So it all comes down to which set of data do you use to model an aircraft. And only Pyro gets too do that.



------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure,
Dicta Verm: "Never give the suckers an even break!" or translated "Never engage without an advantage"