It only took about an hour to go from 30k to 40k. 
snork
My complaint is about stability and not about the 152 being able to fly high and fast.
The gist of it is it's no different from low altitude: D9 might feel crisper but it also departs that much more abruptly, and sooner to boot. The 152's performance advantage in sustained turning and E-retention in instantaneous turn just keeps getting better the higher you go. The 152's rudder authority is much better. Overall it's as mushy as the Yaks in slow vert maneuver, but once you learn the plane you can keep it pointed where you want it at all times by constantly being on the rudder & stick. What you're really saying is that you're unable to do that - to permanently be guiding the plane instead of letting it self stabilize like the D9.
Wmaker is arguing this plane yet he has only flown 2 sorties in it in the last 5 tours (134 to 138).
So what? How much time does he have with the 152 in all other tours for each physics revision? How does e.g. flying 100 sorties a month in last 5 months trump 300 hours each month till 3 years ago?
I took Zeagle's information because he actually flies the plane he is talking about.
Are you really fairly selecting by experience volume, or whether someone agrees with/contradicts you?
When comparing the 190d, I clearly stated 30,000 feet yet many here have turned that into 40,000 feet which is a world of difference...........and not at all what I said.
So what? You don't get to 40 without passing thru 30. There's no practical reason in typical AH gameplay to expect someone who flies at 40 not to also fly at least as much at 30 where there's multiple times the combat density.
The 190d is much more stable and able to intercept bombers at 30,000 feet than the 152.
Where's the evidence? Bomber intercept qualities are energy retention, firepower (since that directly decides what kind of maneuvering's required - you don't need to do more than intersect bomber's trajectory with yours in a 262), speed, and adequate/minimum maneuverability. The 152 arguably only matches the D9 on one (ease of adjusting nose at target) and beats the D9 on the rest of em. It's no unfortunate coincidence that planning your pass ahead of time so that the shot timing seamlessly coincides with your maneuvering - whereas the D9 requires you to have the nose pointed at target much longer IOW fly into defensive fire longer, interfering even if only a little with your maneuvering at and around the bombers.
Yes, the 190d will make 40,000 feet........but not well.....however it is more stable than the 152 even way beyond it's maximum altitude.
No it doesn't. Show some evidence. In fact the D9 at 30k is skittering on the edge of departure like on ice whereas the 152 floats over it at any given speed the D9 can manage, and then is as stable as anything in the planeset at speeds the D9 can't reach.
I flew the 190d and spit IX, XVI, and XIV over 40,000 feet today.......ask the 163 drivers who felt the need to dive out of icon range/dive in or be rescued by another fighter as they absorbed bullets this afternoon.
If the 163 ran from you he was clueless. Just flying a plane doesn't amount to authority, or I could right now pay 10 players to fly around randomly and call that "more evidence".
That said, the spit XIV (yes the 16 and not the 14) has better stability than either 190/152 at 40,000 feet even though it is not known for it's high altitude performance like the spit 14.
yep only thing you're right on
The whole crux of my observations is that the 152 is more unstable that it should be at high altitude
Evidence for underlined part?
while planes that shouldn't fly well at high altitude turn better and are more stable than the ta152
Just plain wrong. Show evidence for this. The burden of proof is on you,
one person who's only been here on the order of 1 year, versus
dozen+ people who'd been here anywhere from 1 year to 10.
......of course, they don't reach the same speeds.....but they have better utility than the 152 even outside of thier known flight envelope than the 152 does well within it's envelope.
Also just wrong.. You're flying it wrong and just haven't seen it flown right. In a nutshell the 152's got a significantly larger combat maneuvering envelope than the D9.
