Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: PanzerIV on August 24, 2007, 11:48:13 PM
-
Havent updated yet, does it satisfy?
-
CoG issue is fixed.
It is no longer using imported early war Japanese fuel tanks.
Like all twin engined birds in AH, it is a pilot wound magnet still.
The flame dampers are still modeled both graphically and in the flight model.
It doesn't have an updated graphic yet.
All in all it is much, much better.
-
Alright, well good thing they worked on it, seemed to have its own communtiy of people wanting it fixed.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
It is no longer using imported early war Japanese fuel tanks.
:lol
-
Hehe. So with less flats spins and less toasting, we just need the speedy side fixed yes?
Will be seeing a lot of mossies in the future in AH I guess.
-
Hey there,
I've flown perhaps 30 precision strike missions against enemy radar since the new mossie was released. What can I say? I died three times. Once to enemy fire, once through bleeding to death and once through crashing into the radar building ;p. Seems to me that the mossie is extremely effective in it's intended role, given my general lack of experience in this game. Oh, and the sight of eight birds trying to catch you as you make your escape, seemingly waving fists from their cockpits, is priceless...
-
This is what the mossie was all about :D
-
Yup.
A) It actually works ingame! (still getting over the accuracy and intricacy of the dynamics in AH)
B) It's a pleasant and refreshing change from the newbie "launch, climb, die, rinse, repeat" cycle. :)
---------------------------------------
"Hehehe, they're nearly blind (damn that bardar).... now, ruuuun awaaaaay!"
-
Though I find the recent fixes very refreshing and indeed needed the mossie is not fixed.
Remove the exhaust dampeners modell the ejector stacks then the mossie will truely be "free":aok
-
And slap the big gun on while your at it;)
-
Originally posted by KD303
And slap the big gun on while your at it;) [/QUOTE
4 20mm's not enough for ya?:rofl
-
What I think is needed for the full Mossie update to AH2 standards:
1) Remove the flame dampers and boost performance accordingly for Mosquito FB.Mk VI.
2) Add Mosquito B.Mk IV
3) Add Mosquito B.Mk XVI
Optional suggestions:
1) Add Mosquito F.Mk II
2) Add Mosquito FB.Mk XVIII
3) Add Mosquito NF.Mk 30
-
It must be done. It is the decision of the Mossie High Court.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
What I think is needed for the full Mossie update to AH2 standards:
1) Remove the flame dampers and boost performance accordingly for Mosquito FB.Mk VI.
2) Add Mosquito B.Mk IV
3) Add Mosquito B.Mk XVI
Optional suggestions:
1) Add Mosquito F.Mk II
2) Add Mosquito FB.Mk XVIII
3) Add Mosquito NF.Mk 30
You forgot the redo of the 3D model! :D
-
Originally posted by Gianlupo
You forgot the redo of the 3D model! :D
That is presumed in the statement "update to AH2 standards".
-
oh, come on... I just wanted to start a bit of bantering! :)
-
I'm afraid I don't get your banter today, Squiffy. Perhaps if you gave it a bit slower.
-
It handles much better now and can be flow much more aggressively. I have found that I have put it in a spin more times now than before because I am being more aggressive. The spin is easy to recover now but recovery is different from the old model. Kill engine, 1 notch of flaps, get nose down and that seems to do it for me.
I still have a tendency to check for a fire when I get a few pings on me, to be surprised by the lack of flames. That’s kind of nice although I do miss the BBQs. Pilot wounds appear less frequent now as well.
It may be just me but I feel it has a tendency to be harder to pull out of a dive. I have augured a few times now which was extremely rare for me in the old model.
All in all I am finding it a much more formidable plane and glad to see many more of them in the skies. Only thing is I am expecting the ENY to be dropped in it as it becomes more formidable.
A fine fighter / attack plane.
80% of the way there, now fix the dampeners and release the true beast!
-
After logging a few more MA sessions in it, im finding the PW issue to be not that bad either, perhaps there was an improvement. At the very least you can take AAA and MG damage and not be on fire so damn often.
What I like best about the Mossie is the E retention, once you get it up to speed, it will keep up to fast fighters for quite awhile, and give LAs and 51s a nasty surprise.
-
Yeah, did somebody turn the AA accuracy level down? I managed a couple of sorties, flew fast across a couple of enemy fields. Instead of the normal shredding, there was a couple pings and that's all.
I still can't shoot though.
