Author Topic: N1K2J - The miracle chopper (Read 2196 times)

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #45 on:** March 20, 2002, 07:43:43 PM »

You are right FLS.
Fatty, DMF was doing a direct comparisong with D9, cause that I used same parameters but I added a very important point: firing the guns.

Tac · « **Reply #46 on:** March 20, 2002, 09:41:06 PM »

"I'm not just talking quick recovery, the nose doesn't even dip below the horizon Tac"

P-38 has excellent accel from 0 to 200mph fatty. chances are by the time your nose is close to above horizon you are already going at 100 mph or more. The 38's "stall" in that situation is a gentle nose down, no pilot input needed. Also, P-38 stall speed is amongst the lowest of the planes modeled in AH (if not THE lowest of any fighter).

Now again, its counter-rot. props eliminate the rolling from torque, bigger wings, very low stall speed... Yet see ze n1k,with 1 engine (1990HP, very powerful) on a light airframe, on full wep does not have any control problems on the way up nor on the way down when at very low speeds (100mph and lower). My question to you is, why?

Try the same on a 109.. or a 190. Even a P-51 will enter into a spin easily below 80 mph. In a n1k you dont even have to worry until you reach 20 mph, and even then it is YOU who can cause the spin by pulling hard on the stick (ive pulled and rolled the n1k at near 0 mph without being spinned, it only seems to enter a spin if you REALLY pull on that stick).

Fatty · « **Reply #47 on:** March 20, 2002, 09:58:23 PM »

First, none of the other planes are even in the same category as the p38 in terms of coming out of a vertical stall as if nothing happened. I'm not saying that this is incorrect, simply pointing it out.

Second, any of the lighter planes in aces high can perform as well as and many can do better than mandoble's example. No, the p51 can't do as well, and I would not expect any of the heavier airframes to recover from a stall as quickly. You have to try pretty hard to get it in a flat spin though. The 109 not only can you do it but then pull over the rest of the way to come out easily inverted. This starting from a standstill on the runway.

If you want to argue that none of the planes in aces high (single prop) stall as badly as they should that is one thing. If you believe that the n1k2 can do this amazing thing that no other plane can do on the other hand, you're flat wrong.

Samm · « **Reply #48 on:** March 20, 2002, 10:27:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tac

Now again, its counter-rot. props eliminate the rolling from torque, bigger wings, very low stall speed... Yet see ze n1k,with 1 engine (1990HP, very powerful) on a light airframe, on full wep does not have any control problems on the way up nor on the way down when at very low speeds (100mph and lower). My question to you is, why?

Well for one thing that is untrue, every plane in AH has control problems below 100mph . If I understand you correctly your argument is that the departure characteristics of the n1k2 are too gentle. Tell us why you think that . Yes it has good departure characteristic as to be expected, but not as good the spitfires, hurris, zero, 202 and p38 . If you've found something that you can do in a n1k2 that you can't do in another plane, film it and let us see it please .

Tac · « **Reply #49 on:** March 21, 2002, 01:10:19 AM »

samm, answer the Q I asked fatty.

1990HP, light airframe.. and yet it has no problems getting to 20mph hangin on prop. Why doesnt it tumble on itself and enter into a spin (as say, the 190's, 109s and p51's)? Its also supposed to have automatic flaps.. they sure aint draggin' it down it seems (if they are modeled in the first place).

"If you've found something that you can do in a n1k2 that you can't do in another plane"

As I said above, many single engined monster HP planes have this oddity. The n1k just has the gentlest handling at lowest speed of the whole bunch. F4U is the other best example of the allied rides. A plane that would kill its pilots at low speeds because of its torque.. and in AH you have to be pulling REAL hard, you have to work at getting that thing to spin. All im asking is whats up with that?

"Well for one thing that is untrue, every plane in AH has control problems below 100mph "

Problems as in "oh sheet!" or as in "heeey its starting to roll a lil' bit, how cute!" ?

"heavier airframes to recover from a stall as quickly"

Erm, correct me if im wrong please. But doesnt a light airframe with a powerful engine enter a stall/spin much easier than a heavy plane with a powerful engine? As far as recovery, yes, the lighter plane would be able to recover quicker... imo if he manages to chop the engine off to stop tumbling than a heavier airframe.

Fatty · « **Reply #50 on:** March 21, 2002, 01:52:58 AM »

I'm not going to argue aces high's flight model mechanics. I have no clue how close it is to reality.

I do know how planes perform within this game in relation to each other however, and the title of this thread and its general premise that the n1k2 is doing wild things the rest of the AH planeset is incapable of is incorrect.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #51 on:** March 21, 2002, 02:49:25 AM »

Tac, to your more than correct comments about engine power vs weight, add that n1k2 done that while firing 20mm guns in the vertical. And yep Fatty, some (not many) other planes can do the same, but these are planes with much less potent engines. Look at the D9 example, 2200 hp, but much heavier plane. Both, D9 and N1k2 went below stall speeds in the climbs, but n1k2 kept there nose up and firing and D9 started to go side by side and stalled (no firing and a lot of rudder needed to keep it climbing).

