Dueling vs MA fighting

[Babalonian]

<---- Turn Tard..

That's right, I turn and I don't solely depend on BnZing.

Turn Tards make great bait for us Pick Tards.   

[humble]

no, it means using your energy advantage to gain separation ...

you are projecting your bias into his statement to draw a conclusion for no reason,
and are so arrogant about your narrow view of ACM that you do not even realize that you are doing it.

you presume you know what he means, and presume i do not.

This is where you show just how limiting your understanding of ACM is. As a general rule the person with the energy advantage does not "separate". In fact excessive separation is the single biggest weakness I see in many guys I've worked with or trained. The Goal of the +E pilot is to gain control and to then constantly increase the pressure until he forces a mistake or draws so much E from the bogey as to render defense impossible. The +E fighter is actually working as hard as he can to prevent the -E opponent from gaining separation. If you view any of the SBD clips I posted earlier in the week you'll see I'm constantly extending every chance I get even if only for a few seconds. Contrast that with the hog clip where I establish during the merge that I am +E and then constantly cut the fight back so as not to allow the hog separation...in effect I draw the fight up and he accepts keeping the fight in the phone booth. If he rolls out I'm within 800-1000 max separation and can follow. The real issue here seems to be that your so focused on a false understanding of ACM you won't let anyone help you.

[thorsim]

i am very interested to hear how you propose to extend from an +E opponent ...

BTW you also are projecting your bias into his statement since he did not make any suggestion about what the motivations or intentions were of the extending pilot and no clue what he might do after the extension ...

as far as what i know about ACM, you also are assuming with the expected result ...

This is where you show just how limiting your understanding of ACM is. As a general rule the person with the energy advantage does not "separate". In fact excessive separation is the single biggest weakness I see in many guys I've worked with or trained. The Goal of the +E pilot is to gain control and to then constantly increase the pressure until he forces a mistake or draws so much E from the bogey as to render defense impossible. The +E fighter is actually working as hard as he can to prevent the -E opponent from gaining separation. If you view any of the SBD clips I posted earlier in the week you'll see I'm constantly extending every chance I get even if only for a few seconds. Contrast that with the hog clip where I establish during the merge that I am +E and then constantly cut the fight back so as not to allow the hog separation...in effect I draw the fight up and he accepts keeping the fight in the phone booth. If he rolls out I'm within 800-1000 max separation and can follow. The real issue here seems to be that your so focused on a false understanding of ACM you won't let anyone help you.

[JunkyII]

i am very interested to hear how you propose to extend from an +E opponent ...

BTW you also are projecting your bias into his statement since he did not make any suggestion about what the motivations or intentions were of the extending pilot and no clue what he might do after the extension ...

as far as what i know about ACM, you also are assuming with the expected result ...

With a positive E opponent you can turn towards HO till the levels eqaul out, then you just hae to pick the right time to extend away....if your a weak boi....or you can use that time to reverse the BNZ clown and own him

True ownage is when you reverse E on an opponent and kill him

[thorsim]

but if you reverse the E states is he still +E ?

???

With a positive E opponent you can turn towards HO till the levels eqaul out, then you just hae to pick the right time to extend away....if your a weak boi....or you can use that time to reverse the BNZ clown and own him

True ownage is when you reverse E on an opponent and kill him

[Tarstar]

True ownage is when you reverse E on an opponent and kill him

    Not that I accomplish it much.. but well said 

[JunkyII]

but if you reverse the E states is he still +E ?

???

I was just saying how you could extend from an opponent with +E........but I dont do it so Im not an expert

[thorsim]

I was just saying how you could extend from an opponent with +E........but I dont do it so Im not an expert

no you proposed a way in which you might reverse the E relationship ...

there is no way to extend from an E+ opponent who does not let you one way or another ...

to suggest you can shows one is assuming errors by their opponent or has a very suspect understanding of ACM and the physics that define its rules.

[JunkyII]

no you proposed a way in which you might reverse the E relationship ...

there is no way to extend from an E+ opponent who does not let you one way or another ...

to suggest you can shows one is assuming errors by their opponent or has a very suspect understanding of ACM and the physics that define its rules.

OK heres your way to extend from one.......split S......the most cowardice move in the book IMO you can get plenty of space for YOU to run back to your buddies and get the E+.........

[thorsim]

more assumptions ...

at some point the stacking of your fails will wear you down and you will stop posting ...

OK heres your way to extend from one.......split S......the most cowardice move in the book IMO you can get plenty of space for YOU to run back to your buddies and get the E+.........

[BnZs]

i am very interested to hear how you propose to extend from an +E opponent ...

In general, this means going away level or diving when the "E" fighter is in the vertical portion of his maneuvering. Forcing the opponent to make up horizontal distance tends to make the E states become more equal over time

[BnZs]

Actually, there are speed/turn (and altitude?) envelopes (I forget what they're called) for every aircraft.  The optimum ACM is to be in a flight regime that exploits your plane's strengths vs. the enemy's weaknesses, which are not necessarily the slowest possible speed.

Shooting down a pilot with really good defensive ACM skills in a fighter of equal or inferior maneuverability will usually involve flying on the ragged edge below corner speed. This is *more* true when trying to apply E tactics against a more maneuverable fighter, not less.  As will avoiding and killing a more maneuverable fighter who is +E on you.

[JunkyII]

more assumptions ...

at some point the stacking of your fails will wear you down and you will stop posting ...

What am I assuming? Do a split S in almost any plane against a higher con and your gunna get separation....whats so hard to understand about that?

[thorsim]

In general, this means going away level or diving when the "E" fighter is in the vertical portion of his maneuvering. Forcing the opponent to make up horizontal distance tends to make the E states become more equal over time

you also are proposing an attempt to engineer a change in the situation.  please reread the last few posts ...

you guys are arguing with me by changing the parameters of the situation that defined my statement ...

[humble]

no you proposed a way in which you might reverse the E relationship ...

there is no way to extend from an E+ opponent who does not let you one way or another ...

to suggest you can shows one is assuming errors by their opponent or has a very suspect understanding of ACM and the physics that define its rules.

Your missing the real point here. The real purpose of energy is to gain an exploitable positional advantage. While the +E plane can always run it can't always kill. Any form of a B&Z attack offers a FQ aspect to a quality opponent. To achieve a reasonable guns solution without risk requires E fighting which is significantly different. From the various comments my assumption is that you are marginally effective and rely on both positional and numeric advantage for your success. I cut out two very short clips here...

The 1st is a strong +E attack from flatiron. I think this is an excellent example of an aggressive +E attack. He is never at risk and never drops to co-e and never gives me a chance to fly straight or regain a measure of parity. Basically he's on me like white on rice from the get go...great flying IMO...
http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/film80_0017.ahf   

Here is a much less experienced zeke driver who makes a lot of common mistakes. My question is can you pick out my multiple extensions and do you understand the ACM behind them. Here is a fight were I am never +E yet control the encounter and manufacture a tracking solution from a -E state...
http://www.az-dsl.com/snaphook/film74_0022.ahf

And yes it's easy to say (with accuracy) that he made mistakes, however those mistakes were induced by good ACM on my part....

BTW in spite my overall modest success I had 2 5 kill hops that weekend in the SBD....