-
Only trouble is now I find myself hurling myself out of the way of 4 x hizooka HO attacks more often.
:rofl
Having said that at least it's less bloody N1ks to deal with.
:D
-
Im just wondering, would it be possible to make it harder to for the radar to see the mossie? the real plane actually had some stealth capabilities, even though unintentional...
XD crazy thought!
f-117 vs p51-d
duhn duhn duhn!
(the 117 would probably win by turning the 51 into a windshield splat)
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I'm afraid I don't get your banter today, Squiffy. Perhaps if you gave it a bit slower.
I'm puzzled... is that because of too many hours of prolonged ecstasy flying the new Mossie, or are you simply "special"?
-
Originally posted by Gowan
Im just wondering, would it be possible to make it harder to for the radar to see the mossie? the real plane actually had some stealth capabilities, even though unintentional...
Until I see some numbers for the radar cross-section of the mosquito relative to other fighters, I consider this a myth.
Two engines have enough metal in them to compensate for the fabric and wood, I should think. Also, not only metal reflects radar. Even birds reflect radar.
-
I wont be home until sept 16th to try out the new mossie. I can fly by mouse i guess, but i think i'll stick to flying the odd bomber sortie. I can't wait to fly the mossie, i was only getting used to flying again when i had to go.
-
Originally posted by Gianlupo
I'm puzzled... is that because of too many hours of prolonged ecstasy flying the new Mossie, or are you simply "special"?
I was quoting or paraphrasing this skit based on 1) your use of the word "banter" and 2) my missing it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKYL0tW-Ek&mode=related&search=
-
I dunno, I've flown it twice so far (both offline though), and the second time I went into an irrecoverable flat spin from 10K. Hit the ground perfectly flat and dropping straight down. Flipped from inverted to right side up a few times, reversed the spin a few times, but couldn't get out of it.
Felt the same to me.
-
Any of the fast fighters can avoid AAA by flying fast and low, I just think the Mossie is able to do it for the same reasons: its fast. That and it wont catch fire from a few AAA pings, so you actually end up rtb'ing. Maybe with 1 engine, but at least you make it back. ;)
As far as being a 1 vs 1 dueller, it can fight against many of the MA single seaters, but like all those fights, is dependant on pilot abilities, and advantages at the start of the fight, in speed and/or alt. I have managed to defeat enough of them to be happy with it, but its not "uber", it certainly isnt a superfighter or anything like that, if you run into a well fllown enemy fighter, your going to have your hands full.
Like any of them you fly it to its strengths.
...was also ging to mention that with a more robust damage model, its a better low-med alt buff interceptor. Any bombers 15k or below im more than happy to make a gun pass on, assuming you have some speed to make a decent attack.
-
But its still not as fast as it should be and that is just unfair on a great Aeroplane:(
-
Part of that is the exhaust baffles. The extra drag and lack of exhaus-stack thrust hampers its performance.
-
Originally posted by Treize69
Part of that is the exhaust baffles. The extra drag and lack of exhaus-stack thrust hampers its performance.
But were they not only for night fighters and therefore irrelevant in this context?
-
About 2/3rds of Mosquito FB.Mk VI's were equipped for daylight ops and baout 1/3rd had the flame dampers for night ops.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
About 2/3rds of Mosquito FB.Mk VI's were equipped for daylight ops and baout 1/3rd had the flame dampers for night ops.
And how many night opps in any meaningfull sense have we flown. I would say approximately nil so what was going on at HTC when they modeled the mossie? and how much difference in % terms does it make to speed?
-
Well according to a military channel program on WWII Aircraft , " It had stealth like capabilities that made it virtually undetectable by radar " :huh . LOL i want that fixed :D
-
Originally posted by Yarbles
And how many night opps in any meaningfull sense have we flown. I would say approximately nil so what was going on at HTC when they modeled the mossie? and how much difference in % terms does it make to speed?
That was the data that was available. Mossie performance data is hard to come by.
I think more is available now.
-
Our B-25C has flame dampers too. The square bumps on each nacelle are the exhaust fairings, designed to remove the flame glare. Before those were put on (so I've read) they were so visible that night missions were banned on the early models.
So, doesn't matter if they FLY at night. I see it as a valid part of the plane, even if flown in daytime. It's not like you can just take it off when the sun rises.
