190A vs SpitVB

[MANDOBLE]

Ok, lets whine a bit. Here are my main concerns about Dora, and these concerns do not involve comparisons with other planes:

1 - Poor elevator response at hi speeds.
2 - Too much trim dependant, very unestable/slow control responses if not perfectly trimmed.
3 - Radiator (the supposed armoured radiator): every hit seems to catch it, and then you can fly for no more than 15 seconds.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Urchin
[B  As a group, we fly the planes with the most ineffective guns out of any in the game.  If anyone wonders why the guns are so amazingly poor, they get called a whiner and dismissed.  . [/B]

Urchin, a really bad example which serves to explain the "conspiracy" theory.

The ballistics issue is another horse that has been beaten to death. The simple explanation is in the picture Pyro posted of all the various nation's rounds standing next to each other. Seems just about everyone understands; just about.

[hazed-]

Im not angry and im certainly not too bothered by all this same old mush brought up. If it really did anger me i'd simply stop using and reading the boards.

The point is I like the idea of a game where you can add what you learn in books to the stock pile of knowledge in here and DISCUSS it with everyone else. That INCLUDES peoples OPINIONS as well as hard facts or official documents. I fail to see where anyone should be censored by the complaints of other customers with a holier than thou attitude. Its not the conspiricy theory that annoys me, its the way decent or relevant discussion break down into a slanging match.If you'll notice i did not try to insult anyone in my post. I simply wanted to know exactly what people think and why they have formed the opinion every LW fan is a whiner etc. So far ive not heard a decent reason other than the usual 'emotional' reaction where things end up in personal attacks.Those that perpetuate those old arguements are the same lot!. I like ammo as a player, often say hello etc which is why it always annoys me more when i see this sort of stuff when Im trying to follow a thread coming from him. Squire is not even worth mentioning, I missed squires reference but it doesnt change anything. The intent of the post is the same if not worse. Its just to annoy anyone in the thread who likes LW planes. Well great it works. Maybe people will act mature enough to realise its not too nice to piss off a few hundred fans of 190s just to have a dig at one LW guy in particular. If you have issues with what is said , Discuss it with that SINGULAR person. You dont throw insults around.

The first thing you will learn if you go to debates is you never get personal or you lose the debate.People dont like to see it used as a way to defeat a discussion when they have enough brains to see through the lines. As you get older you learn to see it being used (politicians love it, called 'spin' only they dont use 'name calling in the playground' as their tools. well not too often anyhow heheh). Take my post how you like. Decide im right or wrong. ranting or simply annoyed and replying. decide im fuming or actually read what I said and take it in, its up to you isnt it.I certainly dont feel i should appologise for anything said in that reply.

But what i will do is ask you eddiek to reword your statement .

"Your lenthy diatribe" I find offensive. it means 'a bitter and abusive speech or writing' and I in no way insulted anyone or was bitter. Bitter to me implies i have an unreasonable complaint or gripe to say it. Which i did not. The aim of posting the word 'Luftwwhiner or whiner' is purely to provoke an angry response. Its not pleasant ribbing or fun. neither is calling what people write 'lenthy diatribe' whilst failing to actually read what was written. Possibly wanting an emotional response from me eddeik? maybe you have the same intention as ammo? Then again you obviously take the word 'pissed off' to mean foaming at the mouth whereas i mean it as more 'disillusioned' or dissapointed. Re-read what i said with that in mind eddeik and maybe you can accept you got it wrong. If not then well, we both seem to be missing each others intent dont we.

[GScholz]

Originally posted by Squire
Been down this road before. Exiting stage left. I cant wait for AH2, a whole new batch of Spitfire conspiracy theories will undoubtably follow, because Im sure it will be just as it is now.

Ah yes, the old "if you can't argue a point dismiss it" tactic. How predictable of you.

[GScholz]

Originally posted by Toad
Urchin, a really bad example which serves to explain the "conspiracy" theory.

The ballistics issue is another horse that has been beaten to death. The simple explanation is in the picture Pyro posted of all the various nation's rounds standing next to each other. Seems just about everyone understands; just about.

