Author Topic: Why I fly Aces High (Read 348 times)

aknimitz · « **on:** September 18, 2001, 02:00:00 PM »

Ok - so that rhymed

This is but one of many examples of why I fly Aces High.

I was flying an la7 along, and a typhoon is 2k behind me. I turn around and into him, and do some pilot stuff, and have a snapshot on his tail. I let a quick squeeze go - 2 pings on the tail of the typhoon. What happened? Its tail fell off.

S! to the damage model. Not only did it detect the pings in the tail, but it accurately noted that the tail should only take a couple shots of 20mm.

Little things like this is why I fly Aces High - WHAT A SIM!

Nim

(ANOTHER RHYME!)

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #1 on:** September 18, 2001, 02:03:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by aknimitz:
...and do some pilot stuff...

So THAT'S what I have been doing wrong!

highflyer · « **Reply #2 on:** September 18, 2001, 02:05:00 PM »

do you really think that the entire tail would fall off?

Im sure you would have massive damage or nice holes but the entire empanage depart from the fuselge?

Swager · « **Reply #3 on:** September 18, 2001, 02:11:00 PM »

PERK THE LA7!!!!

popeye · « **Reply #4 on:** September 18, 2001, 02:52:00 PM »

Here's why I fly AH:

I'm flying in the dark at 10K in a heavy Jug, and spot a N1K2 coming toward me about co-alt. At the merge, I try to HO him with 10 rockets, but miss. I blow by the N1K2 as he revs on my tail. Now, there is a second N1K2 ahead, and a bit higher. I blow by him, but he dives on my tail and is closing fast. I split-S to the deck, and both N1K2's follow. Just as I level out, I find myself 600 yards behind an enemy Typhoon, and closing on him. At 500 yards, I open up with eight .50 cal, and the Typhoon goes down. Checking my six, I see that one of the N1K2's has augered following my split-S, and the other is about 450 yards behind me. I am taking hits, but am slowly pulling away from him. Just when I have lost an aileron, a flap, and half my elevator, and am wondering how much more I can afford to lose, I see a friendly ahead and above us. The N1K2 sees him too, and revs. A minute later I land with two kills, and THREE BOMBS that I forgot to dump.

Fun stuff.

Westy MOL · « **Reply #5 on:** September 18, 2001, 02:53:00 PM »

Bah. The hell with the LA7. Perk nice holes!!!!

Westy

Gtoraii · « **Reply #6 on:** September 18, 2001, 03:02:00 PM »

highflyer
Wasn't the typhoon known for tail problems? I thought it took a long time in its development just get them not to fall of in normal flight?

Dowding · « **Reply #7 on:** September 18, 2001, 03:21:00 PM »

Gtoraii - of the 3000+ typhoons built, only about 26 were destroyed through structural failure in the tail. This generally occured when trying to recover from a steep dive - the aircraft would begin to compress and the pilot would throttle back and use trim to recover. As the tiffie pulled out of the compressed state, it would rear up due to the trim settings and put a breaking strain on the tail-plane. Hence the tail breakage.

I believe this problem was reduced by strengthening of that section of fuselage.

20mm cannon shells might not actually detonate on impact on that part of the tail-plane. But, hey, it's only a game.

streakeagle · « **Reply #8 on:** September 18, 2001, 05:34:00 PM »

Dowding,

You beat me to it

Great game, don't know about the sim part. Did Typhoons have all metal tails? Or were they like quite a few British aircraft with wood and fabric covering? The 20 mm might not detonate until it got to heavier stuff up front, which might be a better result anyway. 0.50 cals love wooden planes

highflyer · « **Reply #9 on:** September 18, 2001, 06:16:00 PM »

hehe My point only was to show that planes in aces high as I have heard them called "paper planes"

seem to break Just a tad too easy

Mark Luper · « **Reply #10 on:** September 18, 2001, 06:41:00 PM »

"Seem to break a tad too easy" compared to what aircraft you flew in RL in the 30's and 40's?

Take it for what it is gents, make the most of it. It's a great sim/game we can all enjoy while enjoying the companionship of others of like mindedness. If you were born in the 1920s and strapped one on for real I want to hear what you have to say. If you weren't or didn't you really don't have a clue.

DanielMcIntyre · « **Reply #11 on:** September 18, 2001, 06:50:00 PM »

I once read a post by someone who stated that given the number of missions / kills / engagements that occur in AH every minute of every day that things become exagerated, little things that might of happened during an engagement in RL actually happen in AH a lot ie. 1 ping kills, tiffie tails falling off with a couple of cannon hits, people becoming so good at virtual acm that others think they are cheating.

I've had 2 or 3 ping tailess typh fiasco's and i've also survived 4 37mm ack hits in typh as well and flown off. These thing could have happened in RL, probably did'nt due to the much fewer number of engagements in RL.

Having said that, I shot off the entire wing of an F4U with an M16 (on my FE anyway), the F4U then proceeded to fly in circles around the field till ack finally killed it. Was kinda funny.

Nimitz is right thou, AH is a great game, albeit with a few flaws, but great nontheless, if it was'nt we would'nt be paying for it.

highflyer · « **Reply #12 on:** September 19, 2001, 12:48:00 AM »

Quote

Seem to break a tad too easy" compared to what aircraft you flew in RL in the 30's and 40's?

hehe thats funny Mark

Quote

If you were born in the 1920s and strapped one on for real I want to hear what you have to say. If you weren't or didn't you really don't have a clue.

With this line of thought; you should most definatly support any of the pilots that have done testing for IL2 and those pilots who have SAID that the flight models for that sim are Accurate.

Now this isnt about IL2 at all, but

I think far too many people will say BS to what some "old" WWII pilot remembers

in contrast to what is written on paper.
I for one do not feel that Those Ideas of the past fliers are skewed, I put more faith in those that have been there themselves anyhow.

hehe and I hate to do it,... but the damage of planes have been reported for the most part to occur the same/more accurately as they are reflected in that other sim

but dont take my words for it; Take thiers!

Oh yeah, reason why I like Aces High:

1. You can play against a large group of people.

&

2. Pretty good flight modeling across the board.

Apar1 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 19, 2001, 02:06:00 AM »

Quote

I turn around and into him, and do some pilot stuff

Muuhahahaha in a la7, you probably meant "and do some serious dweebery stuff"
lol

[ 09-19-2001: Message edited by: Apar1 ]

Mark Luper · « **Reply #14 on:** September 19, 2001, 05:27:00 AM »

Highflyer,
I was wanting to make the point that unless you actually flew these birds in the environment they flew in there really is no way to be certain of their handling, ability to sustain dammage, or any of the other things they were supposed to or not supposed to be able to do.

As to if IL2 models them better than AH, I don't know. I wasn't there. I have other issues with IL2, at least the demo version, and their flight modeling is neither here nor there as far as I am concerned. If I don't like the way a plane is modeled I don't fly it. If I do choose to fly it then I take it's good and bad and work with what the game producer gives me.

Written reports, anecdotal evidence, and scientific data are all we have to work with in this day and time. The programmers do their best interpreting that data and come out with what we have. Different interpretations are bound to come about. Is it wrong to question it? No, but to have expectations of absolute fidelity is nonsense too in my opinion.

[ 09-19-2001: Message edited by: Mark Luper ]