Is it representative? 1/3 is a pretty big chunk. Sure, NOT having them would be nicer, but I think the uproar over them is a bit overblown. It might be nice to (eventually) have an earlier model WITH the dampers, and a middle-to-later model WITHOUT them.
It would make them a little more destinct from each other (assuming we ever get more variants of the mossie!)
-
Originally posted by 38ruk
Well according to a military channel program on WWII Aircraft , " It had stealth like capabilities that made it virtually undetectable by radar " :huh . LOL i want that fixed :D
look on the last page, i already brought that up
oh and bozon, the stealth was in the design, not matierial
-
Originally posted by bozon
Until I see some numbers for the radar cross-section of the mosquito relative to other fighters, I consider this a myth.
Two engines have enough metal in them to compensate for the fabric and wood, I should think. Also, not only metal reflects radar. Even birds reflect radar.
Actually, the all wood construction of the airframe did make the Mossie rather stealthy compared to the other planes in WW2. No, it wasn't completely invisible to radar but it did have a rather low radar profile compared to the other aircraft and did give German radar operators a tough time in locating them.
ack-ack
-
The Mossie is fixed somewhat,but dont bother with it. Afterall it's an unarmed bomber,not a fighter:lol Your better off in a 51 ,16 or LA.
the Mossie is just a waist of your time,so leave it in the hanger.....:rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by morfiend
The Mossie is fixed somewhat,but dont bother with it. Afterall it's an unarmed bomber,not a fighter:lol Your better off in a 51 ,16 or LA.
the Mossie is just a waist of your time,so leave it in the hanger.....:rofl :rofl
it's unarmed? wow didnt know that:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Souless
it's unarmed? wow didnt know that:rolleyes:
Well thats what I keep getting told......
setting the hook:t :t
-
Originally posted by morfiend
the Mossie is just a waist of your time
Like spelling class was?
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I was quoting or paraphrasing this skit based on 1) your use of the word "banter" and 2) my missing it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rKYL0tW-Ek&mode=related&search=
Ahhh... never saw that one, Karnak, sorry. :p
-
The fuel tanks don't drain in the right order like they were made to in the 51 and 190s.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Our B-25C has flame dampers too. The square bumps on each nacelle are the exhaust fairings, designed to remove the flame glare. Before those were put on (so I've read) they were so visible that night missions were banned on the early models.
So, doesn't matter if they FLY at night. I see it as a valid part of the plane, even if flown in daytime. It's not like you can just take it off when the sun rises.
Is it representative? 1/3 is a pretty big chunk. Sure, NOT having them would be nicer, but I think the uproar over them is a bit overblown. It might be nice to (eventually) have an earlier model WITH the dampers, and a middle-to-later model WITHOUT them.
It would make them a little more destinct from each other (assuming we ever get more variants of the mossie!)
I thought this was a get the best most realistic day fighter bomber mossie society post not a lets make excuses for HTC outing:mad:
HTC gets $15 a month from us I think thats enough.
We have already got 3 types of B25. What we want is at least one accurate, relaistic day time Mossie cos that is when we use it. I would have thought adjusting the existing plane is allot easier than bringing out another version. If we are going to have a second Mossie I would like a no guns high speed bomber with drones to spend my perk points on. A bit like a 234 with a 4000lb load, a bomb sight and a bit cheaper than the 234. ;)
-
Originally posted by Yarbles
I thought this was a get the best most realistic day fighter bomber mossie society post not a lets make excuses for HTC outing:mad:
HTC gets $15 a month from us I think thats enough.
We have already got 3 types of B25. What we want is at least one accurate, relaistic day time Mossie cos that is when we use it. I would have thought adjusting the existing plane is allot easier than bringing out another version. If we are going to have a second Mossie I would like a no guns high speed bomber with drones to spend my perk points on. A bit like a 234 with a 4000lb load, a bomb sight and a bit cheaper than the 234. ;)
You get to play Aces High and that is enough for your $15.
There for you do not get to give you opinion.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
You get to play Aces High and that is enough for your $15.
There for you do not get to give you opinion.
HiTech
I beg to differ, ive given it and you have acknowledged it. Should you choose to ignore it is beside the point:p :cool: :D
I would like to add however that I have run my own businees succesfully for 15 years and have always tried to remember not to take criticism of it personally. I hope that HTC makes it s decisions on a proffesional commercial basis as knee jerk reactions are usually counter productive and regretted in the long run ;):lol :rofl
-
Yarbles: You seemed to miss the point of my post.
