comparing

[Nathan60]

About this big : _________ IM very, very cold 

[diaster]

especially when we consider the German and Finn scores against Soviet air forces that had been porked by Stalin just before the war.

  Hartmann flew something like 1400 sorties to earn his 352 kills. .

In Hartmann's book, the Blond Knight of Germany.  He mentions early that he had 352 kills (362 memory didn't serve me well there), "that some will attempt to discredit my numbers because they were mostly against Russians/Soviets". He stated (paraphrased) "however they (russians) had many leading aces with numbers above 100. The Russians had very excellent pilots". He did reveal that he had amassed  such a large amount of kills because of the Sturmovik flying in B-17 like formations!

I thought The Stalin  purges were largely officer corps, potential threats to his regime.

anyway I think we agree that it is man and machine that makes the winner. But how the man uses the machine, IMHO can and often is the deciding factor in the final outcome of engagements. 

Think USAF and the Raptor vs 5 F-15s. Raptor wins every time, all pilots receive the exact same flight training but the F-22 pilot had the better tech!

Also anything I have said was meant to discredit US or Allied Pilots. Everyone knew that the Germans had way more experience in ACM because they had been doing it longer. and in those over 1500 sorties, he had never been bested! all damage forcing his 14 bailouts was debris and in one case

[BnZs]

I believe the man is a bigger factor over the machine in real life than in Aces High. In real life, men will have different levels of eyesight, G tolerance, general endurance, and will deal with crippling fear with varying levels of effectiveness. All that is leveled out in the game.In real life combat experience is rare and precious, whereas in Aces High many of us get 50 hours dogfighting every month. All these factors tend to make relative aircraft performance more of a deciding factor in the game.

[Vinkman]

I just brought up Mosq's data on the P-51D vs. P47M because it showed the 47M with no flaps turning a slightly smaller radius than the P-51D with one notch, which is exceedingly odd. It may be a typo on the tester's part.

I'm not trying to argue that the P-51 series could out-turn Zeros or even 109s here, but its abilities relative the Jug seem odd given the wing loadings, power loadings, and the opinions of pilots who got to fly both.

I think there is more to turn radius at low speed than wing loading. The shape of the wing make big difference. The pony is known for it's very thin, leading edge which helped it go so fast. But that leading edge loses lift faster than more rounded designs do, as the angle of attack increases. Perhaps the airfoil shape of the Jug's wings were more forgiving than the P-51's.  P-40, P-38s, and hurris have very teardrop shaped air foils which helps maintain streamlined airflow over the wing an higher angles of attack. The Pony and 190 have "sharper" [for lack of a better term] leading edges, so the airflow over the top of the wing become turbulent at lower angles of attack and that turbulence lowers the lift of the wing.

There are real aero engineers that play this game that could explain it a lot better, but they explain why the jug and pony end up very similar.

[BnZs]

The 190s perform where you would expect them to, given their wingloading. Yes, some airfoils produce more lift than others, but the usual listed clean stall speed for the P51 is 100 mph IAS, for the Jug 105. Anecdotes are problematic in the extreme, but the concensus among Allied pilots that the Pony outurned the  Jug seems relevant, given the fact that so many of them got so much time in both. 

[Changeup]

The 190s perform where you would expect them to, given their wingloading. Yes, some airfoils produce more lift than others, but the usual listed clean stall speed for the P51 is 100 mph IAS, for the Jug 105. Anecdotes are problematic in the extreme, but the concensus among Allied pilots that the Pony outurned the  Jug seems relevant, given the fact that so many of them got so much time in both. 

What about stall maneuvering?  In game, in a 51 I would always try and succeed in first-turn out turning the jug but I would never get slow with one.  The type of fights ours devolve into in AH are not the same fights that occurred during the war.   

[Arbiter]

What about stall maneuvering?  In game, in a 51 I would always try and succeed in first-turn out turning the jug but I would never get slow with one.  The type of fights ours devolve into in AH are not the same fights that occurred during the war.  

I think it's better to state the average AH fight doesn't devolve into the same as those during the war.  I've run into 51s flying above 20K using slashing style attacks which would have been seen during the war.

That being said I grant I run into plenty of 51s above 15K who want to get slower and turn like a Spitfire, with varying degrees of success.

[Vinkman]

The 190s perform where you would expect them to, given their wingloading. Yes, some airfoils produce more lift than others, but the usual listed clean stall speed for the P51 is 100 mph IAS, for the Jug 105. Anecdotes are problematic in the extreme, but the concensus among Allied pilots that the Pony outurned the  Jug seems relevant, given the fact that so many of them got so much time in both. 

BnZ, again I'm no aero expert but I think there is no one stall speed. The number you quote might be level flight at sea level. In level flight the stall speeds may be very similar because the angle of attack is very low. That is not the case when turning hard at low speed. 

[BnZs]

What about stall maneuvering?  In game, in a 51 I would always try and succeed in first-turn out turning the jug but I would never get slow with one.  The type of fights ours devolve into in AH are not the same fights that occurred during the war.   