Ballistics have nothing ... NOTHING to do with the destructiveness of a HE or HE/I cannon round. IF it did the 30mm MK108 would be the weakest weapon in the game would it not? The Germans used HE and HE/I rounds even in the 13mm MG131, while the 12,7 mm Browning M2 (.50 cal) used only AP/I, ie. no explosive component. Yet in AH the Browning is the more powerful gun.

[-ammo-]

Originally posted by hazed-
and thanks ammo for being the first to suggest 'a conspiricy'. As usual you try to make everyone with any concern about AH behaviour that in any way involves the 190 to be accusing HTC of doing it all on purpose to annoy LW flyers.

Well as usual the thread goes the way you intend it. Turns into a personal slanging match. we can get as pissed off with your reaction as you seem to be if you read anyone questioning the 190.

Consider this: Had mandoble said this exact same thing only substituting the P47 or P38 and described the same thing you would have probably given him your straightforward opinion. You would maybe go try what he says and either agree or disagree.
Since he said 190 though the immidiate reaction is the same old sh*t. You say he whining etc and a few join in and fill the thread with nonsense.

AMMO I want you to answer a few things for me please.

1) do you believe all aircraft to be modelled perfectly as they are now in AH?.
2) Do you feel 190 flyers have less of a right to question the things they experience in the game, and does this includes anyone who flies the 190?
3) Did you read the paper posted above about the 190vs F4u?
or did you ignore it? did you read any of the thread with an open mind is what im getting at.

for once dont just think 'whiner with no basis in truth' and try to consider it as you would someone like frenchy saying the P47 has a weird querk.You wouldnt jump on frenchy's back for asking it would you? You'd at least read it and consider it.

Well i read mandobles and i pointed out that test was a 190A-3 not an A-5 , I gave the weight difference as a guide and i hoped someone with better math than me might be able to give us some figures to show what we should see. But no, nothing like that, just the old crap about us claiming conspiricy again. I dont think theres a conspiricy at all but i do think people make a concerted effort to piss off the people who ask about them in here. Thats not HTC but it seems to make the threads get so personal that it gets ignored by any sane games player or developer alike.

choose to ignore evryone who flies them if you wish but i feel when people who regularly fly certain types notice discrepencies they are a credible source of info. Ammo do you truelly believe mandoble is just making this all up to get the aircraft better? so he can get more kills? shhesh we've been here years! we arent bothered about winning or losing fights , its just we want to see what we read about  and want ACCURACY. most are fans of AH.Why would we bother for this long?

I get fed up, even in this very thread ive just read something ELSE which pissed me off, I had noticed whilst flying the 190 that i tend to black out an awful lot if i ever tried to sustain those high g turns for too long. Never seemed to happen when i flew other planes, I have often wondered just how i can go about finding out how they really were. The problem was i read in a book the 190 used a sloped position which impressed the RAF types for its ability to help the pilot tollerate more G. Again now in that posted doc I read about the same thing, this time written by the USA test pilots.

In AH i have often been lost by a hard manouvering P51B at blackout. Its almost impossible to see the p51 to follow his moves. He gets some G effect but the D-9 goes totally black.

So now how do i do anything about it? It's just a feeling that I seem to black out more but it could be a correct assumption.Am i a whiner if i question it? Isnt it fair that i should be able to say 'why do i seem to black out more in my 190d-9 in AH when ive read they used the sloping seat which afforded a greater tollerance of G force's ill affects (much the same as modern fighters and stunt planes do now)'.

Its a reasonable question but because it says 190 and not P47 or P38 immediately its a whine.I could be WAAYYY off the mark and completely wrong in my assumptions but I need to read where i got it all wrong before i accept it.

I merely wish to know if how it is now is right.its not whining.Ammo if you posted info that proved how it is in AH is spot on it would be different, but you dont , you just have a go at anyone in here whos interested in the 190.it sucks.