You were telling some one that they could not give a good opinion of Aces High because they payed their $15 and did not ow us any thing else.
I was just using the exact same logic as you did, there by stating that your $15 purchased the right to play Aces High, and we owed you nothing else.
I.E. what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Yarbles: You seemed to miss the point of my post.
You were telling some one that they could not give a good opinion of Aces High because they payed their $15 and did not ow us any thing else.
I was just using the exact same logic as you did, there by stating that your $15 purchased the right to play Aces High, and we owed you nothing else.
I.E. what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
HiTech
I shall explain and all will be clear (pompous over bearing slightly self mocking inflection in voice here)
The Mosquito (bare with me here) was 66% without dampers and dampers were for night opperations. (according to my fellow mosquito supporters) and we do not fly night opperations in AH.
Clearly (therefore based on the evidence as stated so far, and without beating around the bush) HTC got it wrong. (Believe it or not it happens to me sometimes as well).
So dear old Krusty starts suggesting because the other 3rd were equipped with dampers (for night opperations which we don't fly) this is representative. Now if HTC was a shy backward schoolchild I could understand making this illogical and mathematically incorrect excuse for what based on the evidence is poor research. However we are mostly adults so I dont think it necessary to "gloss over" something which clearly allot of paying subscibers feel strongly about.
Now (Patronising Ironic tone here) I think in very many ways AH is a brilliant game well executed and way beyond my understanding. We are all grown up here though (I hope) and when HTC gets it wrong (on the evidence) Well do we need these half baked excuses which i dont consider compliments. If however all HTC wants is pats on the back maybe that should be made explicit in the forum rules :rolleyes: :rofl
-
Yarbles: I made no post or insulation about the correctness or incorrectness of the model.
I simply told you in an indirect way that your logic should apply both ways, and that you were breaking rule #4 by not posting in a respectful fashion.
And your last post is still pushing the limits of rule # 4.
HiTech
-
Only gonna be one winner here :t
-
2 Points
1) What Krusty said did not constitute "expressing a good opinion".
2) If criticism equals disrespect and is cesured under "rule 4" what happened to free speech?
Anyway I think we should leave it there:)
-
Originally posted by Furball
Only gonna be one winner here :t
Yeah but you cant just role over and submit to it without a fight:D Maybe HTC is trying to get into the Chinese market like Google did;)
I am definatley going to shut it now before I get censured.:noid
-
Originally posted by Yarbles
2) If criticism equals disrespect and is cesured under "rule 4" what happened to free speech?
Hmm not trying to be a smartass, but there is no thing as "free speech" on a privately owned board ;)
-
Originally posted by Lusche
Hmm not trying to be a smartass, but there is no thing as "free speech" on a privately owned board ;)
Hmmm cant help being a smart bellybutton and saying its a moral as well as a Legal concept and exists because people believe in it and its value. It cannot by nature be imposed i.e. you cannot force people to be free. With the utmost RESPECT do you think it would exist if it were left solely to governments and courts to look after. We all have a reponsibilty to uphold values of this tyoe especially if we find our selves in a position of power. (In my opinion of course)
And I am aware that I might be breaking a rule I do agree with here about Hi Jacking threads so please no on goad me cos all I really care about is Mossies being set free:)
-
Yarbles:
1. Do not try a free speech argument. (if you wish to be respected)
2. Do not try the wounded duck. "I just want the Mossie to be free" (if you wish to be respected)
3. Do not try belittle other peoples posts. (if you wish to be respected)
4. Do not confuse a debate and disagreement with being respectful (if you wish to be respected)
And a question.
What is the first thing you should do when you have dug yourself in a hole?
HiTech
-
Originally posted by hitech
Yarbles:
1. Do not try a free speech argument. (if you wish to be respected)
2. Do not try the wounded duck. "I just want the Mossie to be free" (if you wish to be respected)
3. Do not try belittle other peoples posts. (if you wish to be respected)
4. Do not confuse a debate and disagreement with being respectful (if you wish to be respected)
And a question.
What is the first thing you should do when you have dug yourself in a hole?
HiTech
I dont agree and (with respect) I dont think you have taken on board any of what I have said so far. I am not interesred in respect from people who claim to speak on behalf of a community simply because they have power over it. As our friend here said "there can be only one winner here" and we both know why that is;) and where your respect comes from.
-
yarbles quite while your behind:rolleyes:
-
Huh? How did this get into a "Krusty's voice doesn't count" issue?
