How AHII has conditioned my understanding of history...

[W7LPNRICK]

Contradicted by the historical record would be the kind of low speed death match fights like between a mossie and a zero.  Also I think the Me163 in the game is a lot more reliable and effective than it was in real life.  I understand it used to blow up spontaneously and caused a lot of back injuries on landing.  Also allied fighters could just hang around the field waiting for them to come back with no power.  Also that t-stoff stuff would disolve you...there's a graphic graphics challenge.

Peroxide Rocket motors were very dangerous.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=743kWB7hLpM&feature=related

[Letalis]

Vink is absolutely right ref the F6F.  Grumman got the message early from pilots that a better 6 view was needed.  When it reported to the USN the estimated decrease in F6F production rate the Navy decided the F6F was good enough "as is" and pressed on with the F6F-5 and -5N till the end of the war.  The F6F was more than capable of dealing with the likes of A6M and Ki43 and arrived on the scene as typical combat ratios tipped in favor of the USN.  (The first F6F combat saw 90 Hellcats take on less than half their number of zekes. 27 kills for three losses were claimed iirc. This was typical as the war ended)  When the PW R2800-18 engine went to F4U4 Corsair production, the writing was on the wall for the Hellcat and by that time Grumman had already gotten the F8F off the drawing board anyway.  The F6F was also seen as deficient in roll rate and top speed before the end of the war. Retention was partially due to the ease of use for new pilots vs the "Ensign Eliminator."

I think the F6F is modeled beautifully in AH.  You can see how it would thump the zeke but be vulnerable in the European theater.  The Germans had better aircraft, better doctrine, better training, better access to raw materials, better logistics, better scientists, and last but not least a much better retention rate of pilot cadre.  The ETO was referred to as the "Big Leagues" at the time by American aviators for good reason. "Samurai" by Saburo Sakai and "General Kenney Reports" give excellent perspectives of the Pacific war.  The Jap Bushido code turned into a huge liability. I digress. The F6F is not as good as the stats imply but it is right there with the jug as my fav fighter nonetheless. 

[MaSonZ]

...am I reading you right that it would be 'tres kewl' to start a sortie, press the E button, and explode immediately costing you ~100 perks?

Wow our definitions of 'tres kewl' differ widely.  As neat as a reliability model sounds, it just doesn't transfer into good gameplay.  Dying because your ground crew didn't do its job is not fun gameplay, no matter how you dress it up.

Wiley.

sadly, it wasnt always the ground crews fault. the fuel components inthe 163 (T Stoff and the other one) were highly combustable when i ncontact with eachother. add in the burning of it in the mixing chamber... ground crew cant avoid what happens there, can they?

back to the OP... i learned that HO's were a viable tactic, though barely used due to the risk.. in game used like its nothing risky. we need a slightly more realistic flight model.

[caldera]

F6F is not as good as the stats imply but it is right there with the jug as my fav fighter nonetheless. 

Those are my two favorite WWII fighters. 

[Widewing]

Explained why P-38 were removed from the European theater.

The P-38 was never removed from the European theater.... Moreover, the faults of the P-38 are not remotely evident in the game....

[Oldman731]

Moreover, the faults of the P-38 are not remotely evident in the game....

Very true.

- oldman

[Vinkman]

The P-38 was never removed from the European theater.... Moreover, the faults of the P-38 are not remotely evident in the game....

Faults of the P-38 are very evident.  The plane can't dive.

That was it's critical fault. There were other faults, but that was the big one. Completely removed? no, sidelined wrt escort an fighter sweep? yes. 

[Karnak]

Faults of the P-38 are very evident.  The plane can't dive.

That was it's critical fault. There were other faults, but that was the big one. Completely removed? no, sidelined wrt escort an fighter sweep? yes. 

It was a potentially lethal problem, but I wouldn't single it out as "the big one".

[Widewing]

Faults of the P-38 are very evident.  The plane can't dive.

That was it's critical fault. There were other faults, but that was the big one. Completely removed? no, sidelined wrt escort an fighter sweep? yes.  

Compressibility was never considered a major issue with the P-38, once pilots were trained on how to deal with it. No, it could not easily follow a 109 or 190 to the deck from 27,000 feet. However, that didn't matter as they were supposed to stay with the bombers anyway. All J models were eventually fitted with dive recovery flaps, and all new L models had them when delivered. The three big issues with P-38s in the ETO were engine failures due to fuel incompatibility, lack of cockpit heat and complexity of the aircraft to fly and maintain. P-38s were doing fine in the MTO, flying from Italy to Germany, Austria and the like without engine failures. Likewise, the P-38 completely dominated the Japanese, flying at medium altitudes (usually under 25k).

At the heights we fly in AHII, compressibility is not much of a problem. In point of fact, if you have any idea how to fly the P-38, it's no problem whatsoever.

I'd suggest that you do some research on the P-38 before telling us what you perceive as "the big" fault.