I suspect it is just a 'feeling' that i may have wrong but theres no law saying you cant ask questions. If you dont agree ammo why not show us how we are wrong instead of starting this conspiricy twaddle again>?

Hazed-

To tell you the truth about what I think..and only what I think.  (1)  I dont care at this point whether either AC is modeled absolutely perfectly  (2)  I have never thought there was some kind of HTC conspiracy against LW AC.  However,  Mandoble, and others have definately implied that.  I think its funny.   I didn't insult anyone.  I just stated that we haven't seen this old debate in a long time.  I wondered if it had finally died.

Yes I have read that report,  it is very interesting.  Should  HTC make changes in their FM based on it?  I dont know, thats there call.  I dont know enough to counter that.

I truly dont care if my P-47 is not perfect.  It does not keep me from logging in and having a good time with it.  There are a few things that I have noted that were wrong with the D11 and the D30,  and provided credible information to back it up.  But you know what,  I havent beaten the horse till its black over it.  I presented the information, in that case they chose not to use it.  It was a business decision that their staff must make.

If you have the time, the energy, and the will to make that repeated argument about the 190's being undermodeled, I say go for it.  But don't get upset when you step out on the porch with that tired old subject and get a little ridecule.  

"I merely wish to know if how it is now is right.its not whining.Ammo if you posted info that proved how it is in AH is spot on it would be different, but you dont , you just have a go at anyone in here whos interested in the 190.it sucks."

No hard feelings to mandoble, hazed, or any LW enthusiest.  I have just as much right to comment on this thread as anyone.  It was never personal for me.  I really did enjoy reading all 67 replies in this thread.  I am stuck at home in a post surgery setting and this was just what I needed.

[MANDOBLE]

Originally posted by -ammo-
However,  Mandoble, and others have definately implied that

Really? So, if some one "whine" about F4U or P38 then he is implying some kind of conspiracy, right?. These guys are really funny.

[Toad]

I think that's been throughly discussed before as well.

Would you like to share with us just how much explosive compound is in the Sprenggranaten - Patrone 13mm?

[-ammo-]

Originally posted by MANDOBLE
Really? So, if some one "whine" about F4U or P38 then he is implying some kind of conspiracy, right?. These guys are really funny.

Yes, really.   When I noted what I thought to be problems with P-47 models, and nothing changed.  I assumed it to be a business decision on their part and nothing more,  I really dont know.  You have implied that HTC has something against LW AC and that the the things you have found to be wrong would doubtfully be fixed because of a bias toward allied AC types.

[GScholz]

Originally posted by Toad
I think that's been throughly discussed before as well.

Would you like to share with us just how much explosive compound is in the Sprenggranaten - Patrone 13mm?

Well actually it's Brandsprenggranatpatrone. The 13mm HE/I projectile weight was 36.2 grams which is about 1/3rd of the 20mm MG151 projectile at 105 grams. Typical loadout was one Panzergranatpatrone for every two Brandsprenggranatpatronen. I do not know the weight of only the chemical compound though. The MG131 had a ROF of 900 rnd/min. The Browning had 750-850 rnd/min. The MG131 had a muzzle velocity of 730 m/s. The Browning had 880 m/s. Why is the .50 cal more destructive?

[MANDOBLE]

Originally posted by -ammo-
You have implied that HTC has something against LW AC

Ok, point where.

[funkedup]

This thread is getting off topic.  

[MANDOBLE]

Originally posted by funkedup
This thread is getting off topic.  

Agree with that.

[Toad]

This really is a question for Tony Williams, a person with far superior knowledge in this area than either you or I.

That said, being an intelligent man, I'm sure you agree that the ballistic energy imparted by a hit from a round is a key factor in damage. The chemical energy added/imparted by an HE round is also a factor in damage, but not necessarily "key"; it would depend on the amount of chemical energy, right? The more explosive compound generally the better. Otherwise, they wouldn't have needed the 30MM Minengeschoß if the 13mm Brandsprenggranatpatronen was doing all the necessary destruction, right?

You compare the 13mm to the .50BMG.