[Edit: I mean to say, I didn't see an attack on my post or anything from yarble's response. Seemed more like he was directing it to HTC than to me. *shrug*]
FYI: 1/3 of a very large number is somewhat representative, in my book. We're not talking 30 special one-off planes, we're talking hundreds of planes.
So what, to you, would be the cut-off-point for "representative"?
1/2? 2/3? 3/4? 100%?
1/3 of all 109G6s had 30mm, and we had that option (before it was decided to give us the "early" G-6, where it wasn't so representative). We might just as well campaign for a 190A8 without the aux tank to horribly destabilize its flight patterns -- only, a sizable chunk of all 190A8s had this tank. Either way, what we WANT is nicer, but what we HAVE is still fairly accurate.
Like I said, it would be nice, but I think some folks are blowing the argument out of proportion.
-
Originally posted by evenhaim
yarbles quite while your behind:rolleyes:
I like to judge an issue by what people say no who they are;)
-
Huh? How did this get into a "Krusty's voice doesn't count" issue?
[Edit: I mean to say, I didn't see an attack on my post or anything from yarble's response. Seemed more like he was directing it to HTC than to me. *shrug*]
FYI: 1/3 of a very large number is somewhat representative, in my book. We're not talking 30 special one-off planes, we're talking hundreds of planes.
So what, to you, would be the cut-off-point for "representative"?
1/2? 2/3? 3/4? 100%?
1/3 of all 109G6s had 30mm, and we had that option (before it was decided to give us the "early" G-6, where it wasn't so representative). We might just as well campaign for a 190A8 without the aux tank to horribly destabilize its flight patterns -- only, a sizable chunk of all 190A8s had this tank. Either way, what we WANT is nicer, but what we HAVE is still fairly accurate.
Like I said, it would be nice, but I think some folks are blowing the argument out of proportion.
very well put and agreed;)
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Huh? How did this get into a "Krusty's voice doesn't count" issue?
[Edit: I mean to say, I didn't see an attack on my post or anything from yarble's response. Seemed more like he was directing it to HTC than to me. *shrug*]
FYI: 1/3 of a very large number is somewhat representative, in my book. We're not talking 30 special one-off planes, we're talking hundreds of planes.
So what, to you, would be the cut-off-point for "representative"?
1/2? 2/3? 3/4? 100%?
1/3 of all 109G6s had 30mm, and we had that option (before it was decided to give us the "early" G-6, where it wasn't so representative). We might just as well campaign for a 190A8 without the aux tank to horribly destabilize its flight patterns -- only, a sizable chunk of all 190A8s had this tank. Either way, what we WANT is nicer, but what we HAVE is still fairly accurate.
Like I said, it would be nice, but I think some folks are blowing the argument out of proportion.
Maybe it means allot to them ;) Anyway who is saying your opion doesnt matter, if it didn't matter it would be ignored. Dont say it was an atack on HTC though unlees you want to get me nicked. It was consructive respectfull criticism ;)
-
Originally posted by evenhaim
very well put and agreed;)
:aok :aok :aok
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Our B-25C has flame dampers too. The square bumps on each nacelle are the exhaust fairings, designed to remove the flame glare. Before those were put on (so I've read) they were so visible that night missions were banned on the early models.
So, doesn't matter if they FLY at night. I see it as a valid part of the plane, even if flown in daytime. It's not like you can just take it off when the sun rises.
Is it representative? 1/3 is a pretty big chunk. Sure, NOT having them would be nicer, but I think the uproar over them is a bit overblown. It might be nice to (eventually) have an earlier model WITH the dampers, and a middle-to-later model WITHOUT them.
It would make them a little more destinct from each other (assuming we ever get more variants of the mossie!)
response by Yarbles:
I thought this was a get the best most realistic day fighter bomber mossie society post not a lets make excuses for HTC outing
HTC gets $15 a month from us I think thats enough.
So you in one quick post basically told krusty to be quite and his opinion does not mater because you both pay $15? And crusty was just supporting HTC's current molding?
Yarbles wrote:
Maybe it means allot to them Anyway who is saying your opion doesnt matter, if it didn't matter it would be ignored.
And now you are trying to say, you did not imply krustys post did not matter?
The wise move would be to lay down that shovel.
HiTech
-
Dang, hitech is on a roll! :eek:
-
In fact, he's rolling so fast that he's turned off the spell checker!