A last note my film:
1 - It is a direct response to DMF affirmation that D9 can do the same.
2 - It is not intended to demostrate what I've said in my first post. Conditions are different. While the attacking N1K2 had a clear reference point to keep in the vertical (F6F centered in its sight), me and DMF had nothing except the sun (not in the vertical).

DMF take note of this: With your D9, you keep with a nose up attitude for 3 or 4 secs once below 100mph, with N1K2 I got an average of NINE secs and firing ... that is the difference between a brick and a hovering chopper.

Sikboy · « **Reply #52 on:** March 21, 2002, 05:47:49 AM »

Try it in the new emil Mandoble, it's almost exactly the same as the niki (in my newfound experience). I've also gotten pretty close in an A8 (Film here) Of course it was a LOT harder in the A8, but EVERYTHING is a lot harder to do in the A8. If I were inclined to complain about the FM, I'd be a LOT more suspicious of the Hog (didn't get a chance to try that last night, not a lot of free time when I'm not at work lol) But in the end, I don't see what all the ado is about.

-Sikboy

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #53 on:** March 21, 2002, 05:54:52 AM »

Your A8 zip file is empty. Have you got 9 seconds of vertical climbing and firing with the A8 at below 100 mph?

-ammo- · « **Reply #54 on:** March 21, 2002, 06:22:05 AM »

I can do it with the G10, NP.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #55 on:** March 21, 2002, 06:57:16 AM »

ammo, what about posting the film?

Sikboy · « **Reply #56 on:** March 21, 2002, 07:38:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Your A8 zip file is empty. Have you got 9 seconds of vertical climbing and firing with the A8 at below 100 mph?

While I did not time it, I do think the film is COMPARABLE to what you had in the Niki. Yes, I did use rudder to keep it level, but I also had to do this in the Niki (and in your film, so do you btw) And I had to be more gentle in the revovery, but Yes, I do have a "nose-up verticle guns firing at the top of the zoom no-spin recovery" in the A8. Was the duration as long or longer than the Niki? Probably not. Was the recovery as easy in the niki? No, not at all. The Emil was as easy to hang as the Niki, but not sure if it was "9 seconds of verticle climbing and firing... below 100mph" But to my mind it was enough to convince me that if this is a FM mistake, it's a universal mistake and not something fundamentally wrong with the Niki model.

Is the niki best at this move? Perhaps (although personally I believe that the P-38 is better, and rightly so if Tac's analysis is correct.) But that doesn't mean that anything is wrong any more than the fact that the Zeke and SpitV are the best at low speed turns, Or that the Pony is master of E retention, or whatever other property that any other plane is best at. To me, the A8 is best at vaporizing unsuspecting airplanes, and I love it for that.
I guess I could ask "Did planes really just dissapear in a fireball when the A8 opened up on them from d100? But I don't. I just fly it that way.
Nikis seem to pose no threat to you what so ever, so I guess I'm really confused as to why you've seemingly targeted them?

A quick note on Anecdotal evidence:
Ealier in the thread I mentioned a flight where I was climbing hard on an unsuspecting Ki-61 and when I pulled the trigger, I spun hard. That's why I tried this exercise in the 190-A8, to see if I was right. But I was very wrong. This is possible in the A8, so looking back, I probably moved the joystick hard to get a better lead on the Ki, and that quick input put me into the spin.

-Sikboy

PS: I'll try to post the film again when I get home tonight.

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #57 on:** March 21, 2002, 08:05:00 AM »

I cant tell anything about your film before seeing it. But based on the DMF film with 190D9, I doubt you keep with the 190A8 nose up and firing more than 2 or 3 secs once below 100 mph.

The "hovering" is just that, to keep too much time veritcally nose up and below stall speed even firing the guns. You can pick up any plane and climb vertically untill stalled, but this is not the question.

In the other hand, I would not be surprised if the two engined P38 is better than N1K2 in this move, just the contrary, P38 should be better. Probably, as well, as our new 110.

Sikboy · « **Reply #58 on:** March 21, 2002, 08:16:52 AM »

Sorry, I wasn't going by time I was going by speed, trying to get the A8 as close to 0 as possible before rolling back over. When I repost the film I'm sure you'll find something wrong with it, and that's cool, but to my mind it shows the A8 doing essentially the same thing as the Niki, only not as well. But then, that's exactly what I said in my last post.

-Sikboy

straffo · « **Reply #59 on:** March 21, 2002, 08:20:38 AM »

hahem ...

Can someone explain me this thread in simple word I can understand ?

All I see is that different planes that handle differently at slow speed ...

I don't expect anything else as they are ... guess what ... different ?

or did I get lost somewhere in this thread ?