Commonly published ballistics show:

.50 BMG                   Projectile weight 43.3g  Muzzle Vel 880
13MM Panzergranatpatrone  Projectile weight  36g   Muzzle Vel 730

Now, focus on the 13mm Panzergranatpatrone. Does anyone dispute that this round was significantly inferior to the .50 BMG API? It's ~15% lighter and ~15% slower than the .50 BMG. Both of these rounds are "kinetic" rounds. As you say, 1/3 of the typical MG131 fighter belt was made up of these inferior rounds. 33% of the belt made up of rounds that are significantly inferior to the .50 BMG.

The 13mm Brandsprenggranatpatronen made up 2/3 of the belt. The projectile alone... no explosive... was even more markely inferior to the .50 BMG in terms of imparting kinetic energy because it was 4g lighter yet. It was left to the explosive compound to provide the punch. Now, this would depend on how much of what explosive compound was in the hollowed out portion, wouldn't it?

And this, you admit, you don't know.

So, what exactly are you basing your claim on then?

The Panzergranatpatrone slug is clearly kinetically inferior; that's 33% of the belt. The kinetic energy of the Brandsprenggranatpatronen projectile is even worse. You don't know the amount/type of the explosive compound in the Brandsprenggranatpatronen. What case are you making then, since you don't know how much explosive was in the round?


As noted in other places, these discussion have all been done, redone and overdone and RESOLVED before. I'd wager this exact ballistic discussion can be found in a previous version with the Search feature of this BBS.

Yet... it NEVER ends, does it? I think that may be a reason such threads draw the responses some find objectionable.

[Urchin]

Actually, I thought that the guns whine was a good place to point out a "conspiracy".  Why do the German guns suck so bad?  Well, because of the way HTC chose to model the rounds.  If I understand the modelling right, we use a "hybrid" round with the "stats" averaged out between the rounds and I suppose they have information on the ammo belting to use for a ratio.  The only ammo belting I know was for the German planes, so I am not informed enough to give more than a rough example.  But, for my rough example, lets take the Hispano 20mm.  It was a large round with high muzzle velocity (130 grams at 860 M/sec for the Mk II).  According to Tony Williams (who is a ballistics expert, as far as I know), the combination of kinetic energy and chemical energy rates a "damage" rating of 201.  As far as I know, this damage rating is relative to the other guns, but you'd have to ask him to be sure.

Now lets take the German 20mm Mg151.  I believe the Germans used a 2 AP, 2 HE, 1 Mine belt on the Western Front, and I've heard the proportion of Mine rounds was greater on the Eastern Front (although I don't know for certain).  The MG151 AP round was 117 grams with a MV of 720 M/sec.  So right away it is perfectly obvious that this round isn't going to do as much damage as a Hispano 20mm (its smaller and it is going slower).  And sure enough, the "damage rating" on that round is only 110.  The HE round has a damage rating of 109.  The Mine round is where it gets good, in my opinion.  It was 92 grams (of which 22% was explosive content), moving at 800 M/sec.  Mr. Williams rates this round as a 236 for damage.  

Now, to take this discussion out of the real world and back into the game, I've been flying German planes for a while now.  I'd say I spend at least 75% of my time in them.  Over the course of two years, I have NEVER seen 1 Mg151 round kill a plane.  Over the course of one sortie in a Spit, I'll get at least one kill by taking someone's tail off with 1 round (either the vertical stabilizer or both horizontal stabilizers).  With somewhat less frequency, I've gotten one hit kills in other cannon equipped planes.  Now, one might say "Well of course you have never killed someone in one hit with the Mg151, it only hits about half as hard a the Hispano did".  And you are absolutely correct.  However, if the rounds were modelled as HE, AP, Mine, you would at least have a shot at landing one of the really good Mine rounds every time you fired.  As it is now, the German guns are effectively nuetered by the way the ammo is modelled.  I don't have enough information on Soviet or Japanese ammunition to say if it affects them as well, but I will say that the La-7s and N1Ks cannons hit harder than the Mg151 does, in my opinion.