(At least we know its really him -- its like an electronic dcument signature.)
-
Deleted Rule #4, try again.
-
Originally posted by Yarbles
:aok :aok :aok
sorry i meant krustys statement:aok
-
Deleted Rule #4
-
I'm not cool enough to have groupies. Usually when folks agree with me it's through gritted teeth. Nobody agrees with me just because of the name on my profile.
-
See rule #4, I really suggest you read it.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
I'm not cool enough to have groupies. Usually when folks agree with me it's through gritted teeth. Nobody agrees with me just because of the name on my profile.
Precisely, It was a joke (was being the opperative word), not suggesting your a joke mind;)
-
No Joy Yarbles! You're just going to exceed HT's patience.
-
Originally posted by moot
No Joy Yarbles! You're just going to exceed HT's patience.
Aye long live HTC and the flame dampers, we dont have all these rules in the UK try to leave it alone unless someone complains, but we are not allowed guns either.
-
Originally posted by Yarbles
Aye long live HTC and the flame dampers, we dont have all these rules in the UK try to leave it alone unless someone complains, but we are not allowed guns either.
How did that response go from top gun?
Maverick, the rules of engagement exist both for your safety and the safety of your wingman?
-
Originally posted by hitech
How did that response go from top gun?
Maverick, the rules of engagement exist both for your safety and the safety of your wingman?
:rolleyes:
-
Yarbles,
That was the data that was available. It had nothing to do with dampers or no dampers being modled. They could have given it Merlin 21s and a max speed on the deck of about 315mph if they'd wanted to (WBIII does this) as that data is easily had too. They went with the Merlin 25 with dampers data which made it more than 20mph faster than the alternative.
The data for the FB.VI without dampers is hard to get, and is stated on the forms to be non-representative of the aircraft. For example, the easiest to get data for a FB.VI with Merlin 25s and no flame dampers is slower than the one we got. Only recently have I seen data that puts it as faster, and that is still said to be slower than the typical undampered Merlin 25 FB.VI.
HTC also gave it a climb rate far, far above what any of the charts I have say it should do. Only very recently have I found a report that matches the AH climb rate (the undampered FB.VI sustained a climb of 3,800fpm at low altitude).
Your attitude here is not helping you or the Mosquito. Please calm down a bit.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Yarbles,
That was the data that was available. It had nothing to do with dampers or no dampers being modled. They could have given it Merlin 21s and a max speed on the deck of about 315mph if they'd wanted to (WBIII does this) as that data is easily had too. They went with the Merlin 25 with dampers data which made it more than 20mph faster than the alternative.
The data for the FB.VI without dampers is hard to get, and is stated on the forms to be non-representative of the aircraft. For example, the easiest to get data for a FB.VI with Merlin 25s and no flame dampers is slower than the one we got. Only recently have I seen data that puts it as faster, and that is still said to be slower than the typical undampered Merlin 25 FB.VI.
HTC also gave it a climb rate far, far above what any of the charts I have say it should do. Only very recently have I found a report that matches the AH climb rate (the undampered FB.VI sustained a climb of 3,800fpm at low altitude).
Your attitude here is not helping you or the Mosquito. Please calm down a bit.
Thanks for the data, it makes the situation much clearer. As far as calming down is concerned as I said I am form the UK where I think we are a bit more robust and open for a bit of criticism. Up to this point I thought the whole thing amusing and if people dont want to respond they dont have to. Certainly I am not used to such a strong culture of moderation but can see you take this side of things very seriously and I have no choice but to respect that. :cool:
-
Yarbles no one cares if you're from the UK or Timbuctu. Follow the rules like everyone else unless you can propose a better alternative to them other than some "where I come from" statistical nonsense..
-
You make our HTC god angry, sheep die.
WHY!?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like most things in life, they hold the copywright.
Rules and regulation.
Your 15 bucks is allowed* by HTC to play a game they ALLOW you to download to pay them to play.
If at any time you muck up, and they deside they dont want you around, they can "by law" and will show you the door.
Reread the agreement, OR regulations and rules will show you the door.
And as for this community, doubt they will wipe a tear for you being lost to ignorance.
-
Yarbles, i am from the UK too - and i think you need to give it up ;)
As for flame dampers, does the 110G-2 in Aces High have them?
Krusty, i don't know enough about 109's to say if there were any differences, but i guess that having the dampers on our Mosquito in AH is the equivalent of having a 109G-6/N in AH representing the daytime 109G-6.