This is a matter of pilot skill rather than plane advantage I believe. The P-47D-11's turn radius advantage in AHII would also suggest it would higher *instantaneous* turn rate. That would lead to *initial* advantage in turning going to the Jug in this case, if flown equally well. The P-51 with one flap probably has about a degree of *sustained* turn *rate* advantage however, which would lead to it eventually coming around on the D-11 in extended nose to tail turning, esp. if the Jug pilot hurts his own turn rate by throwing out too much flap. However, none of this is not the historical reputation of the P-51 versus Jug, both Allies and enemies recognized the P-51 as better in the turnfight, as one would expect an aircraft with lower wingloading, lower stall speed, and better power-loading at most altitudes to be.

[BnZs]

BnZ, again I'm no aero expert but I think there is no one stall speed. The number you quote might be level flight at sea level. In level flight the stall speeds may be very similar because the angle of attack is very low. That is not the case when turning hard at low speed.  

Stall speed is a function of indicated air speed. An aircraft at 20,000 feet indicating 100mph will have a higher true airspeed than it does indicating 100mph on the deck, but it will still stall at 100mph IAS. And the aircraft that stalls at 105 mph IAS on the deck will still do so at 20,000 feet.

Accelerated stalls speed for any aircraft is obtained by multiplying the 1G stall speed of that aircraft by the square root of the Gs being pulled. Therefore, if an aircraft stalls at 100ph IAS at 1G, it will stall pulling 4Gs at 200mph IAS. And the aircraft that stalls at 105 mph will stall at 210 at 4gs. So on and so forth. Again, altitude will not change the IAS at which these things occur.

[earl1937]

Stall speed is a function of indicated air speed. An aircraft at 20,000 feet indicating 100mph will have a higher true airspeed than it does indicating 100mph on the deck, but it will still stall at 100mph IAS. And the aircraft that stalls at 105 mph IAS on the deck will still do so at 20,000 feet.

Accelerated stalls speed for any aircraft is obtained by multiplying the 1G stall speed of that aircraft by the square root of the Gs being pulled. Therefore, if an aircraft stalls at 100ph IAS at 1G, it will stall pulling 4Gs at 200mph IAS. And the aircraft that stalls at 105 mph will stall at 210 at 4gs. So on and so forth. Again, altitude will not change the IAS at which these things occur.

What you say about the IAS stall speeds are correct, the ANGLE OF ATTACK of the wing has everything to do with the stall speed. The center of gravity will also affect how quickly you reach that AOA. A lot of pilots in this game, who fly the ponie, does not understand that they should burn off AUX first, then drops to move the CG further to the front, which will increase your maneuvering ability during ACM's.
The only time the AOA doesn't come into effect during stall maneuvers is when doing a hammerhead! In all other realms of flight, where are not doing 300IAS or 85IAS, the wing will always stall at the same AOA!
However there are things which can affect the stall speed to, such as wing damage, ice on the wing, or clipping that South Georgia pine tree at Moody AFB. (no, wasn't me, was section leader, he lived through it).

[Vinkman]

Stall speed is a function of indicated air speed. An aircraft at 20,000 feet indicating 100mph will have a higher true airspeed than it does indicating 100mph on the deck, but it will still stall at 100mph IAS. And the aircraft that stalls at 105 mph IAS on the deck will still do so at 20,000 feet.

Accelerated stalls speed for any aircraft is obtained by multiplying the 1G stall speed of that aircraft by the square root of the Gs being pulled. Therefore, if an aircraft stalls at 100ph IAS at 1G, it will stall pulling 4Gs at 200mph IAS. And the aircraft that stalls at 105 mph will stall at 210 at 4gs. So on and so forth. Again, altitude will not change the IAS at which these things occur.

This sounds like a rule of thumb. I do not believe the stall limit/aoa is the same for every wing.

[Changeup]

This is a matter of pilot skill rather than plane advantage I believe. The P-47D-11's turn radius advantage in AHII would also suggest it would higher *instantaneous* turn rate. That would lead to *initial* advantage in turning going to the Jug in this case, if flown equally well. The P-51 with one flap probably has about a degree of *sustained* turn *rate* advantage however, which would lead to it eventually coming around on the D-11 in extended nose to tail turning, esp. if the Jug pilot hurts his own turn rate by throwing out too much flap. However, none of this is not the historical reputation of the P-51 versus Jug, both Allies and enemies recognized the P-51 as better in the turnfight, as one would expect an aircraft with lower wingloading, lower stall speed, and better power-loading at most altitudes to be.

In this scenario it is not a function of pilot skill.  Some aircraft perform better at stall speeds than others and some accelerate better than others.  Stall fights do not always end up with the victor making a smaller or faster circle.  A jug driver will try to keep his 51 or 109 adversary in turns rather than allow them the space to use their superior climb rate to put the fight in the vertical. 

If done close to correct, a jug driver can bleed his 109 or 51 into a sustained turn fight slow.  They'll lose because they aren't as stable slow.  That's an a/c function, not a pilot skill.

[save]

if the 109 has any sense of performance of the planes, he will not turn horizontal against a d series 47 but bring it vertical

[Changeup]

if the 109 has any sense of performance of the planes, he will not turn horizontal against a d series 47 but bring it vertical

Exactly.  Why?