[Oldman731]

The three big issues with P-38s in the ETO were engine failures due to fuel incompatibility, lack of cockpit heat and complexity of the aircraft to fly and maintain.

Number Four was its distinctive and comparatively huge size.

- oldman

[Widewing]

Number Four was its distinctive and comparatively huge size.

- oldman

Oh yes, seen in plan form, the P-38 was very easy to ID. However, from front and rear, its cross section is very clean. Japanese pilots commented on how hard it was to spot a P-38 from front and rear, whereas radial engine fighters like P-47 and F6F was easier to ID. Even when viewed from the side, the P-38's profile isn't significantly bigger than a P-51D. However, the fact remains that the P-38 was far easier to ID than most single-engine fighters.





 

[Widewing]

Vink is absolutely right ref the F6F.  Grumman got the message early from pilots that a better 6 view was needed.  When it reported to the USN the estimated decrease in F6F production rate the Navy decided the F6F was good enough "as is" and pressed on with the F6F-5 and -5N till the end of the war.  The F6F was more than capable of dealing with the likes of A6M and Ki43 and arrived on the scene as typical combat ratios tipped in favor of the USN.  (The first F6F combat saw 90 Hellcats take on less than half their number of zekes. 27 kills for three losses were claimed iirc. This was typical as the war ended)  When the PW R2800-18 engine went to F4U4 Corsair production, the writing was on the wall for the Hellcat and by that time Grumman had already gotten the F8F off the drawing board anyway.  The F6F was also seen as deficient in roll rate and top speed before the end of the war. Retention was partially due to the ease of use for new pilots vs the "Ensign Eliminator."

I think the F6F is modeled beautifully in AH.  You can see how it would thump the zeke but be vulnerable in the European theater.  The Germans had better aircraft, better doctrine, better training, better access to raw materials, better logistics, better scientists, and last but not least a much better retention rate of pilot cadre.  The ETO was referred to as the "Big Leagues" at the time by American aviators for good reason. "Samurai" by Saburo Sakai and "General Kenney Reports" give excellent perspectives of the Pacific war.  The Jap Bushido code turned into a huge liability. I digress. The F6F is not as good as the stats imply but it is right there with the jug as my fav fighter nonetheless. 

There's many instances where out-numbered Hellcats inflicted big losses on Japanese fighter units. Grumman had built and tested the XF6F-6 as a quick upgrade to the F6F-5. Performance is variously reported between 417 mph and 425 mph, depending upon the source of test data. Corky Meyer, who flew the prototypes, stated that climb rate was increased to over 4k a minute. The Navy decided that with the F8F showing far greater promise, that the F6F-5 was adequate for the time being. The Navy expected to have over 400 F8Fs on carriers for the projected invasion of Japan scheduled to occur in November of 1945. F8F-1s were in squadron service and arriving in theater when Japan surrendered in middle August. The Navy liked the F6F because it was easy to fly around the boat and had enough performance to defeat the enemy. It was also more rugged than the F4U, with a significantly lower loss to sortie ratio.

On thing that the AHII flight modeling doesn't reflect is that the F6F-5 was a genuine 400 mph fighter at critical altitude. What we fly in game reflects the maximum speed using MIL power, not WEP. It's not a big deal as it's quite rare to fly your F6F above 20k. Also, having had the opportunity to spend a few hours in the cockpit of an F6F-5, I can tell you that AHII restricts head movement too much. You can place your forehead on the canopy glass and see better to the rear than you can in the AHII F6F. Both issues are very minor... A big improvement over the F6F-5 in AHI, with one of the nastiest stalls in the game. With many WWII pilots having stated that the F6F was in some respects, easier to fly than the SNJ trainer, that evil stall was hard to swallow.

[Letalis]

One of the last engagements of the war was an instance of 6 Hellcats vs 12 Zekes.  At least 6 Zekes went down for the loss of 3 Hellcats.

If the F6F is supposed to be 20kias faster at 20k I'll take it!  Buff escort in an F6F would be great. Right now that is the realm of the jug for me.

Never had the opportunity to "meet" an F6F, I am very jealous indeed!
I suspected the view in the real aircraft was better however I hadn't complained because of the fact that head position is rather more restricted in RL than in AH, especially when under G. Still, if it is significant I hope you'll bring it to HiTech's attention.

 

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Actually, if you want to get serious about augers, I'd add:

8. It is amazing that any Luftwaffe pilots survived 109 training, much less scored kills against other aircraft, given the ~500 mph lock that 109 controls experience. I've augered this bird throughout my entire 2years of expereince with it, happily just less than before, thanks to learning to use trim and developing my own special trick.

That's probably because real life accounts told that while controls were super heavy you could actually pull out of a dive without playing with the trim.

[PJ_Godzilla]

Thanks for that answer. I'd always wondered about it. I read that there was definitely an "issue" with casualties and wrecked ac in the 109, but I believe it had more to do with the trciky ground maneuvering caused by the narrow track.