Shane - Tactical Question?

[GScholz]

Seems we got our terminology mixed up there. All is good then.

EDIT: Btw, are you saying that if I hang on my prop stalling at 20K/0mph that I have no E, and no E advantage over a con at 5K/400mph for instance?

[bustr]

Gentelmen.....the spit approched me as a dot outside of icon range. We had that time untill 4800d when I began to dive. He was in a dive from about 5300d. 1200d I pulled up and over. He leveled out to make his turn. I know this because I watched the turn while inverted to observe him before rolling over level, then diveing for the next go.

I have a bit of a misconception about fiteing spits with an LA7. I did not think the second vertical was advisable because most spit pilots would turn up my tail and kill me. I've been a bit shy. So I have been doing the jousting garbage wining 50-50 on lucky shooting or running. <--sorry Shane:(

I did discover if I can get a N1K into a turn fite at 15k, 1 notch flaps will give me a slight turning edge. Idea for another thread.

-bustr-

[bozon]

Btw, are you saying that if I hang on my prop stalling at 20K/0mph that I have no E, and no E advantage over a con at 5K/400mph for instance?

First, you have E (potential only).
about E advantage:
adjusting to feet and mph units:
38.4*(h1-h2) = v2^2 - v1^2
so it seems the con needs about 760mph to counter that alt.

But one must be carefull with these energy figures. For extreem values they don't tell much (how would a plane 15k up will engage?).

Bozon

[Tilt]

Originally posted by bustr


As I come over the top I see the spit turning left up to meet me. He dove for a while longer before his turn. We pass I'm nose down. Then I pull back at 45% to left up and over. I cannot get the spits tail. I dive run, 2.4d out I reverse, we close and he HO quarter angles and gets my rudder on next pass.

-bustr-

Seems to me that by dictating the actual angle of the 1st merge you have optimised stuff considerably............ a more cautious spit may have nosed up earlier at say 45 degrees and entered the looping contest he would surely win.


I have the same problem as you have described above.... obviously having dictated the angle of the 1st merge you do not want your opponent dictating the 2nd........... seems to me that your goal is a degree of separation (and angle) where you have manouverability and your opponent does not. (or he has less)

Hence you hope to place him in high G or low e whilst you gain angle.

Theory is fine and practice is hard. He is nose up with good vision (he can roll in the vertical to maintain vision)and any e loss / high G manouver is already passed for him.

hence the agressive move here would have been to chop throttle and pull nose vertical (max G & black out)the moment you went thru first merge then immediately max throttle over the top.

Down side is that this cost you e but you will/should have the better angles advantage........... the judgement issue is how much e can you sacrifice in this manouver......

I have some film of Shane and this is the balance he has off pat IMO. He will also add some degree of angle in the separation after merge inducing his victim to add some manouver out of the vertical whilst he has adjusted for it in the vertical.

The lack of this is my greatest ACM weakness. In films I have of Urchin, Shane and Lazer I note that I always misjudged their e state. Continiously finding that whilst I thought I had scrubbed too much e they infact had scrubbed even more to achieve superiority of angle.

Further when I go agressive as described above the rate of e loss (e loss/sec) is large and so judgement of duration is critical.I most often cock it up.