-
neeeeeeeeeeeeeeow!
(http://www.oscarpix.co.uk/a21840.jpg)
Furball is cornish ignore him.:D
-
Originally posted by moot
Yarbles no one cares if you're from the UK or Timbuctu. Follow the rules like everyone else unless you can propose a better alternative to them other than some "where I come from" statistical nonsense..
I care about where you come from Moot :) I am interested in how people do things differently in different places as I believe if people keep an open mind they can sometimes learn from that.
Admitedly the only forums I have been on up to this point were for adults and there has always been a fair amount of swearing, insulting, winding up etc but nearly always in the spirit of fun.
Moot I propose we only refer to the rules if someone actually complains, IMHO there are too many rules over zealously applied. But thats my opinion and I hope having a different opinion from other people doesn't upset them too much.
I think Karnak has explained the Mossie issue very well and Iam satisfied (for now)
I wish those who obviously disagee with me well and hope they will consider my suggestion. I suspect everyone is worried about corrupting the young and lawyers. :D
-
Originally posted by thrila
neeeeeeeeeeeeeeow!
(http://www.oscarpix.co.uk/a21840.jpg)
Furball is cornish ignore him.:D
You surprise me I had him down as a welsh. :D
-
Originally posted by Yarbles
You surprise me I had him down as a welsh. :D
Beautifull photo of a great plane without flame dampers ;)
-
I don't care that you care about where I come from... I care about the discussions here leading to new insights on what's discussed. Someone bargin in and trying to rock the boat because he supposedly has an open mind, effectively disrupting the proper function of topics like this is a PITA and nothing new and not "in the spirit of fun"; whether you're from the UK or not.. this ain't the AH personals.
The rules here as stickied in every damn forum aren't overzealously applied, they weren't always there, but are there because too many griefers (intended or not) have showed up and rocked the boat beyond HTC's tolerance/patience/whatever.
Don't rock the friggin boat, don't play the "I'm from out beyond where we do things X way" (we had one of those from the UK in fact, a while back - Search for username Zulu6), people posting here aren't bleedin idiots or mindless rule-following drones or whatever lemming like goose stepping, brown coat mentality you or others might want to hyperbolicaly infer.... In fact this forum has quite a thing for humor of the deadpan variety.. so long as the humor doesn't derail the topics to the point that there's no net benefit to the topic from the post's addition to the thread.
The rules are only there for what's always been implicitly understood and agreed on to be explicit to those without a clue.
Back to our sheep... If no flame dampers would not change the top speed much, would the extra exhaust thrust help the acceleration? The P47 (IIRC) does benefit from exhaust thrust quite a bit, but would this work for the mossie too?
-
Moot I still care that you dont care that I care where you come form.
I am sorry you seem to be so angry about what Iam saying but I think I am allowed to have an opinion? I am not trying to insult you I am just asking questions to understand the sensorship and why its there.
My take on events was that it appeared on the evdence HTC had made a mistake in moddeling the Mossie and rather than people defending the mistake HTC should retify it if at allpossible. Karnak eventually explained the circumstances and I am more than happy with the explanation. I felt HiTech over reacted and felt in my opinion unduly criticised. I was under the impression last time I was in the US that businees was very customer focussed in an open society with a minimum of regulation. I have to say this incident has changed my opinion.
Personally I dont mind people challengeing my viewpoint and if I find them insulting I can ignore the insults or choose to ignore them.:cool:
I think my research on the mossie isn't as thourough as HTC'S and so I have nothing more meaningfull to add than according to what Ive heard the Mossie should be virtually uncatchable at altitude other than by the 262 and above average for a fighter at sea level. I think we should have a late war example because it has to be viable in the MA late war like the later model. If the data exists than this is what I (personally) would like to see but only if the outcome is very similar to what was the reality in WW2 and if I am barking up the wrong tree I ll live with it either way.
-
I'm not telling you what to care about nor angry, your interpretation's inaccurate.. "seem" is the key word indeed.
"Insulting" is like "offended". Grow some skin or better yet realize that posts are just ideas floating in cyberspace, i.e. nothing to ever get worked up about.
Anyway, welcome to AH and the forums..
-
Originally posted by moot
I'm not telling you what to care about nor angry, your interpretation's inaccurate.. "seem" is the key word indeed.
"Insulting" is like "offended". Grow some skin or better yet realize that posts are just ideas floating in cyberspace, i.e. nothing to ever get worked up about.
Anyway, welcome to AH and the forums..
Which is why I dont think we need any thing like as much moderating, but thanks for your input and I appologise if youve seen it all before :D
-
The combat trim's elevator trim is a little off. You can't pull into a stall at about 200-250 or so. I'll come back with the exact conditions.
-
I would say she is handling much better.
I guess it is 50% otw to being fixed. Would like a new cockpit and the extra speed but i'm happy for now.
Thanks for the work HTC ~S~
-
Originally posted by thrila
Furball is cornish ignore him.:D
No im not. Eejut.
Fricken Norwich supporter.
We love Cesc Fabregas! we love Cesc Fabregas! wee love Cesc Fabregas! wee love cesc fabregas..
-
hehehe:D
go canaries!
(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42541000/gif/_42541309_plymouth_203x152.gif)
-
<--- Tour 91. 329 kills in Mossie. Approx. 60 GV kills in it and 269 air to air kills to 149 Death in Mossie.
For an ENY of 25 (I think) it is a formidable dog fighter.
-
Yarbles,
Lots of primary source charts and documents here:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
-
The Mossie is a veritable perk factory at ENY 25.
< Tour 75: 279 kills in Mossie to 59 deaths. That was my best Mossie tour, had a lot of fun. ;)
-
Originally posted by thrila
neeeeeeeeeeeeeeow!
(http://www.oscarpix.co.uk/a21840.jpg)
Furball is cornish ignore him.:D
Lovely pic, so I'll quote it again, but...
don't take it as indicative of FB.VI ops - that's the late, lamented RR299 in her 633 Squadron colours.
-
looks like a CGI shot to me
-
What's the name of the Japanese guy that made the WW2 CGI movies? I think that is just a screenshot photoshopped in black and white from one of his other CGI movies. I know he did one with Mosquitos that was posted a few years ago on the O'Club forums.
ack-ack
-
You're thinking of tochy, who (apparently) has vanished from the internet.
That's certainly not from his CGI stuff - his Mossies had flame dampers, which were too flat. About the only obvious error I could detect in his wonderful clip. He even had the circular cut-outs on the back of the mudguards correct.
It's a rare CGI-er who'd go to the trouble of modelling tail-wheel trouble - that thing is dangling. Reckon it's genuine - no doubt will turn up some day with a "buy it now" tag on ebay.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Yarbles,
Lots of primary source charts and documents here:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
Good source. Check it out.
Frankly, as a Mossie flyer myself, I'm happy with the improvements made thus far. The CG issue seems to have been fixed, and while she might not be as fast as some say she should be, she seems to get the job done quite nicely.
The mossie we have is representative of the breed. If anything, I'd like to see her get the cockpit treatment that the Spitfires got. Some of you folks over in the UK should make a trip over to the the museum and get some nice cockpit shots and start posting them for us .
EagleDNY
$.02
-
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/mos_fb_01.jpg)
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/mos_fb_19.jpg)
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/mos_fb_02.jpg)
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/mos_fb_03.jpg)
Theres some cockpit images.
-
damn fine detailing!
-
Originally posted by Bruv119
I would say she is handling much better.
I guess it is 50% otw to being fixed. Would like a new cockpit and the extra speed but i'm happy for now.
Thanks for the work HTC ~S~
Seconded, would like a quicker day version without flame dampers though:D
We have a later war 110 would be nice to have a faster late war Mossie
-
Originally posted by Karnak
That is presumed in the statement "update to AH2 standards".
oh oh nan a passender side ari bags til seat drop down dvd player and fuzzy dice would it be to pushie to ask 4 24 inch crome spinner
rims ?? lol is not rome but enough ??:lol
-
Originally posted by PanzerIV
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/mos_fb_01.jpg)
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/mos_fb_19.jpg)
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/mos_fb_02.jpg)
(http://hsfeatures.com/features04/images/mos_fb_03.jpg)
Theres some cockpit images.
very impressive in deed:aok
-
Since we have the worst radar in the universe anyway (12 mile range ) I am not worried about mossies and stealth ;). I think the Swift Boats of Viet Nam had more capable radars than Aces High has.
I think AH radar consists of a band of boyscouts with x2 binos hanging from the crosstrees of the radar mast. Oh and they do communicate with the via tin cans and strings.
OLtos